value/blocking bet? stupid?

[Ness]

Subject: value/blocking bet? stupid? 200NL

Converter isn't working for me right now so here it comes. This full ring game is mixed in with my regular 6-max and I am paying more attention to the other games-it is currently 7 handed though. Villain in this hand is nothing special either way, but is not good.

He is 30/6/.04. He recently lost a pot, so effective stack sizes are $170.


Preflop:
1 fold, I limp 99, folds to villain on button who calls, SB fold, bb checks.

flop:
446r I bet 5, villain calls, BB folds

turn:

446 7 (two spades) i bet 12, calls

River:

446 7 J (no flush) i bet 20

[Grunch]

I would have bet just a tad more on each street.

It seems like the opponent is very passive, and won't bet on the river with many hands which beat you, like JT. So the river bet isn't a blocker since he'll call with a wide range. It's also not really for value, since your hand seeems fairly marginal here. I'll check & expect a check behind me.

[Ness]

[ QUOTE ]
I would have bet just a tad more on each street.

It seems like the opponent is very passive, and won't bet on the river with many hands which beat you, like JT. So the river bet isn't a blocker since he'll call with a wide range. It's also not really for value, since your hand seeems fairly marginal here. I'll check & expect a check behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts on the hand exactly.

[4_2_it]

.04? Check the river, if he bets you can safely fold. I like your bet sizes, no need to bloat the pot OOP.

[Ness]

[ QUOTE ]
.04? Check the river, if he bets you can safely fold. I like your bet sizes, no need to bloat the pot OOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Its one of those hands I play badly and mark to look at later. I wanted to post this one b/c there is always a lot of talk about blocking bets and getting value out of marginal hands. Here is a hand where checking the river is clearly the best option.

Good thing I have super elite hand reading skills and he called with 88. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ajmargarine]

[ QUOTE ]

Good thing I have super elite hand reading skills and he called with 88. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. I was thinking about this hand since you first posted it, and I liked your line. I think it's a thin blocking bet and was trying to figure out why Grunch and 42 didn't want to bet here. Now that we have results (too soon monkey), my thinking is clouded.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a thin blocking bet and was trying to figure out why Grunch and 42 didn't want to bet here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain had the only logical hand that pays of hero. I think any hand we beat folds and many hands that beat us check behind (or call hero's blocker).

[ajmargarine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a thin blocking bet and was trying to figure out why Grunch and 42 didn't want to bet here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain had the only logical hand that pays of hero. I think any hand we beat folds and many hands that beat us check behind (or call hero's blocker).

[/ QUOTE ]

6x/67/55/33?

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's a thin blocking bet and was trying to figure out why Grunch and 42 didn't want to bet here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Villain had the only logical hand that pays of hero. I think any hand we beat folds and many hands that beat us check behind (or call hero's blocker).

[/ QUOTE ]

6x/67/55/33?

[/ QUOTE ]

If this guy is the prototype calling mouse, that J scared him. While hero might get a call by 67, I don't see anything else paying off.

I will say that if making a blocker is a mistake, it is a very small one at worst. (It does not come close to being a leak.)