Play a Hand With the Masters #1 River - Page 5

AtticusFinch · #41 09-21-2005, 07:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
For those of you advocating betting, what does everyone think about betting less than a push? At these high buy-in events would a weird play like that signal strength or weakness? If we come out betting 4k, what will CO think?

I assume it's the wrong play, but I think considering it would be nice.

I still like checking, btw.

[/ QUOTE ]

The pot is too big, and he has us outchipped by too much. Even a push is only ~3/4 pot, and Villain as 20k chips left. I think it takes the whole 7k to scare him enough to fold even a marginal holding at this point.

AtticusFinch · #42 09-21-2005, 07:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Aside: A good 2+2-er that I have talked with before has a theory that when someone's hand range is small for a given situation... the chance that they are bluffing goes way up. It relates to Bayes' Theorem and I don't feel like explaining it right now. And sure enough, it applies here.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way, this notion applies to OUR play in this hand as well, arguably even moreso than for villain, as the range of hands we'd play this way is very small.

Taraz · #43 09-21-2005, 08:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get this logic - "he limped in CO, so he must have a monster." Players often limp here hoping to steal the blinds simply by betting the flop after no one raises PF. KT, JT, Q9, are precisely the type of hands that limp here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he had a monster preflop or even now necessarily. But do you really limp KT in the CO when it's folded to you? I mean, aren't you much more likely to raise them to steal the blinds? And maybe I shouldn't say that he "definitely" doesn't have those hands, I just think that it would be a lot more likely for him to raise to steal with those types of hands.

Basically I'm still confused that he open limped in the CO and the only hands that I could really see doing that with are pocket pairs and maybe JTs. Maybe I need to start limping when it's folded to me if playing KT like that is standard.

Taraz · #44 09-21-2005, 08:26 PM

On second thought, the stacks are incredibly deep preflop. Crap, he actually could have anything. Damn, this hand is more intriguing than I initially thought.

SossMan · #45 09-21-2005, 08:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't get this logic - "he limped in CO, so he must have a monster." Players often limp here hoping to steal the blinds simply by betting the flop after no one raises PF. KT, JT, Q9, are precisely the type of hands that limp here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think he had a monster preflop or even now necessarily. But do you really limp KT in the CO when it's folded to you? I mean, aren't you much more likely to raise them to steal the blinds? And maybe I shouldn't say that he "definitely" doesn't have those hands, I just think that it would be a lot more likely for him to raise to steal with those types of hands.

Basically I'm still confused that he open limped in the CO and the only hands that I could really see doing that with are pocket pairs and maybe JTs. Maybe I need to start limping when it's folded to me if playing KT like that is standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

open limping in the CO is so un-standard that I put him on two playable cards (pairs, suited connectors, two broadway). When he didn't reraise me preflop, esp with MJ flat calling, I didn't think he had QQ-AA, AK. However, MJ priced him in for everything else, including all broadway hands.

SossMan · #46 09-21-2005, 08:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
On second thought, the stacks are incredibly deep preflop. Crap, he actually could have anything. Damn, this hand is more intriguing than I initially thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

almost all deep stacked hands are more intriguing than the online hands that are posted here daily.

Lloyd · #47 09-21-2005, 08:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
On second thought, the stacks are incredibly deep preflop. Crap, he actually could have anything. Damn, this hand is more intriguing than I initially thought.

[/ QUOTE ]
Like I'd pick a hand that wasn't intriguing [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

HoldingFolding · #48 09-21-2005, 10:39 PM

The river is just about the worst card in the pack for us. After the turn I had him on a made hand; a set, 2 pair or possibly a pair with a flush draw. I thought our best option was to check and hope for a scarey card on the river with which to chase him out otherwise if a blank comes, I'll be content to play on with 9,000+ chips. Now we've dug ourselves a grave.

His river check means one of two things, he's not that enamoured with his hand and wants to get to a showdown cheaply or he's now confident he has the best hand and is waiting for us, as the aggressor, to bet into him again. Read dependent, but from Sossman's description I err towards the former and obviously our raise on the turn shook him up: KQ, QJ perhaps.

I think his range of hands for us is essentially missed flush & straight draws. The only hand we have him beat with conceivably is QQ, but he would have expected us to bet out on the flop. AQ I guess is another possibility.

Again I wouldn't have made the raise on the turn, but I think I'd have to go with my read and raise all in in the hope that I could get him to lay it down.

mayesie · #49 09-21-2005, 10:53 PM

Crappy River, but I can't just forfeit the pot (which is almost sure to happen if I check behind the CO). His check shows weakness, and I'm going to exploit it by going all-in for my last 7000. I really don't believe I can win a showdown.

I don't believe the CO has anything spectacular (otherwise he'd bet the river). His most likely holdings are:

- 2nd or 3rd pair (JT, J9), along w/ a straight draw

- Busted Draw (KJ, 87)

He hasn't played like he has AQ or KQ. If he's sitting there w/ QJ, that's just crappy luck (although there's a chance you can get him to fold w/ your big river bet; representing AQ yourself). 7000 should be just enough to get a tight player to fold after being unwilling to bet the river.

The CO is probably giving me credit for at least Top Pair, Strong Kicker (AQ or KQ). I believe my draw is well-concealed because I didn't take a stab on the flop after raising pre-flop.

Don't get me wrong, this is definitely a risky play that could go south (knocking me out). However, I believe the prerequisites are in place to steal this pot:

- Tight Opponent who showed weakness
- Position
- Betting Leader

Also, getting this pot would take me up to almost 17K in chips, putting me in excellent shape for future rounds.

tpir · #50 09-21-2005, 11:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Aside: A good 2+2-er that I have talked with before has a theory that when someone's hand range is small for a given situation... the chance that they are bluffing goes way up. It relates to Bayes' Theorem and I don't feel like explaining it right now. And sure enough, it applies here.

[/ QUOTE ]

By the way, this notion applies to OUR play in this hand as well, arguably even moreso than for villain, as the range of hands we'd play this way is very small.

[/ QUOTE ]
The context is not totally there... but that was my original point and reason for bringing it up. I meant this about reading *our* hand and picking off our bluff from the CO.