Fourth hh review: Tnixon $110
10-20-2009
, 03:15 PM
10-20-2009
, 03:55 PM
10-20-2009
, 05:11 PM
lol . quick replied thought it was a nice touch
...ok no more derail...
...ok no more derail...
10-20-2009
, 05:57 PM
10-20-2009
, 06:09 PM
Quote:
I'd like to comment a bit on this, and would like to hear your opinion about my thinking.
Suppose we open 3 out of 4 buttons, and villain defends all 3 of our opens. First time, we hit a hand like TPTK (or better), we cbet / take it down. Second time, we flop overcards with couple of backdoor draws (flush and straight), say KQ on J27r, we cbet / take it down. Third time, we flop 8 high straight draw, with say, 78 on 56Kss (with a flush draw on board) - do we cbet here? If we do, how should we react to check/raise?
I guess my question is, what is general guideline when should we cbet our showdown value (like in hand 2), and when should we check it back?
Suppose we open 3 out of 4 buttons, and villain defends all 3 of our opens. First time, we hit a hand like TPTK (or better), we cbet / take it down. Second time, we flop overcards with couple of backdoor draws (flush and straight), say KQ on J27r, we cbet / take it down. Third time, we flop 8 high straight draw, with say, 78 on 56Kss (with a flush draw on board) - do we cbet here? If we do, how should we react to check/raise?
I guess my question is, what is general guideline when should we cbet our showdown value (like in hand 2), and when should we check it back?
if you want to know something about checking back showdown value, give me a different example where checking down the hand could actually mean that we win the pot unimproved
10-20-2009
, 06:34 PM
Quote:
i dont get it... why wouldnt you bet the 87? you flop an openender, there's basically very little spots i would check this back tbh, i cant think of any right now... you have a decent draw and close to 0 showdown value and the boardtexture is kind of okay and villain will fold enough of the time to make cbetting definitly the best option
if you want to know something about checking back showdown value, give me a different example where checking down the hand could actually mean that we win the pot unimproved
if you want to know something about checking back showdown value, give me a different example where checking down the hand could actually mean that we win the pot unimproved
But basically, my idea is, if we cbet with our "showdown value" more often than not, shouldn't we expect that our villain will open up his floating or check/raising range on the flop, and thus putting us in tough spot when we have a draw that doesn't have high card strength? Aren't we creating unnecessary aggressive dynamic?If we take our showdown hands and use them as a way to keep our opponents passive and honest (by checking back), aren't we getting better result in a long run, since our cbets when we have draws will get more respect on average (and thus more folding equity which means higher profit)?
I look it from my perspective, if I played against a villain that opened 3 out of 4 buttons, and cbetted 3rd time in a row (and I gave up on flop twice), im probably going to c/r hand like J
T
(or something similar that doesnt have showdown value) on a flop like K56, with intention of barreling alot of turns (mainly A, Q, J, T, any ). My villain is going to have very hard time hitting his OESD with 78, and when he does he will rarely get paid.
10-20-2009
, 07:15 PM
Quote:
Heh, i guess my example is bad. But basically, my idea is, if we cbet with our "showdown value" more often than not, shouldn't we expect that our villain will open up his floating or check/raising range on the flop, and thus putting us in tough spot when we have a draw that doesn't have high card strength? Aren't we creating unnecessary aggressive dynamic?
But basically, my idea is, if we cbet with our "showdown value" more often than not, shouldn't we expect that our villain will open up his floating or check/raising range on the flop, and thus putting us in tough spot when we have a draw that doesn't have high card strength? Aren't we creating unnecessary aggressive dynamic?
10-20-2009
, 08:24 PM
Quote:
Heh, i guess my example is bad. But basically, my idea is, if we cbet with our "showdown value" more often than not, shouldn't we expect that our villain will open up his floating or check/raising range on the flop, and thus putting us in tough spot when we have a draw that doesn't have high card strength? Aren't we creating unnecessary aggressive dynamic?
But basically, my idea is, if we cbet with our "showdown value" more often than not, shouldn't we expect that our villain will open up his floating or check/raising range on the flop, and thus putting us in tough spot when we have a draw that doesn't have high card strength? Aren't we creating unnecessary aggressive dynamic?
Quote:
If we take our showdown hands and use them as a way to keep our opponents passive and honest (by checking back), aren't we getting better result in a long run, since our cbets when we have draws will get more respect on average (and thus more folding equity which means higher profit)?
Quote:
I look it from my perspective, if I played against a villain that opened 3 out of 4 buttons, and cbetted 3rd time in a row (and I gave up on flop twice), im probably going to c/r hand like JT (or something similar that doesnt have showdown value) on a flop like K56, with intention of barreling alot of turns (mainly A, Q, J, T, any ). My villain is going to have very hard time hitting his OESD with 78, and when he does he will rarely get paid.
T (or something similar that doesnt have showdown value) on a flop like K56, with intention of barreling alot of turns (mainly A, Q, J, T, any ). My villain is going to have very hard time hitting his OESD with 78, and when he does he will rarely get paid.
Cliffnotes: cbet first, ask questions later.
01-19-2010
, 06:55 AM
