I'm trying this new thing called: checking - Page 2

MYNAMEIZGREG · #11 10-12-2007, 01:57 PM

This is fine vs this player and you def don't have to bet anywhere especially since we have NO idea what the hell his range is.

cityburke · #12 10-12-2007, 02:04 PM

I bet flop like always against this guy. His 3-bet calling range is probably huge. Also if you are betting the turn then I think you need to bet the river as well if he calls.

Bramsterdam · #13 10-12-2007, 02:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bet at least the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

for value right?

[/ QUOTE ]wtf?

TheChad · #14 10-12-2007, 02:12 PM

I def take a stab, maybe flop, probably on the turn. His AF seems a little high not to.

Jay Riall · #15 10-12-2007, 02:14 PM

Betting the turn is absolutely horrible. Either bet flop or check it down. Both have their merits depending on what you think his range is here.

underthesky · #16 10-12-2007, 02:14 PM

Having a look at his fold to cbet % might be useful. I'd be more inclined to check if I've been active at the table and cbetting a lot.

TheChad · #17 10-12-2007, 02:38 PM

yeah, I'm thinking that our check behind on the flop with a bet on the turn shows a bluff (albeit with likely the best hand). I stab the flop, give up if called.

traz · #18 10-12-2007, 02:39 PM

this is fine imo

tufat23 · #19 10-12-2007, 02:40 PM

i usually bet 2 streets and then instantly regret it

Montezuma21 · #20 10-12-2007, 02:42 PM

GRUNCH:

Yeah this is fine, though i think there might be greater EV in flat-calling preflop against this particular villain.