Sushi vs Clarkmeister

Sushiglutton · #1 09-03-2007, 03:48 PM

I apolgize to the mods and everyone else for some stupid posts lately. I'll try to behave better. Here is an interesting river that came up in todays session. So villain is 28.7/10.5/1.8 and I have no other reads because I multitable.

The fourth spade hits and I'm OOP so it's Clarkmeister? But I think AK is a big part of villains range. And can we really expect him to call with that unless he holds a spade? On the other hand if he raises is it really a safe fold?
Flop donk is also debatable.

PokerStars 0.50/1.00 Hold'em (10 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
1 fold, UTG+1 raises, 2 folds, MP2 calls, 2 folds, Button calls, Hero 3-bets, 1 fold, UTG+1 caps, MP2 calls, Button calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (17 SB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (4 players)
Hero bets, UTG+1 calls, MP2 folds, Button folds.

Turn: (9.50 BB) J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets, UTG+1 calls.

River: (11.50 BB) 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero???

CrMenace · #2 09-03-2007, 03:58 PM

As I understand it, clarkmeister is a bluff bet, and you had a made hand. For instance, if you were calling down your queens because you thought villain had aces and then bet this river, that would match my understanding of clarkmeister. If villain raises you here with AcKc, that would match my understanding of a clarkmeister.

I like a c/c here, by the way. The check will induce a bluff from the non spade AK. If you bet, you'll have to lay down even against villain's bluff raise.

Jaran · #3 09-03-2007, 03:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
As I understand it, clarkmeister is a bluff bet, and you had a made hand...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong. A Clarkmeister is a value bet.

-J

NIX · #4 09-03-2007, 04:02 PM

I don't donk the flop. Based on those numbers, I expect a flop bet from him like all the time which I would check/raise. I know the pot's big, but I don't think he'll be nice enough to raise with AK on the flop (because it's .5/1), so if people are going to call 1 bet, I'd like them to call 2 (or 3).

On the river, I don't know what you beat, other than 99 or AK without a spade. By this time, it looks like he has AK and I wouldn't think he'd call a bet on a 4 flush board with AK UI. He is somewhat agro, so I think I'd check and hope he tries to bluff since we look scared of the flush.

Point Blank · #5 09-03-2007, 04:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I understand it, clarkmeister is a bluff bet, and you had a made hand...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong. A Clarkmeister is a value bet.

-J

[/ QUOTE ]

i always thought a "clarkmeister" was just an action ... and could therefore be both a value bet/fold or a bluff

Xylocain · #6 09-03-2007, 04:06 PM

As I understand the clarkmeister is a b/f OOP with a hand you intended to call with, thus having showdown value, when a 4th flush card hits.

The value comes from fold equity plus beating most calling hands.

c/r flop and bet river.

Jaran · #7 09-03-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I understand it, clarkmeister is a bluff bet, and you had a made hand...

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong. A Clarkmeister is a value bet.

-J

[/ QUOTE ]

i always thought a "clarkmeister" was just an action ... and could therefore be both a value bet/fold or a bluff

[/ QUOTE ]

A Clarkmeister is where you have a made hand on the river OOP, the fourth flush card falls, and the only hand that most likely beats you would be the flush. You bet to get value from hands that don't have a flush, won't bet, but will call a bet. You fold to a raise because, when the board 4flushes, almost no player will raise w/o a flush (not including paired boards where a fh is possible).

Certainly you can bet the river into a four flush board as a bluff, planning to fold to a raise, but this was not what Clarkmeister was talking of when he put forth his "theorem".

-J

CrMenace · #8 09-03-2007, 04:20 PM

Okay, I reread this discussion of the clarkemeister theorem. It looks like this hand would actually fit the theorem well.

Clarkmeister himself calls it a "value-bluff" as betting here will get some better hands to fold. But as Jaran says, the main reason to bet here is that many more worse hands will call a bet here than will bet if checked to. If raised, you would call against some villains and fold to others. Here, you'd probably want to fold, I think.

CrMenace · #9 09-03-2007, 04:30 PM

NIX nailed this post, IMHO

Riku · #10 09-03-2007, 04:47 PM

What better hands are out there that would fold ? I check it.