Live 20/40 Two river check-raise attempts…

[jfk]

Hand 1: I'd be inclined to bet the river. There are too many hands which he may elect not to pay off if you check raise and too many hands which he may elect to check behind (like QQ or JJ).

Being that he had position on you and is repping at least a K, just calling the flop three bet is fine once the HJ mucks but I'd not be critical of a cap. This is a situational/meta game consideration.

The river check raise is perfect in the second hand. I disagree with Dave F. about the fold. I would tend to just smooth call here with Axo. The $5 rake is a strong consideration, but the two chip small blind prices you in. I don't like to raise as very few in that game are going to fold a BB getting 5 to 1 and I hate playing Ax OOP against aggressive opponents.

Also, I'm curious to know why you think the button limp in the second hand is a sure fire sign of weakness. I very suspicious when an aggressive player who should know better limps on the button.

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
n.s. had some sentiment about being afraid of a house. In my opinion being afraid of a house at this juncture is weak-minded. But yes, if I check-raised and got 3-bet, I can make the fold pretty easily.

[/ QUOTE ]

For some reason my advice (I actually haven't been playing much) has gotten extremely weak-tight lately, I dunno what's wrong with me.

That said, I didn't really mean to imply that I was actually afraid of a boat here, just that there was some small chance of it and it was a factor that weighs against check-raising. However if you can fold to the 3-bet, then it doesn't make any difference because 2 bets are going in no matter what you do.

I'll go back to nitting quietly.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, of course a boat has to be part of the equation. But when you described it as a "decent chance," to me it implied something like 25-30%, which I thought was too big. I suspect if he had a set on the flop, he'd probably pop me on the turn greatly reducing the chance he actually flopped it.

Garland

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I'm curious to know why you think the button limp in the second hand is a sure fire sign of weakness. I very suspicious when an aggressive player who should know better limps on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

He limps too much. I suspect any connecting or decent suited cards is a huge part of his range. Any decent A or pocket pair he's raising. I really don't think he knows better...he's there to gamble.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Garland

[Garland]

Thoughts:

I'm reconsidering the idea of 3-betting the nut flush draw, but it might have been a little results oriented.

Do I need AK to re-raise? No, probably KQ or other such if I have a read I'm ahead. But the point is well-taken, I may need to push these draw hands to get action when I do have AA, AK or a set against good players. I could push him out of a medium pair, although I actually didn't expect him to play it that way.

It looks like Hand #2 is almost universally approved, so that's good.

Results:

Hand #1: Button checked behind with JJ (Why didn't he 3-bet me pre-flop?). I sheepishly showed my flush. The check-raise failure, I believe, is not as disastrous as shown as there's a chance he might have folded to the river donk anyhow with smaller pairs, and he's likely to value bet AK, KQ, KJ, etc.

Hand #2: It worked and he showed A3o for a losing two pair. So indeed I had proper odds to call the turn raise.

8 votes for Hand #2 vs. 0 votes for Hand #1. Good job. Thanks for everyone's thoughts,

Garland