canterbury bluff spot

[MitchL]

[ QUOTE ]
Ilovepoker, your response was worthless why even post that? use some comprehension or dont post a response pls. i am saying i dont always flat call in this spot, i often c/r flop or 3-bet preflop etc - but sometimes i play it the way illustrated... also, this post was not about how it was played up to the river, only the bluff option...

for the rest: because turn checked around, if someone made flush or straight they will bet it out from mid position on river - also, because villain checked behind on the turn it is unlikely he had a flushdraw (especially with Ah held by me) - at this point the only hand that gets there for CO is 99, and its unlikely he checks it around on turn

- my thoughts are that some of the players in the middle may have made a ragged 2pr they will call 1 bet for, but not the c/r cold... and i think CO has mediocre holding, 99, or a bluff... someone give some reasonable insights besides

last, if i did C/R what can others at the table call with in mid and what can C/O call with if its folded to him?

thanks for any thoughtful responses and anyone who stopped mid post and deleted if it contains something rediculous containing robots

[/ QUOTE ]

No one is folding a straight, which is your main problem. I would expect CO to have 99 alot here. Also, it seems extremely unlikely that he would bluff into this field on this board. I expect that you will get called in 2 spots if not reraised. This play works in 3-way pots where it is obvious that the player in position is bluffing and the remaining player has a weakish made hand and might overcall. This play almost never works in a large multiway 8-16 pot.

[Vehn]

This is terrible for about a hundred reasons but basically if he's capable of having anything other than 99 here you should have 3 bet preflop.

[ship it pls]

vehn, like i said, sometimes i 3-bet, sometimes i flatcall the 3-bet isnt the question, and 100 reasons why it wont work is worthless unless you elaborate

mitch, i agree that nobody folds a straight, but i think only one capable of having it with the check around on turn and river is CO, and i think its unlikely

as a whole it seems the consensus is that this play sucked, i thought it was good at the time and still think it is fairly strong considering the hand range... i did c/r and it folded to CO and he got pissed off and stood up as he curled the cards back to flick them into the muck, but in his frustration knocked some chips in and said fine if they are already in, i call and tabled TT

[MitchL]

[ QUOTE ]
vehn, like i said, sometimes i 3-bet, sometimes i flatcall the 3-bet isnt the question, and 100 reasons why it wont work is worthless unless you elaborate

mitch, i agree that nobody folds a straight, but i think only one capable of having it with the check around on turn and river is CO, and i think its unlikely

as a whole it seems the consensus is that this play sucked, i thought it was good at the time and still think it is fairly strong considering the hand range... i did c/r and it folded to CO and he got pissed off and stood up as he curled the cards back to flick them into the muck, but in his frustration knocked some chips in and said fine if they are already in, i call and tabled TT

[/ QUOTE ]

Ship it,

A straight-forward frustrated player's range will include 99 or a rivered flush and really nothing else. These type players tend to give up in spots like this, not bluff hopelessly. They understand that they are never bluffing 4 players out of a pot this size. I think you got real lucky that you didnt get called or raised in another spot, nevermind the range of the straight-forward player. My guess is that your read of this player is off, though this obviously based on the results. But given your description I hate a raise here.

[ship it pls]

mitch, i appreciate your feedback

due to overwhelming arguments against the play, i am hoping i had some sort of subconscious body language read on him i am not aware of, other than that it seems this play goes against code - appreciate the useful feedback

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
mitch, i appreciate your feedback

due to overwhelming arguments against the play, i am hoping i had some sort of subconscious body language read on him i am not aware of, other than that it seems this play goes against code - appreciate the useful feedback

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread is a good example of the type of hand I would never post on 2+2. 99% of the time your river check/raise will be terrible. 1% of the time it will be genius. When you post a hand like this you will inevitably get responses targeted for the 99% category, and then youre left with the burden of trying to convince everyone it was in the 1% category. From reading this thread, it looks like you dont even know if this hand is in that exclusive 1% group so I can safely conclude that your river check/raise was a mistake, but even if you were right and this hand did belong to that 1% category, do you really want make this thread and then have to go through all that trouble of explaining to eveyone why your right. Seems like an exhuasting excercise to me. I guess thats a big reason why I dont start alot of threads myself.

Every day I make atleast a few plays that would make most 2+2ers say WTF are you doing? And the reality is, if my play is wrong I'll quickly figure it out myself thus not needing any 2+2er's help, and if my play is right, it seems like a waste of time to post it on 2+2 and futilely try to show everyone the light.

BTW, ship it, I disagree with you that my initial post was worthless. You should never make any play some X percentage of the time. You should simply concentrate on making the best possible play all the time. Too many players piss away lots of money in their fruitless quest to be tricky and unpredictable. Heres the amusing part: What these players dont realize is, if they always simply tried to make the best play possible they would end up looking more tricky/unpredictable than they could ever desire.

There are so many spots in limit holdem where it will be correct to raise with a calling hand, raise with a folding hand, call with a raising hand, and call with a folding hand and so on. These spots do not come up very often, but the great players are always prepared to seize the moment when they come. And thats why in full ring holdem you dont have to "mix" up your play. If you play extremely well, everything else will take care of itself.

[lippy]

My issue is, at the Canterbury 8/16 game, you're going to get an overcall by top or second pair MORE often than you get CO to fold. It's just a very -EV move IMO.

You may of taken it down, and if you did, more power to you. I just don't make plays like this because no one in that game is willing to make any kind of a laydown on the river. "Hrm, I have a pair... I call!"

[Hamlet]

I think this is correct. I don't think this is going to work all that often. Bet-fold just isn't a line that a lot of players are going to take in the 8-16 from the button unless they have complete air. On top of that, you have to get thru the limpers.

I don't understand the intensity of the critism on this board though. I think it's a bad bluff, but it was at least worth considering.

[ QUOTE ]
You're not going to win this even close to a 4th of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

[jaroot]

Having played in this 8/16 game I can tell you that a c/r here is not +EV play. If I'm reading right, you have 3 players left to act other than the cutoff. It's not totally unresonable to put one of them on the flush draw. Even if the CO is valuebetting his underpair to the J (which seems likely based on his flop bet and turn check) you still have 3 others to worry about.

Heads up... I like this play a bit more as most 8/16 players will look to save a bet on the river and fold the underpair.
Too risky 5 handed though.