|
|
#11
03-09-2007, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Who pays off Ahigh?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Turn is excellent if what you say about him is really true. [/ QUOTE ] Seems to me like betting the turn would be better if what OP thinks villian is calling the flop lightly. Why give him a free chance to draw out? [/ QUOTE ] we make more from his bluff than we do trying to fold out a 6 outer in a 3.5 bet pot. [/ QUOTE ] This was my thinking. He actually had J8 of clubs here. 
|
|
#13
03-09-2007, 03:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who pays off Ahigh?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Turn is excellent if what you say about him is really true. [/ QUOTE ] Seems to me like betting the turn would be better if what OP thinks villian is calling the flop lightly. Why give him a free chance to draw out? [/ QUOTE ] we make more from his bluff than we do trying to fold out a 6 outer in a 3.5 bet pot. [/ QUOTE ] What about the times he calls our turn bet, we spike an A on the river and get to win another bet? Although since OP says villain shows down light, so I think villain would need to actually have a hand to get this to work.
|
|
#14
03-09-2007, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who pays off Ahigh?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Turn is excellent if what you say about him is really true. [/ QUOTE ] Seems to me like betting the turn would be better if what OP thinks villian is calling the flop lightly. Why give him a free chance to draw out? [/ QUOTE ] we make more from his bluff than we do trying to fold out a 6 outer in a 3.5 bet pot. [/ QUOTE ] What about the times he calls our turn bet, we spike an A on the river and get to win another bet? Although since OP says villain shows down light, so I think villain would need to actually have a hand to get this to work. [/ QUOTE ] his range is gigantic and he has air like 10x more than something that will see showdown with an ace on the board.
|
|
#15
03-09-2007, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who pays off Ahigh?
This play is fine and probabily the right one in a vacuum.
But you must be careful about making plays like this consistantly against an observant opponent. Against an observant opponent you should balance your checking behind distribution to include both draws and weak showdownable hand (and on ragged boards perhaps monsters very occasionally). Some ABC Tags at my limit (5/10) are wayyyyy too predictable when they are checking behind turns. On some boards its obvious what they have, and I bluff the river 0% of the time, and value bet 100% of the time with 22 or better. Against players like this I purposely peel light, knowing I can frequently get to see 2 cards for one small bet. There are a few multi tablers who I have a very solid read/exploit on that play this way at my limit, and I exploit it to the maximum. Against observant players on a board like this what I strive to do is: 1. Occasionally bet turn check river (most frequent) 2. Very occasionally fire 3-barrels with Ace high, 3. Occasionally check turn with a draw fold to a river bet 4. Very occasionally check turn with draw BLUFF RAISE a river bet if another draw completes that it is posible for you to have. 5. Very occasionally check a weak pair behind and value bet it if checked to on river. Balancing your checking behind distribution is a fine art and takes a lot of situational and player awareness though. Tweaking the percentages (obviously not literally) of those 5 things depends on 1. How often they peel 2. How often they bluff check/raise 3. How often they bluff the river These all depend heavily on the board texture too. Against most players you can just play straightforward. Bluffers + light & agressive peelers = chk behind showdn hands, bet draws loose passives = bet turn, chk river nitty predictable TAG's = bet turn, chk river or chk turn, FOLD river (depending on the board)
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
