A9, Blind battle, river

[giddyup]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet/fold.

Tons of worse hands will call but check behind if you check.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't understand why we would fold the river for one more bet if we get raised. That means we are putting villain on exactly a 7. I think there are plenty of times when villain makes a river raise here with a hand that we still beat.

[MattiasL]

[ QUOTE ]

Turn 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

bet/call

[/ QUOTE ]
This means that he raised the turn, right?

Edit: Obviously it doesn't. I cant read and want to change my vote from c/c to b/f.

[giddyup]

Can someone explain why we would be folding this to a river raise? Does villain have a 7 or higher PP often enough to let this one go for 1 more bet on the river?

[danzasmack]

What is a "typical bad small stakes player" to you guys?

[DING-DONG YO]

[ QUOTE ]
What is a "typical bad small stakes player" to you guys?

[/ QUOTE ]

I will speak for WPEX cause that's where I've been playing lately.

Way over aggro
Too loose with blind steals and defense
Goes way too far with marginal hands/bad peels/always sees the turn/river
Raises and re-raises too much junk in position becuase a) you never have a hand and b) they think they can "out-play" (lol, out play in LHE) you
TP=TEH NUTZ!!!!
bad turn raises with weak draws
bad free showdown raises with AX trash suited
Inability to shift gears
Calls junk from BB all the time from EP raisers SH, then tries like hell to push you off dry flops

[giddyup]

[ QUOTE ]
What is a "typical bad small stakes player" to you guys?

[/ QUOTE ]

Geez, I don't know - that's a pretty broad category. There are many things that make small stakes players bad, but I don't know if there is such a thing as a "typical" bad small stakes player, simply because you can be bad in a lot of ways. If this particular "typical bad small stakes player" was too aggressive or raised too many rivers then I am surely calling a river raise in this instance.

[Ainex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bet/fold.

Tons of worse hands will call but check behind if you check.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't understand why we would fold the river for one more bet if we get raised. That means we are putting villain on exactly a 7. I think there are plenty of times when villain makes a river raise here with a hand that we still beat.

[/ QUOTE ]


Because our only two options are bet/fold or c/c.

[danzasmack]

I guess in these new fancy WPEX games people will raise on a bluff here sometimes, so if you want you can bet/call. I think if it's the type of player you can bet/call against my play would have gone:

bet/call
check/raise
bet/call

nm, like 90% of the threads that i start, this didn't go where I thought it would.

[DING-DONG YO]

Where did you want it to go and maybe we can take it there.

This is my reasoning for the c/c line.

Plenty of weaker 9s, little PPs, busted flushdraws will bet here when checked to.

I would prefer to spend only one more BB on a showdown.

I don't like the b/f line for 2 reasons.

1 - If this is WPEX, river bluff raises on scare cards are becoming common, therefore, I am RARELY b/f the river at WPEX

2 - I think weaker hands will bet for you more than you think. Also, hands that will check it down are hands that would have folded to your river bet anyway.

Bottom line, I think the potential downside of b/f or b/c is much higher than c/c.

[danzasmack]

Basically when I first came to 2+2 I would c/c here. Then I learned b/f and i did it way too much. I started losing, winrate went down. I chalked it up to variance, then i realized I was trying too hard to play well.

A while back there was a thread where a lot of 2p2ers alluded to having to unlearn a lot of what they learned at 2p2, and then they started winning again.

I've been "working" with a few people on their SSSH game lately, so i feel pretty in tune with the "typical bad player"** and firmly believe that bet/fold is better than bet/call, and worse than check call.

Basically I was long scared of missing value, then i learned to let this guy bet his T8, JT, QJ, K3, or whatever crap he took to the river. A lot of times when you start to move up/learn the game, you start to outplay yourself. I think someone checking behind a 9 here is SUPER rare and the only real hands im missing value from are bottom pair or like 22.

This post may be awful, irrelevant, or not of any help to anyone. If you think so, fine, just please ignore it.

**Pretty much what I meant here was I have typical reads for players at most levels. Easy examples are NL ones (it's actually easier to do this for NL) - like "oh he's that type that thinks he can play any 2" or "the type that slowplays AA". I think after enough hands you've seen one you've kinda seen them all. And while it's easier to do this at NL, it's much more effective, IMO, at limit. NL people have this silly community - they post the names of the villains in a lot of their hands, they know about each other. Limit, it's a lot different. So having these borderline stereotypes is very useful.

I have another hand where i think it's correct to call down with 93o on a A3T77 board after your flop donk gets raised, any interest in that? I really don't want to clutter the board with my witchcraft/hooplah.