Fuper Spot Where Hand Reading Helps

[Elektrik]

seems standard to me, w/ river fold unless you have some read that he's crazy.

I don't like leading the turn. I def do like betting the river.

I really can't believe that people think that a tiny flop bet combined with a check behind on the turn is quads or a boat. When people make one of those dinky flop bets with a monster, they usually follow it with by making up for it on the turn (typically potting it or something). I really think the tiny flop bet followed by the turn check is weakness or a draw.

Also, the reason I hate a turn bet is because I think it does get shoved over a lot with worse hands, especially because of the nature of the board. Even if we're not inducing bluffs a rediculous amount of times on the turn, I still think a check is correct for pot-control purposes.

[djk123]

I think I play the hand the same as kramer, but i rarely ever take the c/c flop lead turn line. I like the river bet because based on villain's flop/turn combo I would think we have the best hand 99% of the time, and he could easily put kramer on a busted draw or ace high too.

On river I don't think people bluff enough in these spots to make calling good.

[Todd Terry]

[ QUOTE ]
I really can't believe that people think that a tiny flop bet combined with a check behind on the turn is quads or a boat. When people make one of those dinky flop bets with a monster, they usually follow it with by making up for it on the turn (typically potting it or something). I really think the tiny flop bet followed by the turn check is weakness or a draw.


[/ QUOTE ]

If he flopped a set, he made quads or a boat on the turn. You called a 1/4 pot bet on the flop and then checked the turn, which looks like you're drawing. He wants you to get there now. He would never make a pot sized bet in that situation and blow you off a draw by not giving you proper pot odds. He would either make another small bet, which I think would be overly suspicious, or check behind and hope you get there so he can take most or all of your stack. A check behind can also be a draw or weakness (but since you've shown no strength whatsoever I think a stab at the pot on the turn by a draw or weakness would make more sense), but a raise on the river on a double paired board given your call on the flop makes a monster the only reasonable conclusion which explains the action on all streets, unless he's nuts.

[dumbndumb]

[ QUOTE ]
I really can't believe that people think that a tiny flop bet combined with a check behind on the turn is quads or a boat. When people make one of those dinky flop bets with a monster, they usually follow it with by making up for it on the turn (typically potting it or something). I really think the tiny flop bet followed by the turn check is weakness or a draw.

Also, the reason I hate a turn bet is because I think it does get shoved over a lot with worse hands, especially because of the nature of the board. Even if we're not inducing bluffs a rediculous amount of times on the turn, I still think a check is correct for pot-control purposes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kramer,

When I first read your OP I thought to myself, "why the hell did he play it like this (esp. not betting the turn and leading the river) and why is he considering calling?" Now that I think more about it, I think you are a genious for inducing a huge bluff.

To people who think he has a monster (quads) why would villain not bet the turn? If he puts Kramer on anything, esp draw, this is his best chance to make any money (unless Kramer hits perceived draw). Instead he checks behind on a draw heavy board like this? I like Kramer's comment about most players flopping a monster and making a small flop bet usually make a more substantial one on the turn. Add that to the fact that the size of his river bet makes no sense, then I think I call this.

[uclabruinz]

I love Kramer's line and reasoning in this hand, and obviously snap call the river.

[NYWalker]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

If he has 66, 88, he'd raise to 1500. He may think all-in looks like bluff but still doesn't want you to call, therefore made 2150. Given your reasoning, you should call the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

how in the world do you know the exact amount he would raise with a boat here?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just how I think when seeing people make y amount of raise into x amount of pot (also related to stack). If he wants you call, normally, he makes it 1500 (1000 more) since you already put in 750 and the pot is 2500, for 1000 more, you get 2.5:1. But raising more than that (as played) looked like bluffing to me.

In related to the stack, he left 700 and put in 2150 raise into 1000 pot also looks like bluffing (he doesn't want to get called) meanwhile he leaves some chips behind trying to make people think he's not bluffing.

[NYWalker]

[ QUOTE ]
I really can't believe that people think that a tiny flop bet combined with a check behind on the turn is quads or a boat. When people make one of those dinky flop bets with a monster, they usually follow it with by making up for it on the turn (typically potting it or something). I really think the tiny flop bet followed by the turn check is weakness or a draw.

Also, the reason I hate a turn bet is because I think it does get shoved over a lot with worse hands, especially because of the nature of the board. Even if we're not inducing bluffs a rediculous amount of times on the turn, I still think a check is correct for pot-control purposes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like your play especially the turn check.

Clearly, you don't want to give villain a chance to get you off the hand at the turn. Overpair would come againt at the turn.

[Requin]

Sure. I don't like a turn lead a all.

Oh yeah fold here.

[shaundeeb]

This is obv nuts or air and he like never has the nuts nh. Would suck if he shows some 87 hand that he correctly checked behind turn for pot control with and now is valuetowning you.