[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
3. betting into a better hand isn't too bad at all. you usually lose nothing and occasionally lose a chance for your 2 outs if he c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]
Betting into a better hand is expensive.

1. Villain checkraises: You lose two outs. That's roughly -1/3 BB.

2. Villain calls: You lose a bet every time the river is A/K/J. That's roughly -1/4 BB.

[ QUOTE ]
4. a lot of marginal weak hands (44,66,A7,A5s) will call a bet now but you won't get a bet out of them on the river when certain cards fall, OR you will be too scared to bet yourself, OR they will bluff you out on certain cards.

[/ QUOTE ]
An important element of the turn check is that Hero is representing AK/AJ. They are pretty much the classic hands for 3-betting preflop and then wimping out on this board.

When the river comes A/K/J we are prepared to fold in part because our hand is rarely good, but primarily because our opponent will not think of bluffing. He expects us to have just improved to Broadway or some big split pair and betting 44 or 98s looks like just a waste of money.

On any other river card Villain may indeed bluff but then I call and get paid. Or he checks and I bet my hand. Now he is getting 7-1 and folding 44 is very hard because Hero seems to have unimproved overcards. I expect the pair hands to payoff almost all the time.

It is true that I lose a bet when A/K/J hits and I give the little pair a free showdown. All I can say is it doesn't happen very often and it's slightly offset by the occasional bets I save when he has something like A7 and an ace hits.

[ QUOTE ]
2. in your analysis for KJ:
...
- most importantly though, while incorporating of dealing with the cost of bluffs on the turn, you do not incorporate a similar cost of dealing with bluffs on the river if we check ( not necessarily against KJ but against other parts of his range). the point is: in both lines his bluffs always carry a cost.

[/ QUOTE ]
We're in great shape against KJ. We fold when he hits and pick off his bluffs when he whiffs. Calling a nine is our only error.

Moving onto other bluffing hands, incorporating the costs of bluffs is a two-way street. I've already explained why I don't expect to lose much to bluffing. I'm calling almost all the bluffs I actually expect them to make. How about you?

1. Any of those little pair hands or oddball draws could clobber you on the turn with a bluff checkraise. The fact that most of these hands have so few outs makes it even worse. Even if such accidents are quite rare the EV loss involved could easily exceed the small extra profit from value-betting the turn instead of value-betting the river.

2. What happens when Villain calls the turn and bets the river? If you payoff you'll frequently be losing 2BB to his queens and tens plus all the lucky hands he makes on the river. Or you can fold and lose the pot when he has a small pair (the popular value bet-fold) or some busted draw. There is no good answer to this situation. Whatever you do you are going to lose a lot of EV to a problem created by your turn bet.

Betting the turn creates great scope for Villain to make bluffs we aren't prepared to call. That's why I'm harping on it. If Villain were passive and well-controled betting would have a lot more going for it because if he steps out-of-line it's a pretty painless fold.

[ QUOTE ]
i have a feeling that good players whose videos i've seen routinely b/f in similar spots. examples of a typical free card play in stox's book feature much worse situations (like 3 overcards).

[/ QUOTE ]
Are they similar or do they just look similar? This hand has many special features. For example 974Qr looks like a very similar board but the analysis would have to change tremendously.