Heads up unlimited raising on the river

[DMoogle]

Actually all you guys that said always go down to the felt no matter what are wrong.

If it's obvious that you and your opponent have the same hand, and there isn't a cap on rake, then the correct play is to call once you have realized that it will be a chop.

Of course, if there isn't a rake or it is already capped, THEN you should go down to the felt.

[WordWhiz]

[ QUOTE ]
If it's obvious that you and your opponent have the same hand, and there isn't a cap on rake...

[/ QUOTE ]

Casinos are greedy, but I haven't seen one yet that didn't cap the rake. How the hell would that work anyway? Taking $100 out of $1000 pots in the $40/$80 games? I don't think many players would stand for that.

[tom10167]

[ QUOTE ]
You shoulda twenty-bet it if your opponent let it go that far. And you shoulda kicked the "chop the pot already" guy in the gnads to silence him--it's harder to table talk when you're wallowing on the ground puking in agony.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Mr_Donktastic]

[ QUOTE ]

What do you think? I definitely should have at least 5-bet.
-Tom

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, as others have said, why not?

I went 7 bets once with the 3rd nuts (nuts= quads, nut boat, then my boat) but then chickened out, just to find out I shoulda made it 9!!! (I don't know what the other guy was thinking...he had a flush. Standard for a 2-4 retard at Foxwoods I guess?)

[habsfanca11]

The one guy who mentioned it only "sort of" got it right. Is the rake capped? If it is, that is, there is a maximum amount that they take out in rake <u>and</u> it has already been met, <u>and</u> you have the stone cold nuts then keep going to the felt. Otherwise, you'll have to use your judgement. If you chop and have to continue to pay rake, then you're just costing yourself money. I would go 7 or 8. Cheers.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]

Casinos are greedy, but I haven't seen one yet that didn't cap the rake. How the hell would that work anyway? Taking $100 out of $1000 pots in the $40/$80 games? I don't think many players would stand for that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The old-timers tell me that it used to be that way, back in the day. Imagine a stack of chips 6" high sitting on the slide, waiting to be dropped. Open the trap door, and down they go.

[youtalkfunny]

I stopped raising with the nuts on the end once. ONCE!

[ QUOTE ]
I watched two guys get stubborn and go after it 15-betting, 17-betting before the one guy finally say, "oh, there's a flush on the board.... call." MONSTER POT! SHIIIIP IT!

[/ QUOTE ]

At least with a flush on board, most players will keep their mouths shut.

But four to a B'way on board, I don't think I've ever seen a table keep quiet during the raising wars.

[TheStation]

possible hijak: what are the most number of bets that you have gone on the river in a limit game when you won the entire pot?

My answer: 15 (in 8/16 limit)

never stop raising with the nuts in limit, just make sure the dealer isnt being a tool and sweeping all the bets in when they will only have to chop it up possibly

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Casinos are greedy, but I haven't seen one yet that didn't cap the rake. How the hell would that work anyway? Taking $100 out of $1000 pots in the $40/$80 games? I don't think many players would stand for that.

[/ QUOTE ]


The old-timers tell me that it used to be that way, back in the day. Imagine a stack of chips 6" high sitting on the slide, waiting to be dropped. Open the trap door, and down they go.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real old timers tell me there used to be an open hole in the center of the table that they would push as much as possible down.

[youtalkfunny]

Well, yeah, but that's kind of off-topic.

The guy who told me about the uncapped rake also mentioned the "snatch joints". He told of the guy who sat down with a rack of chips, scooped the first three pots he was dealt in, and noticed he had less than a rack of chips.