Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
cbboy et al- why aren't we betting the flop here- do you really think his range hit this flop that hard?

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason I don't mind a flop check is because this is a good flop for him to either bluff raise you because of the likely hood that it missed your hand as well or he likely has a hand that is willing to peel a card with while you have garbage). I also c-bet less then most on these boards and this seems like a good time to mix your play and bet ANY turn card. The fact that we hit it should not make a difference since we are folding to any c/r there regardless of us hitting the turn.

As played, I would not have raised the river bet. Fold to the shove. But if you had bet the turn, you would have gotten your desired 2 streets worth of value and not needed to force the action with this thin river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

bet the flop, betting has way more leverage than normal because we are deep. getting bluff raised won't happen nearly as often and his range is composed of many more speculative hands (than a 100bb) that will just c/f the flop OOP.

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
if villain is a really good thinking player...i would actually make a hero call on the river here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if the villain is a really good thinking player you probably would still blow off money calling the river 3bet. He isn't bluffing often enough and will often actually wake up with a flush even though he checked two streets.

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

regarding the flop check, I do agree that betting flop would be optimal. Only reason I didn't was because I 3bet him 2 times previously and took it after a c-bet and I had thrash hands then too. I felt that he would prolly bluff raise me this time so hence the check.

Turn I could see both betting and checking here. But considering that the hand checked through on the turn, isn't a river raise mandatory here? I agree that if I bet turn, I should most likely just call river.

BTW, this hand was just a line check and by no means asking for help on the river cause I believe that it's a really easy fold on the river.

Way played, I think that the river raise is quite standard, anyone wanna tell me why it's not?

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
I 3bet him 2 times previously and took it after a c-bet and I had thrash hands then too. I felt that he would prolly bluff raise me this time so hence the check.

[/ QUOTE ]

ummm, maybe let him win a pot and don't 3bet him with 78s this time?

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

I'm raising this river vs a fish all day. I think we have to fold to the 3 bet, but I feel like there's a ton of value being left on the table by just calling the river bet

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I 3bet him 2 times previously and took it after a c-bet and I had thrash hands then too. I felt that he would prolly bluff raise me this time so hence the check.

[/ QUOTE ]

ummm, maybe let him win a pot and don't 3bet him with 78s this time?

[/ QUOTE ]

Woah dude, are you saying that game context should be a factor when deciding to make marginal plays? Your whacky ideas will never make it here!

Re: 78s line deep: 600NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
The river raise is for value or bluff?

[/ QUOTE ]

eh? what better hand is he ever folding? Not raising for value on river is criminal imo. I fold to the push.

With these stacks I also c-bet flop here a lot.