Quote:
Originally Posted by gadolparah
yeah. i mean, i agree its a cop out and thats how i think about it in game. But earlier today i was having a debate in a thread with strangly lucid, JL514, and zeth about a hand where Zeth advocated for c/c and evaluating later streets. Also talked with my coach today about a hand where he thought calling the turn and evaluating a river bet were good. Both these players are better than me, and have caught my interest on this topic as somthing more than an excuse
Well... 90% of the time when someone says "I decided to call and re-evaluate" what they mean is "I just felt like calling because **** him and I had no plan."
That hand where I was advocating call and re-evaluate was a very common example where we have a strong overpair, the flop comes out low, unconnected and two-tone--something like J
3
6
--and you get check/raised by a 12/10 type reg. I was arguing that even a lot of 12/10's are going to mess around and check/raise air on some flops; many better players than myself insisted that I was wrong, that a nit-reg always has a set when he check/raises. Still not sure I agree. Anyway, my plan--which, again, everyone else said was daft--involved calling the check/raise and paying attention to whether he bets and, if so, how much he bets to decide whether to continue. I said my default plan was to call a turn bet, fold to a river bet because many regs double barrel but few triple barrel.
Kind of an aside, but again, most of the time "call and re-evaluate" is BS and code for "call but I don't know why." I'd like to think that even if I was wrong about that spot, at least I had a plan when I called the check-raise.