|
|
#131
03-01-2007, 11:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
duck,
according to this logic, i like a flop shove better. it's a dry board so that would be a strong option for a bluff. twp 
|
|
#132
03-01-2007, 11:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
[ QUOTE ]
duck, according to this logic, i like a flop shove better. it's a dry board so that would be a strong option for a bluff. twp [/ QUOTE ] you don't get to use my logic until you get the key information on the turn. that is in fact, the entire point of the post - the logic you can use after the turn half pot. if he bets full pot on the turn, it can be a much broader range of hands, weighted more heavily toward the extremes, and he will also put you on a narrower range if you raise (i think)
|
|
#133
03-01-2007, 11:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
oh, i thought you were pulling a lot from the re-raise on the flop. (you said he would expect gutshots and the like to be a large part of your range already in the context of the flop re-raise.) once you get to the turn, i doubt he will ever check/fold the river, so i think flat calling the turn is better to get another value bet out of him before jamming.
|
|
#134
03-01-2007, 11:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
Wtf? Of course he will check/fold river, he might just min3-bet flop, realize you can call with a quite wide range if you want to, and then fire another barrel on turn to get you off all those hands. Once you call THAT, however, I'm pretty sure he will almost never bluff river and c/f the VAST majority of times.
This is also why RBK made a lot of sense in raising turn (raising somewhat normal as the hand was played, pushing over a bigger bet), since calling just tells him "I HAVE A HAND" whereas pushing might be pretty whatever, a gutter or something.
|
|
#135
03-01-2007, 11:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
[ QUOTE ]
oh, i thought you were pulling a lot from the re-raise on the flop. (you said he would expect gutshots and the like to be a large part of your range already in the context of the flop re-raise.) once you get to the turn, i doubt he will ever check/fold the river, so i think flat calling the turn is better to get another value bet out of him before jamming. [/ QUOTE ] whether or not he will check/fold the river, he will check/call or bet/fold a fair amount (and with mediocre aces, i actually see him check/folding a lot). but even if you think he won't ever check/fold, my point is you get tons more value out of raising the turn given my interpretation of his flop minreraise combined with half pot turn bet.
|
|
#136
03-01-2007, 11:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
[ QUOTE ]
Wtf? Of course he will check/fold river, he might just min3-bet flop, realize you can call with a quite wide range if you want to, and then fire another barrel on turn to get you off all those hands. Once you call THAT, however, I'm pretty sure he will almost never bluff river and c/f the VAST majority of times. This is also why RBK made a lot of sense in raising turn (raising somewhat normal as the hand was played, pushing over a bigger bet), since calling just tells him "I HAVE A HAND" whereas pushing might be pretty whatever, a gutter or something. [/ QUOTE ] He's never check/folding a hand that might call a raise on the turn. If he's bluffing, sure he might check/fold river, but he wasn't calling a raise on the turn either.
|
|
#138
03-01-2007, 11:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
Obviously I meant 'with a hand that will call a raise on the turn' otherwise it makes no sense. And you said "This is why RBK made a lot of sense in raising turn" referring back to your first comment about him check/folding the river. But THAT doesn't make any sense. You say he is check/folding the river with bluffs. That gives NO reason to raise the turn. In fact, the contrary. Even if he'll bluff only a small percentage of the time again on the river, it is worth giving him the opportunity to do so.
It's only worth raising the turn if he's going to check/fold the river with a hand that WOULD have called a turn raise. And I'm saying THAT'S not going to happen.
|
|
#139
03-01-2007, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
[ QUOTE ]
It's only worth raising the turn if he's going to check/fold the river with a hand that WOULD have called a turn raise. And I'm saying THAT'S not going to happen. [/ QUOTE ] and my point is i think this is dead wrong.
|
|
#140
03-01-2007, 11:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10/20 top two vs cts, 250BB deep and 3-handed
Uhm, you do realize what I mean with RBKs comment is that if he has anything that falls in between these hands, i.e let's say he has AQ, he might very well c/f river if you call turn again, but he might VERY WELL call a turnpush since now our hand is very possible a bluff, whereas where we call turn, our hand is weighted against a REAL hand and never a bluff anymore.
If you could polarize his range as either bluff or nuts, then yes, raising turn would make no sense at all, but this is rarely the case, and I'm sure CTS does end up with some hands that are for value against a big part of your range, but still not "nuts", since I'm sure he is trying to NOT polarize his bluffing hands for the flopraise, i.e being able to do it more often (bluff) if he does it with more what some people would call "marginal" hands for value.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
