A few hilo hands

[howzit]

hand 1, seventh should be a check behind. your board looks terrible and he has 3 flush going along with his jacks. he'll know that if you have busted out and have nothing, you'll have to bluff at it by betting. if he bets, you'll most likely fold. also, i've witnessed a ton of stud players check a baby two pair on the river looking to snap call.

a river bet is razor thin as it is and i'd give Jdags credit enough to be able to pull off a river check-raise bluff, of which you don't have the cards to handle such a move. you should only bet here with the proper monkey tilting image or tons of history of bluffing the river.


in hand 1, can we discuss sixth? can somebody with experience or insight give me your thought process on raising his open jacks/3flush when blumpkins board is all over the place?

is it a bluff? a freeshowdown? ted forrest like read?

[2461Badugi]

[ QUOTE ]

There aren't many sane combos that don't beat us, but not many sane players will open any of the hands that do beat us looking at a 34555JK board behind him.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of players at these stakes will raise anything playable if they have the only ace in the door, and for a lot of game conditions they're correct to do so.

[2461Badugi]

[ QUOTE ]

in hand 1, can we discuss sixth? can somebody with experience or insight give me your thought process on raising his open jacks/3flush when blumpkins board is all over the place?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much either he has the flush or we're ahead, and there's not any reason to believe he does have the flush. Our range has a lot of things in it bare jacks beat, and he doesn't want to give a free card in case we have something like Tx clubs or two baby diamonds.

[Adebisi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

There aren't many sane combos that don't beat us, but not many sane players will open any of the hands that do beat us looking at a 34555JK board behind him.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of players at these stakes will raise anything playable if they have the only ace in the door, and for a lot of game conditions they're correct to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of those hands aren't playable with 5 low cards behind you. Someone is going to have a better hand and be playing the vast majority of the time. Personally, of the 4 possible combos, the only one I'd consider playing is (66)A.

[howzit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

in hand 1, can we discuss sixth?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much either he has the flush or we're ahead, and there's not any reason to believe he does have the flush.

[/ QUOTE ]badugi, i disagree, two pair should be in Jdags range as a high %.

[ QUOTE ]
Our range has a lot of things in it bare jacks beat, and he doesn't want to give a free card in case we have something like Tx clubs or two baby diamonds.

[/ QUOTE ]

ahh, the premise sounds right. but once blumpkin raises sixth w/one pair, shouldn't that fold out bare jacks but not two pairs or better? meaning, a raise would be negatively convex. i'm trying to think in terms of the sklansky's fundamental theorem. If we knew Jdags held one pair of jacks on sixth, would it be correct for blumpkin to raise for value with the info that Jdags would probably fold one pair most of the time? or better off smooth calling and letting jdags check/call a baby two pair on the river if we improve to kings up?

the last scenario would be, if blumpkin called sixth and didn't improve, how would he handle a river bet by Jdags?

my opinions is that jdags will bet the river if he has either a big high hand or a rivered low...mix in the % of times he'll bet a lone pair of jacks as a bluff. the other times, he'll check to us with unimproved jacks or two pair or better. the very small minority of the time, he will value bet two pair but i find that instance rare in the scope of full ring stud8.

my main question is how to handle the river if there was no raise on sixth to get info.

[blumpkin]

One thought about hand 1: should I consider betting the river as a bluff? When I raised sixth I thought he might have just Jacks and at best he has Jacks and 3s or Jacks and 4s. So either I'm in the lead or have many outs and can value bet the river if I improve.

But, since I raised 5th AND 6th with a fairly dry board, he may think the only hand I could possibly have is three kings, in which case he could lay down Jacks up. Is it worth throwing in one bet on the river in case he (a) either had Jacks up on 6th or made it on the river and (b) decides to make that fold since he surely thinks my raises during the hand were for value.

The only way he can really convince himself to call is putting me exactly on a big pocket pair (e.g., AA) that raised 6th because JD might have only Jacks and then made some sort of razor-thin-value/strange-pseudo-bluff bet on the river with just one big pair.

[2461Badugi]

[ QUOTE ]

ahh, the premise sounds right. but once blumpkin raises sixth w/one pair, shouldn't that fold out bare jacks but not two pairs or better?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, totally bare jacks aren't really an option: Dags certainly has a draw of some sort here, so I don't think we're in any danger of folding him out. Ideally it's a worse flush draw than ours and we both make.

I don't think a pair of threes or fours are very likely to call fifth.

[2461Badugi]

[ QUOTE ]

But, since I raised 5th AND 6th with a fairly dry board, he may think the only hand I could possibly have is three kings, in which case he could lay down Jacks up.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be semibluffing with 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] or Tx[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]? I agree that trips is your most likely hand, but I'd instacall you with jacks up because the pot is big and you've played very strangely.