FTOPS #1 - When do I become a believer?

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]
What part of his range value bets the turn? Don't margina1 1 pair hands check behind in a WAWB pot control situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were to poll people in this event, and ask what % of them know what a way ahead way behind situation is, I'd guess less than 10% do. EVERYONE who plays poker makes their decisions by "do I have him beat" "yes I do, lets bet"

[ QUOTE ]
Don't monsters check behind on a dry board to get an extra bet from my likely 1 pair holding on the river?


[/ QUOTE ]

Slowplaying in pots where both players ranges should be ridiculously wide is almost always wrong.

[hockey coach]

Timex - so your default for a random tourney player is: "he's not 2 barreling here, he thinks he's got me beat and in this case he certainly does". Leading the turn would seem to force him to the same thought process that has him folding most of his range but you don't lead there because we can't coun't on him to think and lay down a weak A there?

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]
Timex - so your default for a random tourney player is: "he's not 2 barreling here, he thinks he's got me beat and in this case he certainly does". Leading the turn would seem to force him to the same thought process that has him folding most of his range but you don't lead there because we can't coun't on him to think and lay down a weak A there?

[/ QUOTE ]

The board is super drawy and no one ever folds top pair. I'm not saying hes never bluffing here, I'm saying that your opponents are less creative and thinking on an even lower level than you can contemplate.

[hockey coach]

What evidence do you require before you move away from the PT Barnum assumption - does it need to be a player you know from here, w/ considerable personal playing history, or as little as a seemingly insightful hand in a given tourney?

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
What evidence do you require before you move away from the PT Barnum assumption - does it need to be a player you know from here, w/ considerable personal playing history, or as little as a seemingly insightful hand in a given tourney?

[/ QUOTE ]

if he says or does something that implies he thought about more than his hand for .2 seconds, he probably doesn't suck at poker.

most people suck at poker, though, so it's ok to just believe him and fold on the turn like everybody else.

[nath]

I just fold the flop a lot. I mean, what's the point?

[hockey coach]

"Why bother" as in: {nothing pot, reasonably deep, OOP, marginal hand, undefined villian range} >> {"I'm not giving him credit for an A or K here"} ?

[nath]

Yeah, more or less.

[Todd Terry]

What horrible fate is going to befall you if you lead out and bet the flop here, say 300? And simply having to think to yourself "OMG, I'm betting OOP without the stone cold nuts" doesn't qualify.

[hockey coach]

No horrible fate - simply a raise to like 800 which he would do w/ ATC which leaves me folding 300 chips poorer than C/F or playing an even more bloated pot OOP w/ a marginal hand and no real plan.