Look what I've got myself into, interesting spot w/ 65s..

[LearnedfromTV]

jim i def wasn't saying bet/call the turn! The opposite in fact. All things being equal* it's so much better to bet/fold a blank turn with 18% equity than the flop with 32%.


* of course all things aren't equal, and giving him sixish outs with hands that would fold the flop + giving him a chance to outbluff us are reasons to bet the flop instead; otoh, sometimes the turn will turn a hand he was check-calling or check-raising into a hand he folds.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
putting in another 40 or whatever and then folding really sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]
How is it worse than bet/calling?

[/ QUOTE ]

After further thought, I was wrong about that. I thought the pot committing bet was closer to a normal sized flop bet than it is, plus I was just being dumb. (There's really no excuse for this given that billy outlined the bet size options very nicely in the OP). Agree that overbetting just so you can call is bad, mainly because the opponent is not going to react much differently to $40 v $60; absent another reason to bet more, doing it just to price yourself in is bad.

I'm mostly arguing for a check.


Question: If you bet $40 and he calls and then checks again, how many/which turns are you shoving?

[aislephive]

I think a lot of this depends on how wide our opponent's range is to call a reraise preflop. The tighter it is the more I like checking.

[PoppinFresh]

bet 40, I think you get called way more than you get checkraised

[Big_Jim]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why we would bet/fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
As has been said in the thread, one of the big things to consider here is how often you think he's gonna check/raise. A lot of the time, players will just check/call, since the board is pretty dry, so we don't lose the value of our draw.

[ QUOTE ]
jim i def wasn't saying bet/call the turn!

[/ QUOTE ]
Hah, thank god. I must've misread it.

[ QUOTE ]
If you bet $40 and he calls and then checks again, how many/which turns are you shoving?

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a bit of feel involved, but almost always shove As and Ks, and some random cards. Shoving on cards that make the board drawy might let him talk himself more easily into a call. Sometimes just go for it when you feel like he'll fold.

[Big_Jim]

True:
[ QUOTE ]
calling turn without odds, is very bad

[/ QUOTE ]
This depends so much on the size of his turn bet. If he leads out for pot, a call is probably pretty thin, but as odds get better, so do implied odds.


Assumptions:
We will either stack him, or he will check/fold.
We will never bluff, or try to pick off a bluff when we hit a pair.
We will always have the best hand when we hit our draw.
Assuming our draw is 4:1 exactly.

If he bets full pot:
$60+$59+X*(225-28-59) = $59*4
119+X*138 = 236
138X = 117
X = .85

Solving for other bets:
2:1 - 85%
2.25:1 - 57%
2.5:1 - 38%
2.75:1 - 26%
3:1: - 17%

If he's fairly likely to have a good hand, or to bluff/bet very thin a lot on the river, calling up to a 2/3 pot bet (2.5:1 odds) can easily be profitable against a lot of players, especially if they give away their strength on the turn, in some way.

[BobboFitos]

why is this such a debate? bet and see what happens. worry about getting raised when it happens, not before. thats a good old brunson-ism, actually.

checking doesnt have much merit w/ 6 high simply bc the draw is uber weak on the turn and its possible to get called by alot on the turn that wont call the flop. is you hit the pair, who cares? a turn bet woudl've likely worked on the flop but now if they fold you were simply protecting the bets hand. cehckraised there? well now you're priced in w/ pair + oesd, v little dif between wasted money turn vs flop. hti the nuts? once again if he has nothing, who cares. onyl dif is really..

how often do you get c/r bluffed? (by the best hand, anyway!) not often. how often do you make the best hand which you woudl've been shut out on the turn? well, since you only hit the nuts ~18% on the turn anyway, and he doesnt have much alot (which is why a flop bet is +EV) this parlay is low.

also, who says a typical hand cant go you bet the flop he calls he checks the turn now you get to get a free one to the nuts. or you bet and then improve and voila you bet again and stackola. or you bet and improve to a pair check behidn call a river bet and bam you have best hand.

there are a million scenarios, but the worst is bet enough so that its a ~0 ev call of an all in. thats just stupid variance. there was a nearly identical hand to this a month ago or so when hero in a rr pot flopped a OESD or whatnot, and a few good players argued for the line of bet/calling bc "you can price yourself in". using that logic, next time you have a gutshot on the flop overbet the pot by 10x so that if they go all in you're getting 8:1 on a call and are priced in! yay, +EV.

[Big_Jim]

[ QUOTE ]
why is this such a debate?

[/ QUOTE ]
The only reason I'm debating it is because I think a standard flop bet is a pretty obvious play that should be obvious is significantly profitable.

I'm just exploring other lines because they can be profitable as well, and add depth/deception to your game.

At what stack sizes would you want to change your strategy? Is there such a point?

I suppose you probably won't find yourself in that spot with this hand.

[soah]

I don't know how 1/2 plays these days, but at the next levels up it seems like people always put you on AK and never fold the flop if an A or K doesn't hit. Checking behind gives you a chance to hit the nuts for free and it also gives you a chance to catch an A or K to bluff with. This gives you 14 cards to catch to win the pot.

But unknowns at 1/2 probably don't play the way I expect people to play, so I dunno.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]

At what stack sizes would you want to change your strategy? Is there such a point?

[/ QUOTE ]
without a doubt. however, checking doesnt really fit with my gameplan there. flop has 59, i suppose if the effective stacks after the flop were less then ~120, id just shove. bc id feel dirty betting half pot then getting c/r getting 3:1 and villain EVER having a semibluff (which highcards me!) or a total bluff that he would've folded.
if you have 120 or more betting 30 and villain c/r for 90:240 means you pretty much have to call, although its barely +EV (obv you can cbet, im just using a bet that illustrates the perspective of possibly avoiding this scenario)

and if you're deep enough, id bet with the intention of 3betting all in. this is a bit deeper then what hero is, like pot of 60, we bet 30, if he calls pot is 120, to fold a legit hand that is a non bluff (although certainly makes a c/r on their part weird!) we'd prolly have to be 500 or so deep, bc that presents worse then 2:1 to villain. so i guess thats the 250 bb. most scenarios (80 to 240, standard online) its a cbet, whatever you feel comfortable doing, if they c/r like min or whatever you call bc you're priced in or push if you think they're FOS, otherwise you just fold bc they wont fold enough to make a semibluff profitable plus your draw isnt getting good enough odds.. just think to yourself that they proly think they bluffed you, but you had 6 high! they're the sucker.

if you're REALLY deep id bet with the intention of calling, bc shoving would be way too much, and now we have a 8 out nut hand with ultra deep stacks, is sorta deceptive, we have position, and now i believe we do have implied odds. for sake of hypothetical, assume 1000bb (1000$) like Wynn or Foxwoods where buyin is uncapped, so you bet 40, they c/r to 175, you call, pot is ~400 and you have 800 behind. now if you hit whatever they bet you can push and overpair is dead and set/top two is in trouble, both could call, plus you win that 2nd barrel from a bluff.... if they check now you can check behind and possibly hit the draw etc etc (millions of options)