River spot early in stars 320

[0evg0]

i don't see why his range has changed at all from flop to river.

even an idiot realizes steve never has a 7 or a 5 here so their straight/flush/straight flush outs are still "clean" on turn (yeah, they're not but blah blah).

as for river, any that beats A2o is betting if we check. and so are those missed draws which i think he shows up with a lot more than everyone else.

while you're right that b/f is a good line because we're NEVER getting bluff-raised, that's really not a convincing enough argument.

[NHFunkii]

first of all, you're definitely overestimating how many people are bluffing their missed draws on the river. 98cc is checking behind here a LOT. Second, I don't think steve never has a 7 here, but that's somewhat irrelevant. Anyway, yeah people sometimes have a draw here, and they will still call the turn a fair amount even w/ the double paired board, but I don't think they'll bluff very much at all.
geeeeeenerally speaking, the people who flatcall twice with their draws aren't the same people who bluff with their missed draws.

wait, I just realized I misread your post... you said anything that beats A2o is betting if we check, not anything that is BEATEN by A2o. umm... I disagree. I think midpairs here very rarely bet. Steve's line is pretty damn scary.

[mikeJ]

Since you're not inducing bluffs, bet/fold is always better than c/c, just have to figure out if c/f is better than b/f.

If we check and he bets, I don't think we'll be getting pot odds to call unless it's a really small bet that a dumb player w/ 88 could make.

Since we're intending to c/f otherwise, I think we need to have 50%+ vs. his combined calling/raising (edit) range, i.e. we need to get called by a worse hand 50%+ when we make the bet, to make bet/fold better than c/f.

This is all assuming we're not getting bluff/raised and he's never bluffing when we check to him on river, reasonable assumptions.

[Ansky]

bet

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
we're NEVER getting bluff-raised,

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not but we will be raised by hands we are beating (JJ-88, 66) enough that folding the river after putting in a reasonable bet would be bad IMHO.

I would bet somewhere from 750-850 on the river to get value from the medium pairs and Ax's of the world (and then call any raise, obv).

Later,
Che

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
we're NEVER getting bluff-raised,

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not but we will be raised by hands we are beating (JJ-88, 66) enough that folding the river after putting in a reasonable bet would be bad IMHO.

I would bet somewhere from 750-850 on the river to get value from the medium pairs and Ax's of the world (and then call any raise, obv).

Later,
Che

[/ QUOTE ]

right, i thought about that, but even if we bet 1k on river, we're just not getting the odds to call

so are you suggesting bet/call?

[MLG]

right,
so why not jam the river?

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
right,
so why not jam the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

got confused when responding, and now edited my post after you replied.

i think the fact that he's "value-shoving" worse hands sometimes only makes betting less proiftable, not more.

[Che]

Jamming folds too many Ax hands but still gets called by all the hands that beat you (well, maybe an occasional 5 folds but I wouldn't count on it).

Plus, I always include a small amount of value in any bet less than all-in (assuming I know I will call a push) because a lot of people will see bets like the one I'm suggesting as weak and push. I'm not saying it's a smart move on their part or that it has huge value for us, but it does happen enough to take into consideration even at higher online buyins.

Later,
Che

[Che]

[ QUOTE ]
i think the fact that he's "value-shoving" worse hands sometimes only makes betting less proiftable, not more.

[/ QUOTE ]

You may well be correct so please explain why you think that.

I merely posted my gut instinct on this one and have not actually tried to estimate with any degree of accuracy the profitability of my line.

Later,
Che