OP line thoughts?

[neverthink]

Nobody posts anything so I'mputting up a few hands to see if anything sparks, or we will discover the truth that only me and Sfu like the strat forumz.

Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: EightNine10 ( $126.05)
Seat 2: HUMan1234 ( $86.95)
Seat 3: tiboer ( $178.95)
Seat 4: swedelite ( $101.50)
Seat 5: TomJetland ( $100)
Seat 6: ____11____ ( $129.90)
EightNine10 posts small blind (0.50)
HUMan1234 posts big blind (1)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to ____11____ [ Kd, Ks ]
tiboer folds.
swedelite calls (1)
____11____ raises (5) to 5
EightNine10 folds.
HUMan1234 folds.
swedelite calls (4)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 7h, Jd, 5h ]
swedelite checks.
____11____ bets 8
swedelite calls 8
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 4h ]
swedelite checks.
____11____ checks.
** Dealing River ** : [ 9s ] Pot is $26
swedelite bets (19)
____11____ calls (19)
** Summary **
Main Pot: $63.50 | Rake: $2
Board: [ 7h Jd 5h 4h 9s ]

EightNine10 balance $125.55, lost $0.50 (folded)
HUMan1234 balance $85.95, lost $1 (folded)
tiboer balance $178.95, didn't bet (folded)
swedelite balance $69.50, lost $32 [ 9d 8d ] [ a pair of Nines -- Jd,9d,9s,8d,7h ]
TomJetland balance $100, sits out
____11____ balance $161.40, bet $32, collected $63.50, net +$31.50 [ Kd Ks ] [ a pair of Kings -- Kd,Ks,Jd,9s,7h ]

[sfustsh]

Turn check is questionable. I like to make a small bet here to induce a raise if he's got a flush. Something like $10 is sufficient to let you get away and still charge a straight draw.

While the 4h completes the flush it doesn't complete any likely straight (68? seems unlikely given preflop).

River call seems okay.

On the other hand, checking through the turn is a common play when bad players make their flushes.

It would have been better for him to try to check this hand down and be happy with the moderate sized pot with just a pair of nines on this board. At the end, the board is indeed very cluttered but the 9s didn't make any draws, actually (except T8), but lots of straight draws include a 9 here, that just paired.

If he had checked to me on the river, I am not sure if I would have bet or not. I probably would have, but something around half the pot, maybe.

Yes, I think we're the only ones who read these hands anymore, sadly.

[neverthink]

Yes, I think we're the only ones who read these hands anymore, sadly.

I suppose better to have one person give ten line of reasoned thinking than 10 different one liners eh? We'll pwn them all!

On the subject of the turn check, that seems to be a street you and I disagree on how to play in the last couple threads. I did check behind here since two draws were completed, the 86 (you think this not in an UTG limpers range?) straight draw and the flush draw, I thought keep the pot small and induce a bluff on the river (not that I was calling just any river bet!) I never make those small bets Sfu, because it could induce him to bluff raise you. My ethos is bet properly or not at all, that way you always get a reliable answer, nearly always. I do vary bet sizes from about 1/2 to 3/4, but I rarely bet small when I have the flush here, so I can't do it when I don't hold one either. Out of position I would bet here and fold to funny business, all but a minraise probably.

I called him on the river as my hand is pretty transparent as missed c-bet or he can push me off a one pair hand with such a clustered board. If he'd bet about 2/3 pot I'd have prob given it to him, but betting so much made so little sense that it made sense. If he had checked it to me I'd have checked it down as well I think.

"It would have been better for him to try to check this hand down and be happy with the moderate pot"

Absolutely correct imo, he is turning his hand into a bluff when he has a chance at showdown. Far too many (winning) players do this, and I am currently readin a poker book called Aces and Kings where this exact subject comes up, and, thankfully, Chris Ferguson is on our side of the line. When you have a middle strengthed hand (JJ on a board with 2 Aces say), don't represent the frickn Aces, just look for showdown, pick off a bluff, control the pot. Only bluff with no chance at the pot otherwise. Far better for villain to check/call a bet.

