4/180 W/TT, Not sure I'm ahead enough to continue

[Akeshish]

i think you have to bet the flop, to see where you stand. You need information, unless you plan on representing and ace later on for a bluff.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
i think you have to bet the flop, to see where you stand. You need information, unless you plan on representing and ace later on for a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]Ok, say you bet the flop and villain calls. You are certain he wouldn't do this without a pair- where do you stand in the hand?


Here is how I approach the hand: Will villain bet this with KJo if you check behind on the flop? If so, I will check behind and let him bet into me. If he is very passive then I will be the flop to prevent overs from getting a free chance to outdraw me.

As played I am calling the turn and planning to call a smallish river bet (but fold to a large one). If he checks the river then I am checking behind because I like to miss value on the river.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]

As played I am calling the turn and planning to call a smallish river bet (but fold to a large one). If he checks the river then I am checking behind because I like to miss value on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought betting the river was 1/2 for value against lower pairs and 1/2 to represent the A against hands like JJ-KK that just "might" be able to let it go. Our line looks a lot like a slowplayed A IMO.

In other words, we have to bet the river when checked to, because we can make worse hands call (sometimes) and better hands fold (sometimes).

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought betting the river was 1/2 for value against lower pairs and 1/2 to represent the A against hands like JJ-KK that just "might" be able to let it go. Our line looks a lot like a slowplayed A IMO.

In other words, we have to bet the river when checked to, because we can make worse hands call (sometimes) and better hands fold (sometimes).

[/ QUOTE ]This sounds a lot like a 0EV play that increases variance. Not saying that's true, but I'm just not sure whether this is a profitable bet or not. It is an interesting question.

[hamnegger]

fold or raise to represent the ace id fold

[mflip]

Is there any part of his range that he raises PF and then checks the flop and turn? I think he's betting everything he raised with PF here so add me to the call turn call small river bet.

[APipeDream]

Bet flop...as played, the turn looks like you may be up against another pair, or a disguised Ax. I bet this flop though, you need to see where you are in this hand.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought betting the river was 1/2 for value against lower pairs and 1/2 to represent the A against hands like JJ-KK that just "might" be able to let it go. Our line looks a lot like a slowplayed A IMO.

In other words, we have to bet the river when checked to, because we can make worse hands call (sometimes) and better hands fold (sometimes).

[/ QUOTE ]This sounds a lot like a 0EV play that increases variance. Not saying that's true, but I'm just not sure whether this is a profitable bet or not. It is an interesting question.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually don't think it is because it always makes villain make the tough decision. Sometimes he is wrong and sometimes he is right. Only if our villain calls/folds with the appropriate frequency does this become 0EV. Otherwise, I think it is +EV because villain does not call/fold appropriately.

[AceofSpades]

[ QUOTE ]
i think you have to bet the flop, to see where you stand. You need information, unless you plan on representing and ace later on for a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Betting flop is a bluff. But an ace is clearly in your range, so folding out JJ-KK is ev. If he's not folding those there then check/fold or check flop/call turn/fold to river bet.....

Also betting flop keeps us from folding the best hand here

[Sherman]

The only reason to bet the flop in this hand is because you are afraid villain has a hand that contains at least one J,Q, or K and you don't want to give him a free card. Otherwise, there is no real reason to bet this flop. It is almost a WA/WB situation.

Anyhow, the turn call is mandatory. The interesting part of this hand comes on the river:

1) If villain bets, how much do we call?


2) If villain checks do we bet and if so how much?


I would like to demonstrate further why I think we should bet if villain checks to us on the river:

Let's say that he never calls on the river with an unpaired hand (i.e. K high). Let us then assume that he has a PP (not unreasonable given his line).

Let us further assume that 50% of the time he has JJ-KK and 50% of the time he has a lower pair (that did not make a set). These numbers are hypothetical and arbitrary.

Let us then assume that he will call our river bet 50% of the time and fold 50% of the time.

So 1/4 of the time we fold out a worse hand and pick up the pot. 1/4 of the time we fold out a better hand and pick up the pot.

1/4 of the time he calls with a worse hand and we gain EV. 1/4 of the time he calls with a better hand and we lose EV.

Using these very crude estimates, it seems that betting is the only reasonable option on the river.

If he has a worse hand, we gain nothing by checking (and obvioulsy lose value when he would have called). If he has a better hand and will sometimes fold to a river bet, we gain. Thus, betting on the river is the obvious play IMO. The only question that remains is how much.