Low Limit Poker Forum wpt dollar
Low Limit Poker Forum
September 04, 2010, 12:43:55 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Low Limit Blog gets it's own home.
You can visit the Low Limit Poker Blog at http://www.lowlimitblog.com
 
   Home   Help Login Register  

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Value Checking with AQ  (Read 241 times)
CoolDuck
Guest
« on: March 28, 2009, 07:03:08 pm »

I can already hear some replies.  Cont. bet flop... blah blah blah blah   Cool

Opponent 6 is (31,22,3).  Played with plenty, very aggressive.  I don't know anything about player 5.

<a href="http://www.pokerhandreplays.com/flash/replayer.swf?pokerhandid=386881" target="_blank">http://www.pokerhandreplays.com/flash/replayer.swf?pokerhandid=386881</a>

I probably should of bet the flop, but I knew 6 is going to check-raise me with just about everything (pair, draw, wouldn't put a complete bluff past him).  The turn comes and I'm calling down regardless of the river.  Very predictable bet from 6.

Not a typical play for me, but it has the added benefit of giving an aggressive player the chance to bluff or semi-bluff, and in those instances I don't get pushed off the hand with a check-raise or donk bet on a terrible turn card.  Cont. betting will push him of when he has absolutely nothing.  The play has a disadvantage of paying off when he hits any pair.

If 5 donked the turn I would probably have folded without any information.  If they had both checked I bet the turn.

Thoughts on the play?  Think this is an option instead of a typical aggressive bet/bet line?
Logged
Fishbach
Trips
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 55



« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2009, 08:52:01 pm »

 hey CD...you killed my dial-up!
Logged

I used to love trips
Fishbach
Trips
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 55



« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2009, 09:05:50 pm »

  My impulse would have been to hammer the AQ.  Love the concept of the value check.  Hope CHARADES calms down and does well.  I still owe the forum a seven stud post.  I hold the record for consecutive wrapped trip losers.  Made $880 last week in a 2-10 limit (HE) game.  Every week we end up playing three handed, which I like fine.  Cheers to the analytical CoolDuck.  I am still reading all the posts.  I have yet to play a game on line.
Logged

I used to love trips
Tony
Registered User
Seven Deuce Offsuit w/ +EV
************
Offline Offline

Posts: 5960



« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2009, 12:47:23 am »

Three-handed I guess a check is ok, it's not the best board to cbet.  However if I was going to make a value check I'd rather do it on the turn and save myself some money, and a cbet would likely set that up.

Personally I'd just cbet the flop.  If you get checkraised you'll still often be ahead in a heads-up pot.  Checking behind just gives the big blind a free card when he has a much weaker hand range, not something you want to be doing too often since he'll benefit more from this than you in the long run.

I think if you're going to check the flop some of the time, do as Lederer or Malmuth suggest and save it for your very strongest and very weakest hands.  Strong overcards on a coordinated board isn't the kind of hand to do it with imo.
Logged

CoolDuck
Guest
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2009, 05:05:22 am »

  My impulse would have been to hammer the AQ.  Love the concept of the value check.  Hope CHARADES calms down and does well.  I still owe the forum a seven stud post.  I hold the record for consecutive wrapped trip losers.  Made $880 last week in a 2-10 limit (HE) game.  Every week we end up playing three handed, which I like fine.  Cheers to the analytical CoolDuck.  I am still reading all the posts.  I have yet to play a game on line.

That's cool, I'm working on my seven card stud game.  I think stars has the best table selection for it.

Three-handed I guess a check is ok, it's not the best board to cbet.  However if I was going to make a value check I'd rather do it on the turn and save myself some money, and a cbet would likely set that up.

It's funny I typically post my exceptions than my norms.  Against average players I'd c-bet this every time, but the loose aggressive big blind made me want to play this differently at the time, and the unknown player calling cold in the sb didn't make it easier.

I think in this spot I'm still going to go with my flop check, though in 95% of these situations I'd bet.  Heads up against the loose/aggresive blind I'm betting this on the flop.

Personally I'd just cbet the flop.  If you get checkraised you'll still often be ahead in a heads-up pot.  Checking behind just gives the big blind a free card when he has a much weaker hand range, not something you want to be doing too often since he'll benefit more from this than you in the long run.

But the problem is that the pot is multi-way and there's a cold caller in the small blind.  Now if he folds when I cont bet and I get check-raised, then that's a loose call down a lot of the time as well against an aggressive opponent.  And that's a tough call down if he check-raises here with a draw, since he's about 40 to 50% to win the hand from the flop, assumin a flush or straight draw. 

The big blind does profit when I give him a free card, but I thought I could offset that with semi-bluffs and bluffs from this player.  And this player is more than willing to bluff through the river.  I have about 400 to 450 hands on this guy. 

I basically looked at the flop and thought it was good for a showdown.  Since the big blinds range is wide I thought letting him take the lead was higher EV (Mason would be so proud that I used "EV"  Razz  )  If the small blind woke up in a multi-way pot then I could release pretty easily.


Logged
Tony
Registered User
Seven Deuce Offsuit w/ +EV
************
Offline Offline

Posts: 5960



« Reply #5 on: March 29, 2009, 05:18:02 am »

Yeah I understand your reasoning and it's an interesting play.  There's nothing wrong with mixing it up occasionally.
Logged

CoolDuck
Guest
« Reply #6 on: March 29, 2009, 05:20:20 am »

Yeah I understand your reasoning and it's an interesting play.  There's nothing wrong with mixing it up occasionally.

Funny how an extra player in the hand can completely change the situation.  But I agree with your assesment, clearly not a play to make often, if at all.   
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  













Quality Poker Links
HTML Site Map

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!