Live 20/40 Gar vs. Pro Part 2

[that_pope]

[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts: Check-raising the river never really entered my mind, but it was entertaining idea! I can only beat a river bluff. Well maybe I can beat AJ, AT. Arg, tough decision.

Results: The river bet did not occur, and Pro checked behind and won with 66.

I think I might have cry called if the situation arose, but I think it's a mistake.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Garland

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn, I hate his river check there. You have to have AK+ to make a fairly standard river call to his bet. While AJ and JJ don't make too much sense (but he did have 66), I think I would have had to fold AQ unless I saw said opponent getting out of line a lot in the given session...

[mongidig]

I am curious what would be the point of betting the turn here? If were behind we are getting raised, If we are ahead our opponent probably doesn't have many outs and may very well fold in a situation where he might have continued to bet. We have outs.......Just curious.

I am also curious if you think the pro should have bet the river here?

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
I am curious what would be the point of betting the turn here? If were behind we are getting raised, If we are ahead our opponent probably doesn't have many outs and may very well fold in a situation where he might have continued to bet. We have outs.......Just curious.

I am also curious if you think the pro should have bet the river here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I see no point in betting the turn. No turn [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] came allowing the opportunity for opponent to check behind with a random heart to beat me. I have a hand that is hard to beat given I was ahead on the flop. If Pro is bluffing, I want the bluffing to continue. The only monkey wrench was the river Q, which created a potential dilemma for me (luckily it didn't).

Should Pro bet 66? Probably. However, I have been known to check-raise the river. It's highly probable I lead a J, so 66 is a pretty good value bet.

Garland