big discussion hand

[akishore 0]

the only reason i'm wary of using this play in NL is that you can often face a big bet on the river against an aggressive player. what would you do on the river if he bet $30 or $35 (or more if he has a deeper stack)?you also risk a lot for a relatively smaller reward (as compared to limit), and you're in a tough spot against an aggressive player if he reraises you on the turn. on the turn, the pot before it came to you was $20, and you risked $12 on this play (some argue that you should have raised more, which means you're risking even more for the same reward).you need to more correct in your read for this to work than in limit, because your bet/pot-odds are way smaller. also, what do you do on the turn if he reraises you to $40 or $50? there are aggressive NL players that are capable of doing that with both top set and with king-high flush draw.again, i don't mind this play at all. i just find that there are better spots in NL, and that it works better in limit. if you're that confident in your reads, though, and are comfortable with facing a big reraise or bet on the river, more power to you.aseem

[SapphireTiger 0]

yeah i did that to see the difference in responses

[akishore 0]

add:one key point of this play is to check/call a brick river since you presume your hand is good, but it's marginal so you can't bet it since only a better hand will call, and you can also induce a bluff by checking, etc.check/calling in limit is cake.check/calling in NL is hella dangerous.*shrug*aseem

[dapokerbum 0]

OKay this has gone on long enough...what happened? I am super curious now. Am wondering if my original guess is correct.C'mon and post the results