$2/4 Full House

Tar.Aldarion

Why would he check the turn?
Also, why did you check behind?

Captain Tom

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Why would he check the turn?

because he wont get action off a worse hand.

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Also, why did you check behind?

because i wont get action off a worse hand.

phantom_lord

plus on the river you're more likely to call with stuff like 1010 after he checks the turn.

Tar.Aldarion

Captain Tom wrote:

because i wont get action off a worse hand.

But if you think he is ahead on the turn then the river won't change it favourably for you, if it changes it, and it is a good chance to win the pot, you essentially declare you need to hit on the river or will fold to a push imo.

edit: although i realise i haven't slept and am confused.

Captain Tom

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

But if you think he is ahead on the turn then the river won't change it favourably for you

but i dont check the turn because i think he is ahead,i check because:

1.i dont get action off a worse hand.

2.checking turn may induce a bluff on the river.

3.it may also induce a v/bet by a weaker hand.

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

you essentially declare you need to hit on the river or will fold to a push imo.

while my line does indicate some sort of weakness,it doesnt neccessarily imply that im going to fold the river,more that i have a hand with showdown value thats looking to control the pot.

Tar.Aldarion

Captain Tom wrote:

but i dont check the turn because i think he is ahead,i check because:

1.i dont get action off a worse hand.

2.checking turn may induce a bluff on the river.

3.it may also induce a v/bet by a weaker hand.



while my line does indicate some sort of weakness,it doesnt neccessarily imply that i'm going to fold the river,more that i have a hand with showdown value thats looking to control the pot.

Ok, the way I would see it is, you check the turn, which may induce a bluff on the river, it did, but you fold? It did induce a bet, but no matter what cards he had, he would have made it.
What card on the river would have made you not fold?
As far as i can see q is the second best card that you could have got on the river but you didn't call. You checked behind on the turn, the only time you will have position over him for the rest of the pot. He is going all in with anything on the river imo.

I know you don't get action from a worse hand on the turn, but frankly, you want to win the pot without giving him a chance to hit. On the turn you should think to yourself; If I check behind, and he goes all in on the river what will I do? What card will I call with that hits on teh river? Just a ten?
But If I raise now on the turn, what will he do? When you check the turn I think you bassically gave up on the hand if he went all in.


Would you have called an all-in on the river if any card but a ten had hit?
Do you not think he will go all in with anything after you checked behind?
I would have checked behind with a q, not with 10's, I suppose different strokes though.

phantom_lord

checking the turn is 100% standard.

I take it you want to bet the turn is so that you don't get bluffed off the pot?

phantom_lord

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

He is going all in with anything on the river imo.

if that's what u think then it's such an obvious spot to check!

Captain Tom

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

You checked behind on the turn, the only time you will have position over him for the rest of the pot.

???

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

It did induce a bet, but no matter what cards he had, he would have made it.

im not sure what you're basing this on.trying to bluff someone when its 95% likely they have a full house is very risky and something a lot of players wont do.

Tar.Aldarion wrote:

Ok, the way I would see it is, you check the turn, which may induce a bluff on the river, it did, but you fold?

yes i know folding is questionable after i seemingly induced the bluff.that is why im looking for feedback.point taken.

Tar.Aldarion

Not just to stop a bluff, to stop himm possibly hitting on the river, any card higher than a 10 and what do you do PL. Would you have folded or called?


By positon, I meat a chance to bet first.
It is risky all right, but his check all-in makes people lay down a low full house sometimes. He obviously thought there was fold equity.

To be fair, it is easy to have checked behind here, I might have, but only if I would call if a card lower than a ten came, or another queen.

phantom_lord

i dunno, it depends. I don't really care tbh, I'm more interested in trying to induce a bluff then to stop him sucking out.

anyway, 1010 here isn't exactly great, so protecting it isn't any concern. folding a blank river is probably the normal course of action anyway.


sometimes people are too concerned with "protecting their hand", and forget about trying to induce bluffs and extracting value from worse hands.

