Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
<img /2 bluff catching with Ace high on Flop and Turn then River TpTk <img /2 bluff catching with Ace high on Flop and Turn then River TpTk

07-31-2015 , 04:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cAmmAndo
Why would we ever be planning to bluff catch someone incapable of bluffing the river?
Pretty sure that was my point.
<img /2 bluff catching with Ace high on Flop and Turn then River TpTk Quote
07-31-2015 , 04:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge
Pretty sure that was my point.

Gotcha.


That was a quick quote btw... Didn't even finish editing
<img /2 bluff catching with Ace high on Flop and Turn then River TpTk Quote
07-31-2015 , 11:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbo-travis
He would double barrel every time (90-100% of the time), but would check back probably 3/4 of the rivers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge
Well, according to OP's read, which appears perfect, we can't call the river with ace high here and expect to profit.
Good post mpethy, I agree with you about leading river.

When I first saw OP's read, which I quoted above, I didn't really get the point that V doesn't barrel rivers. It is a pretty "perfect" read, and sometimes when I see a read so "perfect," I don't give it full credit.

My thinking goes - huh, really? Super LAG opens from BTN - he can basically have ATC pre-flop. Then we know he barrels flop and turn 90-100%? Wow, so he's taking his entire ATC pre-flop range to the river! But wait... now you say he checks back the river 75% of the time?! That's an awful lot of river discipline for someone getting to the river with such illustrious hands like 64s and J6o.

So I discounted the river read, which is why I suggested a c/c line in my post farther above.

If we accept the read, which is fine, then yes, we should lead.

Leading is good and profitable because I expect to beat a ton of his calling range, but I have to note, the reality is that V is almost always folding. He gets to the river with ~ATC. He probably folds ~85% to a river bet? Calls ~15%? And of that ~15%, we win ~75%?

Pretty random numbers, but directionally, that's what I'm thinking. So I do like leading for value, but I would note the actual EV of the bet is super small because almost his entire range is air - he mostly just folds.

For example, say we bet $80... a smallish inciting bet imo that gets some calls from worse pairs, etc.

Without doing the full math, I expect the EV is like < $5 because his range is so airy. What we're missing in the AMOUNT of EV, however, we make up in CONFIDENCE of EV. I'm certain a bet is profitable, so I bet. It's not even appropriate to call it "thin" because it's fat value vs. his calling range. Betting is the right play, but I think it's instructive to note how little we actually profit in terms of absolute dollars, BBs, etc.
<img /2 bluff catching with Ace high on Flop and Turn then River TpTk Quote

      
m