Macau 15k Hand

[ChipRick]

i like the flop bet, i prefer a little less i think...i agree with everyone else though, based on your read of scott the river is essentially a bluff with only 3 jacks calling you beat...

[Bond18]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Live players are obsessed with protecting their hand. I think if he has a set he almost always bets the flop since i'm not PFR and has no reason to think i'll bet for him. I also think if he has a flush that's not the nuts he's pretty damn likely to either bet flop, check raise flop, or check raise turn.

Conversely, live players are obsessed with the slow play. If he has the nuts he very well may check it all three streets, and he might perceive K high flush as basically the nuts.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you complicating things with broad assumptions about "live players?" (btw, is the definition of a "live player" someone who doesn't make his living playing internet poker?) Based on your original description of your opponent, it's a clear value-bet on the river, and if you want to simplify the hand and generally play it better, do what Waco said and keep the pot smaller.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to make some broad generalizations because there's not that much history (40-50 hands?) I don't bunch all live players together, and i wouldn't call a very profitable pro a standard live player.

I'm starting to think i should go with smaller value bets and pot control in general in live.

[JSchnett]

Id fold pf and make a smallish bet/fold on the river. But I'm just a nit.

[Ansky]

not surprised at Joe's response at all is all im gonna say.

[djk123]

who is joe

[luckychewy]

PASS THE SUGAAA DJK

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
I bet about 11-1200 on the flop, 2300ish on the turn and prolly 3k on the river... I almost always prefer to keep the pot smaller than you did here

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
if you want to simplify the hand and generally play it better, do what Waco said and keep the pot smaller.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why waco and shane want smaller flop and turn bets. No one is changing their flop action with one pair/two pair/set based on bet size, and the player described isn't changing his turn action based on bet size either. Maybe you get a small bit of extra flop value from medium pair w/ medium spade but that value is slim because that hand actually has a decent amount of equity and if you bet too small you would prefer he fold. Also, against the table descirbed and player described, I think we almost always will have easy folds on a fourth spade, so bloating a pot we get bluffed off of shouldn't be a concern. So unless you think 1200/2300/3k (4-5k?) gets the river bet called way more often than 1600/3500/shove, there's no reason to bet less. It has to be a lot more often too, because two near pot bets gets you nearly as much as as three small ones. The only other reason to bet less is to induce bluff raises, which I really doubt can play significantly into the decision on either a multiway flop bet or a turn bet into this guy.

As for the river, the most likely hand that beats you that plays this way is the nut flush and given the kk hand setup I kinda think that's what he had. I can't see him checking a boat, because you have a tight image and people who check kk as in the example hand expect other tight players to play the same way, so he would be too afraid of you checking behind a flush. Paradoxically (or perhaps not; this is just where this kind of player's exploitability gap is), there's enough that he'll call a bet with to make a bet worth it. I don't see him calling a shove nearly as wide as a smaller bet that leaves him chips, though. 5k bet/fold, i guess, although shove is fine too.

[BarryLyndon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bet about 11-1200 on the flop, 2300ish on the turn and prolly 3k on the river... I almost always prefer to keep the pot smaller than you did here

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
if you want to simplify the hand and generally play it better, do what Waco said and keep the pot smaller.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why waco and shane want smaller flop and turn bets. No one is changing their flop action with one pair/two pair/set based on bet size, and the player described isn't changing his turn action based on bet size either. Maybe you get a small bit of extra flop value from medium pair w/ medium spade but that value is slim because that hand actually has a decent amount of equity and if you bet too small you would prefer he fold. Also, against the table descirbed and player described, I think we almost always will have easy folds on a fourth spade, so bloating a pot we get bluffed off of shouldn't be a concern. So unless you think 1200/2300/3k (4-5k?) gets the river bet called way more often than 1600/3500/shove, there's no reason to bet less. It has to be a lot more often too, because two near pot bets gets you nearly as much as as three small ones. The only other reason to bet less is to induce bluff raises, which I really doubt can play significantly into the decision on either a multiway flop bet or a turn bet into this guy.

As for the river, the most likely hand that beats you that plays this way is the nut flush and given the kk hand setup I kinda think that's what he had. I can't see him checking a boat, because you have a tight image and people who check kk as in the example hand expect other tight players to play the same way, so he would be too afraid of you checking behind a flush. Paradoxically (or perhaps not; this is just where this kind of player's exploitability gap is), there's enough that he'll call a bet with to make a bet worth it. I don't see him calling a shove nearly as wide as a smaller bet that leaves him chips, though. 5k bet/fold, i guess, although shove is fine too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that advocacy for smaller bets relies on the assumption that said villain will stay in the pot and you can extract max. value against his style while having room to fold to a RR. We know that against other players, however, betting more is great because they may call you down thinking you were trying to buy the pot with As / slow play something / blah blah. Also, it's a multiway, so I think betting amount was standard here.

The problem with this hand is that it's less likely your opponent is calling you down with a J here, more likely that he has either a higher flush that is afraid of a FH or QA, and now that said J hit, he is very unlikely to pay you off to a push on the river with QA. And, KsJ or AsJ make up only two hands he has as compared to wider range of hands that either fold or have you beat. Also, your opponent cannot see through small river bets as blocking bets, so you can either bet 3K/fold OR check behind.

Barry

[Egarim]

I think this is a pretty easy bet/fold situation. Versus this opponent, you know he's never check raising you with a worse hand on the river, so it's not difficult to fold if he raises. I just don't see a whole lot of value in shoving here vs this opponent. Although, your play looks okay vs maybe a standard online player, I don't think this is profitable in this situation. With the blinds so low, there's no reason to stack off this early, and I doubt the tight passive player here will stack off with kings or aces. So, imo the river action should easily be to go to value town with him, and fold to a raise.

[NoahSD]

[ QUOTE ]
i think live a smaller bet on the river is much better....


[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably true. Live poker is so weird.