|
|
#21
11-10-2006, 03:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Trip KKK\'s on river, me and Perry disagree.
Given the fact that he called the river, you made the right play no matter whether he won the pot or not. If he won't raise the river with a straight or flush, there is absolutely no point in checking unless you have filled, in which case a check-raise is best.
|
|
#22
11-10-2006, 03:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Results
Results
thanks to all who responded. My Stud game has an extremely long way to go. One thing I forgot to mention is that I'm probably one of the most aggro players at the table and he's seen me bluff re-raise 4th or 5th or something and fold on 6th, so he can definitely be calling me down lighter than most people. He called with two pair of some sort, but given my image at the time I had to bet, and he had to call. This is something I forgot to include in my OP that I def should have, sorry. Regardless, thanks for all the advice. Kirk
|
|
#23
11-11-2006, 01:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Results
What a stooge.. He called a better hand, and berated you for betting it. What a loser.
|
|
#24
11-11-2006, 04:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Trip KKK\'s on river, me and Perry disagree.
[ QUOTE ]
You don't make bets on the river just because you think you're ahead. You make them when you figure you're ahead the times you're called. [/ QUOTE ] River betting when you are out of position (like the OP is here) is a bit more complicated than that. The key dynamic with a moderate strength hand is: Will my opponent call a bet with more hands than he bets with if checked to? If the answer is yes, then we bet (+usually fold to a raise)... if no, we check/call. Not having a great read on the player, I would expect the default player will look us up with a lot of hands, but only bet his strong hands if checked to. A river bet seems standard to me.
|
|
#25
11-12-2006, 01:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Results
[ QUOTE ]
What a stooge.. He called a better hand, and berated you for betting it. What a loser. [/ QUOTE ] He agreed with me that the call was very.. marginal. Plus, the fact that I got called by pretty much the only worse hand that could have that time doesn't mean it was a good play in general. Kirk
|
|
#26
11-12-2006, 02:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Results
There are lots of ways to make two scraggly pair, and if Perry's calling with two pair, you owe it to yourself to bet the river. This is especially true if he'll be afraid to raise with a straight or flush because of your willingness to bet into his draw-heavy board. You lose the same amount when you lose, but you gain an extra bet when he makes those two scraggly pair.
What is with all the strategy discussion at the table?
|
|
#29
11-13-2006, 11:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Results
Perry loves to talk strategy at the low limit stud tables. The really funny thing is he's a pretty mediocre stud player, so his advice is often incorrect. The river bet into him is correct here, precisely because he will call with two pair. Against a stronger player the rationale of betting if you plan to call makes sense, but frankly check-calling is just as good to snap off a bluff.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
