|
|
#13
10-11-2006, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Panel hand #2 - showdown
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] - Flop bet with two overcards and a flush draw against the paired board: Standard bet if I checked preflop or if I raised preflop. But betting this has *NOTHING* to do with raising preflop. The preflop pot-building raise is about building pots to win more money when you flop well. Anyone who even hinted at this decision being related to being the preflop aggressor doesn't understand big pot poker. [/ QUOTE ] disagree. because you made the pot so huge and they expect a bet, you will certainly get value out of this flop bet. can this factor be the difference between checking had you checked preflop and betting because you raised preflop? imo it probably can be, although not in this hand specifically. [/ QUOTE ] It will be hard not to get some value out of this hand on the flop. If you check, it doesn't get checked through very often regardless of whether you checked or raised preflop. Even if it does get checked through, you "lose" (fail to earn) only a small amount. Assuming 4 players get to the turn for one bet each, you are milking something like an 7-10% equity edge (depending on how many outs you give yourself), which amounts to roughly .3-.4 SB (35% of 4 SB = 1.4 SB, but 1 SB of that is yours going in, so doesn't contribute to true profit). The sorts of pot-pumping situations that you can really lose out on are those where there are 5+ players on the flop, the board is not paired (your flush outs are substantially stronger because you can often raise/cap your flush without fear), and there's a raising war breaking out that you can perpetuate. I stand by my statement that the flop bet has nothing to do with raising preflop. You can argue that the fact that since the pot was raised a flop bet is more likely to get called (big pot = loose callers), but that's a statement of the pot size related to the fact that *SOMEBODY* raised. If someone else raised, then relative position becomes the indicator of whether hero donks or checks. I'd donk this flop against a button raise. 
|
|
#14
10-11-2006, 07:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Panel hand #2 - showdown
[ QUOTE ]
also in the future, PLEASE add action before the decision points. this hand was very annoying. there were like 3 threads per street and you had to go back to 9 threads to see wtf had happened prior to the river. these would be 10x better with the action shown, and they would get much more discussion. as it were, i'm pretty sure everyone was just turned away by this format. [/ QUOTE ] fuji, make note of this please. i've said it a few times as well and i don't think it got through. full action to that point + reads in every post would make people happy.
|
|
#15
10-11-2006, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Panel hand #2 - showdown
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] also in the future, PLEASE add action before the decision points. this hand was very annoying. there were like 3 threads per street and you had to go back to 9 threads to see wtf had happened prior to the river. these would be 10x better with the action shown, and they would get much more discussion. as it were, i'm pretty sure everyone was just turned away by this format. [/ QUOTE ] fuji, make note of this please. i've said it a few times as well and i don't think it got through. full action to that point + reads in every post would make people happy. [/ QUOTE ] I agree here. It makes it easier for folks to follow the action. Btw..thanks for hosting these panel hands.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
