[djj6835]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Cold call preflop (ok, that's preflop). Call flop bet. Turn AF.

(I'm sick of making the point that stats have value before they converge. Learn something about standard deviation/uncertainty and use the stats appropriately. 500 is plenty to give you some sense how he plays.)


[/ QUOTE ] What sort of postflop stats are you wanting that would make you not bet this turn? We have 500 hands on villain of which only a fraction villain has actually played. A fraction of the hands he has cc a raise ip in a HU pot, a fraction of those hands ended up going to the turn.

Now some sort of actual read in which we see villain floats with no hand no draw and bluff the turn is worth something but I'm pretty sure a statistic is going to be pretty worthless.

[/ QUOTE ] Cold call preflop (ok, that's preflop). Call flop bet. Turn AF.

(I'm sick of making the point that stats have value before they converge. Learn something about standard deviation/uncertainty and use the stats appropriately. 500 is plenty to give you some sense how he plays.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah my point was that we aren't talking about 500 hands when we get down to the situation at hand. It's probably more like five hands. Things like turn af can also be misleading in a spot like this because villain is likely to react differently on turn if they were the one being the aggressor to begin with compared to this hand in which he just called pre, called flop. He could have a high turn af because he fires a lot of second barrels not because he frequently floats and bluffs turns. So again, unless we actually have an actual read outside of a stat with a sample size of a few hands I don't see how checking could ever be better than betting here.