|
|
#11
01-30-2007, 12:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 5/10. QTs. Should we bet this river? If not, why not? If so, why s
I agree with what you're saying. If you're thinking is that you don't want to be because, taking into account future action, you don't think it's profitable, that's correct. If you're thinking was, "I think betting is probably profitable, but it would really suck if I got raised" that's different (which is how I took your comment).
Sorry if I misread your idea. 
|
|
#13
01-30-2007, 05:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10. QTs. Should we bet this river? If not, why not? If so, why s
[ QUOTE ]
I would check probably any heart. Maybe not A. [/ QUOTE ] Wouldn't the BB have been correct to value bet the river with flushes other than the ace high flush?
|
|
#15
01-30-2007, 06:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10. QTs. Should we bet this river? If not, why not? If so, why s
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I would check probably any heart. Maybe not A. [/ QUOTE ] Wouldn't the BB have been correct to value bet the river with flushes other than the ace high flush? [/ QUOTE ] I think this is highly opponent dependent. I think my statement appears blanket and that is incorrect. If my opponent is aggressive/value bets, I'd check a lot more here. If my opponent is passive/loose, I'd bet into on river. If he's scared easily, I'd check here as I think he'll fold too much bet into but he'll bet a lot more if checked to either for value or bluff.
|
|
#16
01-30-2007, 07:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5/10. QTs. Should we bet this river? If not, why not? If so, why s
I'm swayed...i think a bet would be ok here.
However, [ QUOTE ] How often would a non-maniacal, non-tilting opponent check-raise this river with a worse hand than ours? I don't think it would be enough for us to call here. [/ QUOTE ] If I'm villain here, you're getting raised at LEAST some of the time both when i'm holding a heart and when i'm holding none.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