Tar.Aldarion

So you are saying we should induce a bluff and fold if we don't hit a two outer?
Well ok...

phantom_lord

my post was pretty **** tbh.

you check there cause you don't get any value from a worse hand, and you only get something like ak to fold. you wouldn't expect ak to push the river usually, you'd expect it to be checked through. you don't acheive anyting good by betting, you only stand to lose a bet when he has a hand, or pick up the pot you were gonna win anyway.

if you had something like jj/qq+, then you're trying to induce a bluff. with 1010 you're just hoping it gets checked through. he only has less than a psb bet anyway, so it makes no difference if u bet the turn or the river against a hand, and by checking the turn you maximise the chance he puts in his $$$ as a bluff, or calls you lighter since your hand is under repped.

edit, well not qq here obviously, but on paired board in a similair type of hand.

The_Prof

1. You said he was "probably a losing player". This means that his decisions are going to be weak a lot of the time. Pushing the river there, when your hand is so transparent and you´re getting such great odds, is quite frankly retarded. So, you figured he would know this and wouldn´t do it, therefore you made a "good laydown".

Clearly, this type of rational mentality will cost you lots of money at online MSNL. You gotta appreciate the twisted mentality of these guys. Here are my:

Golden Guidelines:

1. If you have just called a guy down thin in the past, this will not make them tighten up against you like a rational human being would. In fact, this will make them attempt the "audacious bluff" -- purely to get one over on you. In this particular board, you must snapcall with Ax or better. Sure, sometimes you won´t even be beating his bluff, but I think it´s +ev to call.

2. After making a thin call, and then getting dealt TT, you are pretty much never folding the hand against said opponent, regardless of the action. Therefore, I recommend taking a line where you will induce a bluff as much as possible. In this regard, your line was good. Although, perhaps betting 1/6th of the pot or so on the turn may have been a reasonable alternative.

Of course, if you were just a tiny bit deeper, the insta-minraise on the flop would have been a good choice too. In this particular case, you´re a bit too shallow to do so, and I´m not sure if you´re gonna see the cheap rebluff here often enough to make it the best line.

3. Of course, the final point of note, taken from good old Zeebo, is the fact that players don´t fold full houses. This is a tried and tested rule. I don´t see why you feel the need to deviate from it.

Alex.

p.s. I´m 100% serious eoin

pok3rplaya

The_Prof wrote:

3. Of course, the final point of note, taken from good old Zeebo, is the fact that players don´t fold full houses. This is a tried and tested rule. I don´t see why you feel the need to deviate from it.

maybe because we believe it's -EV not to deviate. Who cares about some stupid rule, rules are for microstakes. What matters is hand ranges and EV.

The_Prof

I´m going to assume that´s a weak attempt at "levelling" because my post was clearly intended as a joke.

Captain Tom

The_Prof wrote:

p.s. I´m 100% serious eoin

.

pok3rplaya

The_Prof wrote:

I´m going to assume that´s a weak attempt at "levelling" because my post was clearly intended as a joke.

lol oh sorry, I didn't realise. Cut me some slack it's early.

Dantes

sorry to bump an old topic, but I thought this was a particularly good thread...

I've been thinking about it for a while and it's been eating away at me!!

I know, I probably have OCD or something

Any results on this hand?

Tar.Aldarion

Aj or something, without reading back.

Dantes

Doh! Thats the only post I missed! Thanks Tar

Recon20k

BrokenArrows wrote:

id say your behind. JJ,KK and AA all push here if not a weak Q

lol @ weak Q

I think a call is good here, you have set it up looking like you have an unpaired A that you might fold. He must think if he pumps he thinks he has a chance to take it down. He will push AA, KK, JJ or a Q to avoid a check-check situation, but since you have set him up with an opportunity to bluff, i don't think you can fold. He may even be desperate and pushing 99 or lower hoping to get a call from Ax, else shoving Ax to push an A out. Looks to me like a desperate effort to pick up the pot(else a monster).

Anyway, a call is good enough for me. If he's got it, he's got it.