5/10 Value betting too thin?

[sammy71]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Puke- he NEVER calls with worse here- what were you thinking?
Also, certain hands that beat you- such as low two pair often fold river. Sorry, but this is completely retarded unless you have a specific read on him and are bluffing.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is completely wrong. i would like this a little better if the river wasnt a spade bc it's possible now that he's c/cing some hands that beat us but i think he has a J here a lot and we need to be able to bet AT like this if we ever want to be able to run believable bluffs as part of a balanced game

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, my comment was aimed at the bet which I thought was 1950 into a 650 pot. In that case it would have been retarded. Obviously since the guy is short (which I did not see) and he is putting him all in for his last 500 this bet is fine sometimes.

[Moonshine]

given this board, i dont think it changes anything in this case. I think without a spade the hand is super standard and with the spade it becomes slightly slimmer.

the only possible hand i see that could have 2 pair and play this way is J9. sets all raise the turn, so does AJ and almost certainly A5...

[Big_Jim]

Jared,

History/image affects what you get called by so much.

Against some players, this is a pretty clear value shove, against others, a clear check, since they just won't call you with worse.

When it's somewhere in the middle and pretty thin, things like the backdoor flush coming in obviously take away a few of those calls that you might otherwise get.

Pretty much the only thing that he can beat, if you have him beat, is a pure bluff. How often does he think you can pull off a bluff like this? Have you been running hot against him and running him over? Has he been running you over? Is he ready to make a stand? Does he think you're tilting? etc..

[Big_Jim]

Lastly, even if a fairly thin bet happens to be -EV, when it gets called, there is definitely some value in being seen playing big pots without having to show down, and you're ahead here so often.

[Novles]

I think you get less calls from a jack given that you are UTG. If you were CO or BTN, it'd be a mandatory vb imo.

nh

[Jay.]

i don't think you get called by worse here, it takes some really big history for him to justify calls because you could hold TT 99 88 QT QKo etc and maybe he views you as a pot controlling pussy with AT etc, but anyway, give him the rope and bet it because he rarely ever has you beat and betting here fits in perfectly to an overall strategy.

[mak15]

anyone like betting less than all in?

[FGators]

I wouldn't bet less than all...just leaves us in a little weird spot with less than a pot sized bet left for villain on the river to just not put him all in.

Definitely an image type hand. My initial reaction was to check because I don't think we ever get called by WORSE. I still think thats correct play...notice OP said they haven't played much with each other. Given that they are fairly new to each other I don't see villain looking him up super light without an Ace here. If there was some deep playback history I would like a shove a TON more.

[TxRedMan]

You're basically betting a little more than the pot on the river, which doesn't really feel like a value bet to me. A value bet in this spot seems like a fairly small bet given the texture of the board and the turn action. I'd bet $350 for value, I'd shove (as you did) as a combo bet hoping to sometimes get a fold from AQ and sometimes get a call from a worse hand.

In sum, I don't think this a value bet b/c it's too hard for him to call w/ worse, but it might shutout better ocassionally.