|
borges
|
12-28-2008, 02:27 PM
Post subject: Playing flopped TPTK when scare cards turn
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: la biblioteca de Babel
Posts: 21
|
|
{split by jyms- from Spenda's New Years Halp thread}
I'm usually a lurker here. I'm pretty much a beginner at NL. A common situation with me is that you are OOP and think you might be ahead. For example, suppose you have TPTK on the flop. You bet and you get called. The turn pairs the board or the third card to the flush or a straight arrives...you bet again and you get called. What do you do on the river? What considerations go into your decision on whether you should bet/fold, bet/call, check/call, check/fold?????
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
swiggidy
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Waiting in the shadows ...
Posts: 3,777
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keith_MM
i keep betting and try to represent that the overcard doesn't worry me and I'll lose a stack load.
|
Do you see your problem?
|
|
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
|
|
Keith
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,336
|
|
basically , i gues once the scare card hits only hands that have me beat are going to be calling , but showing weakness in the light of the scare card can invite in a bluff or a bet from someone the scare card made a hand for. I'm also guess that it shows i was probably out of position otherwise it would be safer to check it down
|
|
|
|
jyms
|
|
Tilting Mod
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,836
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keith_MM
basically , i gues once the scare card hits only hands that have me beat are going to be calling , but showing weakness in the light of the scare card can invite in a bluff or a bet from someone the scare card made a hand for. I'm also guess that it shows i was probably out of position otherwise it would be safer to check it down
|
Do you think it's more expensive to call a bluff or bet and fold out hands we beat? Which makes us more money? Which makes us lose more money?
|
|
|
|
Keith
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,336
|
|
i would say the biggest earner is to call the bluff, the biggest loser to call the made better hand ,and makingthe poorer should win us the pot there .
the trouble i have is allocating relative chances of a bluff and the better made hand.
|
|
|
|
jyms
|
|
Tilting Mod
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,836
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keith_MM
i would say the biggest earner is to call the bluff, the biggest loser to call the made better hand ,and makingthe poorer should win us the pot there .
the trouble i have is allocating relative chances of a bluff and the better made hand.
|
I never mentioned better hands in my choices because were obviously putting in one bet either way. We win or lose depending on hand strength if we bet first. The trick is to get more hands to pay us when we're the better hand. We can't do that by folding out worse hands by putting in that one bet on a scare card.
|
|
|
|
borges
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: la biblioteca de Babel
Posts: 21
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jyms
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keith_MM
i would say the biggest earner is to call the bluff, the biggest loser to call the made better hand ,and makingthe poorer should win us the pot there .
the trouble i have is allocating relative chances of a bluff and the better made hand.
|
I never mentioned better hands in my choices because were obviously putting in one bet either way. We win or lose depending on hand strength if we bet first. The trick is to get more hands to pay us when we're the better hand. We can't do that by folding out worse hands by putting in that one bet on a scare card. |
Wow thanks for splitting out this question. It's one I've struggled and thought about for a long time. jyms, I understand what you are saying and your reasoning is very logical. But couldn't we make another logical argument for bet/fold? The clearest case (I think) is if our opponent is passive and bad (the usual case in the micro-limits).
Reasoning for bet/fold: We can very well be ahead. If we bet a small amount, say 1/4 of the pot, he'll call if he has a weak holding; if we don't bet, he'll check behind his weak holdings and bet his strong ones (e.g. if the scare card actually helped him and he has made his straight or flush). If we bet, he'll raise us and we can fold. Suppose that we are ahead with probability p. So, if p > 1/2, this gains us money versus check/calling against this opponent.....Granted maybe this opponent is not that common; i.e. one that NEVER bets when checked to on the river after being bet into on 2 previous streets.......but it might be an illustration that the type of opponent might have a bearing on the decision process of bet/folding or check/calling.....no?
I'm probably way off base here.....these decision processes are much clearer/easier in limit hold'em.
|
|
|
|
jyms
|
|
Tilting Mod
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,836
|
|
It all comes down to your range of hands, his range of hands and the board. Mostly the problem is if you are doing this on weak scared hands (betting 1/4 pot) what are you doing with your best hands. You need to blur the line between our lower end of our range and our higher end. Second pair still has equity vs certain hands on certain boards. If you are talking AQ on a Q high flop and a K turn is far different from JTs on a T high flop and a K turn. The question is very vague for details of this type. Why not find a hand, give us some stats or a read and start from there.
Betting 1/4 pot on the turn will almost never be right. Giving guys with second pair, GS draws and even an Ax bottom pair a redraw with so much money behind is never good. Biggest problem between limit and 100BB no limit is the money behind becomes more important than the pot.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
