PS 5-10 AA 240bb deep

[RepulseMonkey]

after your bet on flop, turn check behind looks like an "I've no [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]" check.

does anyone like sticking it in on the turn here ? especially if you're going to agonise over a river call.

[jlocdog]

No, not a fan. Agonizing over the river isn't a justification to spew turn. It seems that us betting/shoving the turn only gets called by better. If we check turn, we may induce a bluff.

So infact your logic seems backwards. If we are going to agonize over a river call, I think we are better off checking turn. In other words, if you are resigned to going broke after the turn card regardless of the river, then I MUCH prefer to check turn and call river.

[RepulseMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
No, not a fan. Agonizing over the river isn't a justification to spew turn. It seems that us betting/shoving the turn only gets called by better. If we check turn, we may induce a bluff.

So infact your logic seems backwards. If we are going to agonize over a river call, I think we are better off checking turn. In other words, if you are resigned to going broke after the turn card regardless of the river, then I MUCH prefer to check turn and call river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually my logic is right side up. If you're planning to go broke(as opposed to agonising) then check turn is best.

if you think he will bet only hands that beat you as opposed to his full range on the river then it's an easy fold.

We're agonising because we're not sure what % of his range he bets here. since it's less than a psb our decision to go broke or not is really on the turn.

Turn bet is to stop us being bluffed out on the river and we still have outs to the boat here if called by better.

[Ship Ship McGipp]

you guys who are saying "call, he's bluffing here enough" probably don't play ps 5-10 enough.

it doesn't really play that aggro, i wouldn't create metagame [censored] that's not there, and i would just fold because there is a good chance my opponent has a spade in his hand and that makes a flush, while I only hae three of a kind which is not as good as a flush

[berserk]

[ QUOTE ]
you guys who are saying "call, he's bluffing here enough" probably don't play ps 5-10 enough.

it doesn't really play that aggro, i wouldn't create metagame [censored] that's not there, and i would just fold because there is a good chance my opponent has a spade in his hand and that makes a flush, while I only hae three of a kind which is not as good as a flush

[/ QUOTE ]

ps 5/10 is such a nitfest and so [censored] boring to play

[ddubois]

If I had Ks, I'd bet turn, because board pairing would make me cry.

[Janis N.]

jlocdog, Repulse Monkey, I'm doing some simple math here but perhaps I have it wrong. Anyway, according to it shoving turn is wrong if we only get called by hands that beat us.

On the turn we are 22% against K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Kx. We need to be good 29% of the time on the river to call.

Let's assume we believe we are only good 28% of the time on the river and thus cannot call river UI.

If we shove turn and only get called by better hands we win 2045*0.28 + 0.72*(1067 - 1402.5) or 331.04.

If we check turn behind and villain won't call a shove if board pairs (let's assume) we win 2045*0.22 or 449.9.

Didn't do the math but I think it's fairly obv that even if we evaluate ourselves as good 30% on the river unimproved it's still higher EV to check turn behind and call any river.

[MYNAMEIZGREG]

I don't know how these games play but against an aggro, good opponent, I would call here. I can definetely see a hand like a pair on the flop calling, checking the turn, and then figuring you don't have a spade and shoving the river. Although, I might be giving the guy too much credit.

[gman06]

I would fold

[aislephive]

I'd fold as well.