Too many players who don't imho consider the game in any way other than blanket aggression commit this and fold out worse hands regularly and bet into big ones too much.

[ugignadl]

Bet the turn, call river (or bet if checked to). For value.

What is with the bitchiness?

[neverthink]

Bet the turn, call river (or bet if checked to). For value.

What is with the bitchiness?

If I bet the turn and then he leads the river I am behind always apart from the very rare occasion that he bluffs, so that would be an autofold, his line is way too strong.

What bitchiness? Just pointing out that while the poker talk forum always has new threads in it, nobody seems too interested in actually talking about hands.

[randy72560]

Bet the turn, call river (or bet if checked to). For value.

What is with the bitchiness?

I agree, sounds bitchy to me...

Post some REAL hands if you want more discussion... Most of the hands I see posted recently are AA or KK duh hands... So me some suited connecters where you actually make a read or a play and not just a "I have AA or KK and I'm calling anything no matter how poorly I've played it.."

Oh, and BTW the check on the turn looks kinda weak.. FWIW.

[mewsiclovr]

or we will discover the truth that only me and Sfu like the strat forumz.

FWIW I do browse these forums but generally don't post because I don't play cash....but I do like reading the strategy.

[mirage]

I happen to think checking behind on the turn for pot control is the correct line on this board, for the reasons stated above. If you fire a 1/2 pot size bet and he calls or raises you are beat more often than not. If you check behind you give him a chance to value bet worse hands on the river since he perceives hero as having missed the flop.

In general it's not a good idea to try to squeeze three streets of value out of 1 pair without a strong read.

FWIW I read all hands posted in the NL forums and usually in the tourney forums. If I don't have anything to add or if I basically agree with what's been said I typically don't post.

[neverthink]

Bet the turn, call river (or bet if checked to). For value.

What is with the bitchiness?

I agree, sounds bitchy to me...

Post some REAL hands if you want more discussion... Most of the hands I see posted recently are AA or KK duh hands... So me some suited connecters where you actually make a read or a play and not just a "I have AA or KK and I'm calling anything no matter how poorly I've played it.."
Oh, and BTW the check on the turn looks kinda weak.. FWIW.

Well, bitchiness was not the intent, and I was not suggesting that eveyone ignores the strat section. But it is nevertheless fact that while there are liable to be several threads every couple of days in talk forums, it's the other way around here. Take it for what you will, sorry if anyone is offended.

Randy, I acknowledged at the top that I was just posting a couple of hands from a short session to spark some discussion hopefully. There was no particular problem on my side with this hand, but, even without some big cash transferal decision involved, we can still discuss average hands as there are always going to be people who have a different view on things.

I'm not really sure how anything I highlighted in bold that you said really has any relevance to this hand, other than that I hold Kings. Further to this, having briefly just checked now, this is the only AA/KK hand in the top 6 or 7 threads, so why you say some things you do I don't know. Also Cavman posted a couple of interesting hands with suited connectors, I don't see your name next to a post in either, again, no bitchiness intended, just the simple truth. Of course, you are not obligated, but I in fact dislike your tone which suggests that we are not posting hands worthy of your time. I don't belive that is what you think but it is certainly what is conveyed.

Checking is supposed to look weak, and in this situation, why would I care? He is not calling with a worse hand, and he is aggro enough to bluff on the river.

Mirage, I look at it the same way you do, and again, Ug, Mirage, ML and others, sorry for any offence. Nobody is obligated, I just wish the strat forums had as much traffic as the talk ones.

[sfustsh]

Frankly I didn't think this hand was as easy as some people would make it out to seem. There are lots of interesting hand reading and complex decision making points on every street.

There is no obvious way to play this hand, or the other one. I always feel that cash games should be played much more creatively with an end to the river, while some people tend to play them like they were tournaments.

They are not.

[ugignadl]

I don't think this hand is trivial, my response size is constrained due to my personal preference for short messages and time.

Anyway, NT, I mean `call river' in the case presented with two checks on the turn. Bet the turn is not meant to be followed by a call on the river. The danger of short replies.