My list of poker advice and concepts which I think are plain bs

[craig1120]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
4 is game theory, it's just never used correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]
your point?

[/ QUOTE ]



My point is that is in no way total bs, you just have to do the work to apply the %'s.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ya I think that's what poker is all about. You're never gonna have the %s exact but you have to think of poker in the long term IMO even if the long term never comes.

[FionnMac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But betting is more often better than checking, mainly because a raising range should be stronger than a coldcalling range, which also affords you the luxury of bluffing more

[/ QUOTE ] betting is more often better than checking, but this is not the reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure it is.

Well, it's not "the" reason, but it's a pretty important part of the reason. Your range is stronger than your opponent's range on more boards than his is stronger than yours (even against opponents who play fairly tightly versus open raises, the fact that they will reraise their best hands makes this usually true; and it's exactly in those cases where it isn't true - i.e. you have a wide opening range, your opponent has a tight calling range, and you both know that about each other and play fairly well -that checking more often becomes correct).

When you have the stronger range, his bluff-raise/float frequency has to be commensurate with his value raise/"value" float frequency, which means he can't bluff too much, which means you get to bluff more. It also means you can be fairly liberal about betting your upper-medium strength hands "that have trouble calling a raise."

So betting with wide cuts of the top and bottom of your range is +EV mostly because your range is stronger than his. I just tried to write a lot more comparing betting lines to checking lines but it got complicated; I think I'll just leave it where it is for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think someones raising range is better than their calling range? Obv it depends how often you 3-bet hands like 99/10-10/AJ, but i would have thought that my raising range is wider than my calling range, i raise all kinds of [censored], but wont call with [censored], esp not oop

[wpr101]

[ QUOTE ]
8. Overbetting the pot allin on the turn (its always better to bet smaller and bet the rest on the river unless Villain is a donk).

[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone explain this further. I can envision scenarios where there this is wrong. If you opponent is going to interpret a turn overbet as a bluff then it might be correct to do it with a strong hand. If he is a nit who won't call large bets with out a strong hand then it could be correct to bluff this way. Where am I wrong? I guess you could argue the smaller bet is better in most cases.

[craig1120]

I think this comes up a lot in reraised pots where on the turn I think I can only get 1 more street of value I will push like 320 in a 260 pot or something.

[Pudge714]

Punter,
I think a lot of this is just semantics.

[wpr101]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this comes up a lot in reraised pots where on the turn I think I can only get 1 more street of value I will push like 320 in a 260 pot or something.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea I see it most often with about 100-120BB. There is a 3-bet preflop and then a cbet. Both players have a little over the pot in the stacks at this point and often the only play seems to push/fold.