|
|
#21
07-31-2007, 09:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: River decision in a big pot
[ QUOTE ]
plz tell me why it's not "not close at all" as is, your comment is empty if I were to call every time on the river when the pot is >10bb I'd suck at pkr [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] no big reads on asian guy, he just sat down a couple orbits before, seems to be playing too loose pre flop, did see him make a river check/raise bluff with ace high that failed [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#24
07-31-2007, 10:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River decision in a big pot
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] plz tell me why it's not "not close at all" as is, your comment is empty if I were to call every time on the river when the pot is >10bb I'd suck at pkr [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] no big reads on asian guy, he just sat down a couple orbits before, seems to be playing too loose pre flop, did see him make a river check/raise bluff with ace high that failed [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] ok, now we're getting somewhere when you know someone is capable of bluffing, you have an <u>easy</u> call when the pot is bigg? (I'm saying easy bc you quoted my reply to Vehn's post) this is easy and not close? I thought and still think this is def not easy and not at all "not close" if it were HU with me and villain somehow I would agree this should be a call but we have a third player in as well and it would def take some cohones for villain to bluff in this spot after given action let me give it a slight twist: the hand where villain bluff c/raised river actually happened after this hand, not knowing villain is capable of bluffing like that, is it still "not close"?
|
|
#26
07-31-2007, 10:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River decision in a big pot
I shouldn't have added the asian part, asians over here are not the same as you might know em (from what I've read on 2+2)
and I don't get the "I didn't bother to read what you wrote" bc obv you read some of it for you to be able to reply and quote a part of it AND if you state that you don't give an isht about what I wrote, why even bother posting at all?
|
|
#27
07-31-2007, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River decision in a big pot
[ QUOTE ]
I shouldn't have added the asian part, asians over here are not the same as you might know em (from what I've read on 2+2) and I don't get the "I didn't bother to read what you wrote" bc obv you read some of it for you to be able to reply and quote a part of it AND if you state that you don't give an isht about what I wrote, why even bother posting at all? [/ QUOTE ] Boredom. But point taken. I'll bow out.
|
|
#28
07-31-2007, 11:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River decision in a big pot
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 2 limpers, this is a definite raise, 3 its closer. It also depends on how the blinds play. [/ QUOTE ] Actually, HEPFAP recomends a fold in MP after 1 limper, if you expect a couple more after you. This is only marginally better, as in multiway pots position becomes less important. As played call and expect to lose. "You can't make money in limit hold'em by making huge laydowns on the river". Flop check is correct IMO -- you're unlikely to win u/i, the majority will call the flop, and you don't want to make the pot big giving them proper odds whem drawing to 1 pair yourself. [/ QUOTE ] HFAP was written for a different time and a different game texture. Raising here preflop is a must in almost all live games. Call the river and hate it.
|
|
#30
08-01-2007, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: River decision in a big pot
Short answer: Call (most of the time)
Long answer: You should call (most of the time) if you think there is a non-zero chance of him bluffing. If there's a 0% chance of him bluffing, your EV of calling is -1.0 BB. If there's a 10% chance of him bluffing, your EV of calling is 0.4 BB. The "breakeven" point is around 7% (game theory). The fact that you saw him make a river bluff means that there's a non-zero chance of him bluffing. In my experience, people are very bad at doing a particular action a really small % of the time...therefore, if anything he's bluffing more frequently than 7% rather than less frequently. Also, if you occasionally fold in this situation, your opponent will believe river bluffs are profitable. Even if he works out that bluffing 7% is correct, he will probably do it more frequently. For example, I tell myself that I should raise UTG "infrequently" with 87s (in a full ring game), say 5-10% of the time. In reality, I probably do it way more than I intend to. Finally, in this situation, standard psychology says he is less likely to do a river bluff since he just did one (that failed). Reverse psychology says he is more likely to do a river bluff since you will be expecting that he won't be doing two river bluffs in a row. Hmmm...I like my short answer better.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
