99 Wierd Spot

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
someone please explain why we would bluff here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get this, what do you mean?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a river bluff would be terrible. some people (maybe not you) said bet/fold the river. I don't see why they would think that it's good, so I asked for an explanation.

[thepizzlefosho]

if the guy puts us on a diamond we fold a hand we would have chopped. If he raises we can fold being pretty sure we were beat since villain will expect a call the vast majority of the time and is pretty unlikely to be bluff raising.

I guess I think we should put in 1 bet on the river, and leading has the greatest number of positive possibilities (he calls we chop, we bluff him off of a chop) and really costs us the same when villain has a diamond. If we check the river he is checking behind every hand that chops, and we get taken to value town with every diamond. I just don't think that c/c is the best option. Maybe villain bluff bets the river enough that we can c/c and chop often enough, but it is really too tough to say.

so its either a c/c or a b/f, and I think we are better off b/f'ing than c/c'ing. But honestly it is super close, and I don't think there is a huge difference in EV either way.

[Burnsabre]

ch/calling this river: you chop to no diamond, you lose to a diamond = win nothing but lose something

betting this river: you win huge when villain folds and lose nothing when villain calls without a diamond.

Either way you lose if villain has a diamond.

In my opinion the chance that villain folds without a diamond is better than the chance that villain bluff raises without diamond.. at least for a typical tag.

So yeah, I like a river "bluff" here.

[thepizzlefosho]

[ QUOTE ]
ch/calling this river: you chop to no diamond, you lose to a diamond = win nothing but lose something

betting this river: you win huge when villain folds and lose nothing when villain calls without a diamond.

Either way you lose if villain has a diamond.

In my opinion the chance that villain folds without a diamond is better than the chance that villain bluff raises without diamond.. at least for a typical tag.

So yeah, I like a river "bluff" here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i beat you to it [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Burnsabre]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ch/calling this river: you chop to no diamond, you lose to a diamond = win nothing but lose something

betting this river: you win huge when villain folds and lose nothing when villain calls without a diamond.

Either way you lose if villain has a diamond.

In my opinion the chance that villain folds without a diamond is better than the chance that villain bluff raises without diamond.. at least for a typical tag.

So yeah, I like a river "bluff" here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i beat you to it [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

and you said it better me thinks. nh.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
you win huge when villain folds

[/ QUOTE ]

3-1 is not "huge" odds. if he's not in a coma he should know that we very rarely have a flush here.

[ QUOTE ]
So yeah, I like a river "bluff" here.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude what's with the quotes? a bluff is a bluff is a bluff

[thepizzlefosho]

we could easily have the J or 9 of d. if he doesn't have it it is pretty reasonable for him to put us on it. And if he does have it he is likely going to raise and then we can fold.

so it is obvious you don't like b/f, but how is c/c any better?

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
we could easily have the J or 9 of d. if he doesn't have it it is pretty reasonable for him to put us on it.

[/ QUOTE ]

seriously think about our range when we 3bet pf, bet flop and turn. yes we could have the J/9/8d. does it make up 3/4 of our range?? not even CLOSE. snap call if I'm villain.

[Robin Foolz]

c/c river. the pot is laying us plenty odds that he doesn't have a diamond.

agreed. bluffing here is bleh. is not going to work. unless you're against super nit at a live casino.

[Burnsabre]

yeah, its a decently easy call for villain, but people find reasons to fold. Should he call? Yes. Will he call? dunno.