|
|
#51
09-18-2007, 12:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 100NL How bad is this?
Without a probe bet on the flop, you don't have enough information to know where you are at, and so I don't like the call on the river. Maybe he paired a seven, and you are ahead, but he may have planned to c/r the flop with a set and tried to catch up and push you off a flush draw on the turn. I don't think he has a K, but the full house and flushes (if he was semi-bluffing by potting the turn) seem like real possibilities. Potting with the full house while hoping you hit a flush seems very sane.
Another consideration: Since he's unknown to you, you are probably just as unknown to him. I wouldn't have potted the river against an unknown after the 2nd K came on the river without a legit hand. Checking behind with a K on the flop is too standard in a heads up situation. 
|
|
#52
09-18-2007, 01:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 100NL How bad is this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 1: you have no idea of his bluffing frequencies <font color="blue">I don't really think this is all that relevant. We don't know what his frequencies for c/r bluffs are, we don't know what his frequencies for peeling lower pairs are, we don't know what his frequencies for calling with K's in the bb are we don't know what his frequencies for anything are. We do know that we have a good hand and that if we be and get raised we often have to fold against an unknown which means we're turning our hand which is good 90% of the time and will be good at showdown a high percentage as well, into a bluff. Also, we develop ranges and frequencies for people by showing hands down with them or watching them showdown hands with others. Not by watching them c/f K high flops.</font> 2: charge straight draws <font color="blue">That'd be great if there were a ton of them out there. As is, there aren't a ton of worse hands he can pay two streets of value with here.</font> 3: value from 7x/6x/pps which you can get from now in case a scare card hits the turn. <font color="blue">You can get two streets of value out of these hands much more often by checking the flop calling the turn and calling or value betting the river. </font> 4: sets up getting value on the turn in case a scare card hits the river. <font color="blue">What are we getting value out of on the flop and the turn again?</font> 5: allows you to control the size of the pot. <font color="blue">Checking accomplishes the exact same thing and I'm surprised this even made your list. </font> <font color="blue">Part of the idea is to keep his range as wide as possible and showdown a hand that is still ahead of that range. We're way ahead of his range on the flop but if we bet and get called or raised, his range narrows considerably and includes a lot more hands that beat us. If we check behind, he bets the turn with basically ATC, so we're still ahead of his range and calling is always +ev. On the river, we have to make reasonable assumptions about the size of his bet, the board texture etc. and assign a range to it then. Betting this flop does absolutely nothing to get the most value out of your hand against unknowns and often times, straight forward opponents will simply fold better and call/raise with worse. In other words, the more we are the aggressor, the more he is the caller, the more his range narrows to hands that beat us and the less ev we have with each bet that goes into the pot. If you're playing against either tougher opponents or complete donkeys and you know the opponent to be one or the other, betting becomes a lot more profitable. </font> [/ QUOTE ] tl/dr and probably just bad any way but this is what is intuitive to me. [/ QUOTE ] Great Post, Reading this has made me a better player. I will not always bet or always check in spots like this. However, I definately see the value gained in checking this flop, and have opened my mind to the concepts here. For example, keeping the opp's range as large as possible, etc. Overall, good post.
|
|
#55
09-18-2007, 01:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 100NL How bad is this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] 1: you have no idea of his bluffing frequencies <font color="blue">I don't really think this is all that relevant. We don't know what his frequencies for c/r bluffs are, we don't know what his frequencies for peeling lower pairs are, we don't know what his frequencies for calling with K's in the bb are we don't know what his frequencies for anything are. We do know that we have a good hand and that if we be and get raised we often have to fold against an unknown which means we're turning our hand which is good 90% of the time and will be good at showdown a high percentage as well, into a bluff. Also, we develop ranges and frequencies for people by showing hands down with them or watching them showdown hands with others. Not by watching them c/f K high flops.</font> 2: charge straight draws <font color="blue">That'd be great if there were a ton of them out there. As is, there aren't a ton of worse hands he can pay two streets of value with here.</font> 3: value from 7x/6x/pps which you can get from now in case a scare card hits the turn. <font color="blue">You can get two streets of value out of these hands much more often by checking the flop calling the turn and calling or value betting the river. </font> 4: sets up getting value on the turn in case a scare card hits the river. <font color="blue">What are we getting value out of on the flop and the turn again?</font> 5: allows you to control the size of the pot. <font color="blue">Checking accomplishes the exact same thing and I'm surprised this even made your list. </font> <font color="blue">Part of the idea is to keep his range as wide as possible and showdown a hand that is still ahead of that range. We're way ahead of his range on the flop but if we bet and get called or raised, his range narrows considerably and includes a lot more hands that beat us. If we check behind, he bets the turn with basically ATC, so we're still ahead of his range and calling is always +ev. On the river, we have to make reasonable assumptions about the size of his bet, the board texture etc. and assign a range to it then. Betting this flop does absolutely nothing to get the most value out of your hand against unknowns and often times, straight forward opponents will simply fold better and call/raise with worse. In other words, the more we are the aggressor, the more he is the caller, the more his range narrows to hands that beat us and the less ev we have with each bet that goes into the pot. If you're playing against either tougher opponents or complete donkeys and you know the opponent to be one or the other, betting becomes a lot more profitable. </font> [/ QUOTE ] tl/dr and probably just bad any way but this is what is intuitive to me. [/ QUOTE ] Great Post, Reading this has made me a better player. I will not always bet or always check in spots like this. However, I definately see the value gained in checking this flop, and have opened my mind to the concepts here. For example, keeping the opp's range as large as possible, etc. Overall, good post. [/ QUOTE ] I agree good post. I think the arguments between betting/checking have a lot to do with play style as well. I check/bet flops 50/50 with my good hands/air so this type of play fits me a lot better. Balancing isn't just a theory!
|
|
#56
09-18-2007, 01:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 100NL How bad is this?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] keeping the opp's range as large as possible, etc. [/ QUOTE ] Is this sarcasm or some zen concept I'm just not getting? [/ QUOTE ] I think he means opponents betting range is larger than opponents calling range. which is correct.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
