|
|
#22
08-07-2007, 09:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: RIVER
Not if it stops him from betting hands that are drawing dead or near-dead...
|
|
#23
08-07-2007, 04:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: RIVER
I agree with TWP that betting the turn opens yourself up to playing a big pot OOP with only a pair. If the river is a scare card I have to shutdown and having bloated the pot so much I may get moved off the winning hand. Check calling is a decent line to protect yourself by controlling the pot OOP. I'm just not quite sure what to make of the river because I also agree that leading the river looks either way too strong or way too weak. I'm not sure I'll get called thin and like many of you stated I may get raised off my hand on the river.
Viffer, Villain is Keith.
|
|
#24
08-07-2007, 05:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: RIVER
"I'm just not quite sure what to make of the river because I also agree that leading the river looks either way too strong or way too weak. I'm not sure I'll get called thin and like many of you stated I may get raised off my hand on the river."
See, that's the thing that I really like about a river bet. It looks like a nuts/nothing bet. So why would he raise? He'd have to be pretty maniacal to raise with a hand that can't even beat 'nothing' when he could easily be pushing into a monster. But he could very easily not believe you have a monster, and therefore call with a hand that can beat 'nothing' but loses to AA. Say you have KK as villain and Hero takes the line I'm advocating. What do you do on each street? I think it's quite plausible that I would call the flop, bet the turn, and then call the river...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
