limit holdem

[NinaWilliams]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey, I have a guess as to who you are. Does your AP screenname rhyme?

[/ QUOTE ]

Me? no it doesnt.

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hey, I have a guess as to who you are. Does your AP screenname rhyme?

[/ QUOTE ]

Me? no it doesnt.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, I thought you might be trishthefish [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[howzit]

nina likes value
a curious pair of kings
nothing more to say

[RobNottsUk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Or to be totally pedantic, whether that opponent would fold a better or equal hand to yours, for example K´s up or Q´s up Ace kicker. And when they call, what proportion of worse hands do they have.

[/ QUOTE ]Hi Rob - That wasn't my thinking.

I truly think Heroine has the winning hand here. But there is a possibility I am mistaken.

Against a good player, I don't think Heroine averages as much by collecting a bet when I'm right as she averages losing when I'm wrong.

However, against a poor player, Heroine collects a bet more often. And in that case she may average more by collecting than she averages losing when I’m wrong.

That's the gist of it.


[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, I generally agree with your points. The possibility of having the best hand and getting called, was included in my previous post by one sentence. I didn´t emphasise it, becuase it had been very well covered.

Reasons for betting :

1) Being called by worse hand, charging a draw to overtake you

2) Provoking a fold, and scooping pot


Reasons for not betting

1) Little chance of incorrect fold

2) Little chance being called by worse hand

3) Taking free card (or cheap showdown) to outdraw opponent or hope hand is good, where < 55% of time, you´ll have worse hand when you´re called.

Now whilst bad players do call very loosely, and will call on draws, in my experience, they also like aggressive players to do their betting for them.

Marginal value bets behind passive players, are less likely to be correct, because their checking does not mean they´re "on a draw", and contrary to some posts, I find they do like to check/raise a "bluffer".

Whilst value betting is the main strategy, you should think you´ll have best hand about 55% of time when called, not just 55% chance winning showdown on the river.

A reason for betting against a good player, is the fold equity, this is probably absent in this case.

A side effect of checking behind on turn, is that it increases chance of a river bluff, and against a good player possibly stealing the pot on a "pseduo-draw" when the flush comes home. It also saves bets against a "trapper" with a made hand, looking to check/raise on the double bet round.

My preferred play in this hand is different because I don´t think the loose-player is necessarily on a flush draw. 2nd pair pairing on the river frequently means they have trips, or have an undefull which you will know about when they raise. So I think 2 bets will be lost too frequently, and the flush/str8 draw and bottom pair or medium pocket pair will fold (despite the low standard of opponent) in this situation.

Because you raised PF, the chances of "checking to the raiser" is much higher than usual, so I feel there´s less info in this situation against that type of player than if the same plays had occured in an unraised pot. If you play too predictably, constantly betting it makes it all too easy for these passive players sandbagging to be rewarded by extra bets.