Dictius 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Betting when you think you're behindSometimes turn play transpires that leaves an awkward amount of money to play on the river. If we're going to pay off a hand that beats us (due to the pot odds) and hands that we beat will check behind, it's better to bet even if we think we're a dog against his range.For instance, suppose we make a straight on the turn and put in a large raise. A villain calls with a small stack so that we'd be getting 8:1 on a river call. A flush card comes on the river, which we believe more often than not beats us. Against an especially aggressive bluffer, we might check to induce a bluff here. But usually players will know that the pot is too large for this to work and they'll check behind.I took this from the FAQ and General strategy page http://no-limit-holdem.wikidot.com/.It doesn't make a lot of sense to me and I can't understand how the second paragraph relates the to first paragraph?Can someone clarify or give an example? Link to post Share on other sites
David_Nicoson 1 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I think I might have been thinking a little faster than I was writing there. The last bits in the second paragraph are the exception to the rule. Sometimes turn play transpires that leaves an awkward amount of money to play on the river. If we're going to pay off a hand that beats us (due to the pot odds) and hands that we beat will check behind, it's better to bet even if we think we're a dog against his range.For instance, suppose we make a straight on the turn and put in a large raise. A villain calls with a small stack so that we'd be getting 8:1 on a river call. A flush card comes on the river, which we believe more often than not beats us. If he has a worse hand (e.g., two pair or a set), he can check behind on the river and we lose value. If he made a flush, we're going to have to pay him off anyway. We're no worse off for betting when we're beat and we profit when we're ahead. Therefore, it is generally better to bet. On the other hand, against an especially aggressive bluffer, we might check to induce a bluff here. But usually players will know that the pot is too large for this to work and they'll check behind with hands we beat.Is that better? Link to post Share on other sites
David_Nicoson 1 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Here's an example of when betting is usually correct when we think we're behind. (I hope.)Only if the villain is a loose incurable bluffer, then we might get something more from inducing a bluff. 1/2 NLHEHero is the cutoff.StacksAround $200.Preflop ($3)UTG raises to $6. Hero calls with 9 T . Button calls. Others fold.Flop ($21)A 7 8 UTG bets $15. Hero calls. Button calls.Turn ($66)6 UTG bets $50. Hero raises to $150. Button calls. UTG folds.River ($416)Q Hero bets all-in for $29. Button calls. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Shove the turn. Link to post Share on other sites
throwemaway 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 That example is a bit extreme but it illustrates the concept well enough I guess. I think you should make it so that the Villain still has a decent amount left...Here if Villain shoves river, we are getting 14:1..Obv not folding..But the general concept applies Link to post Share on other sites
Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Basically, what it's saying is that if you're committed to calling due to the pot odds on the river, but you really have the feeling that you've been outdrawn, just bet anyway. If you're calling regardless, it doesn't change the outcome whether you're betting all of your chips or calling them, but it makes it so that he cannot check behind with weaker hands and take a cheaper showdown. Link to post Share on other sites
craiger 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Shove the turn.I agree with Zach 100%. In theory this concept is very true. But in reality, when would we ever bet that amount on the turn, leaving us with only $29 behind? Link to post Share on other sites
Royal_Tour 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 about the turn shove. I agree.I think at times its better to make an over bet than trying t make the "correct" bet and leave yourself less than you bet previously. Link to post Share on other sites
krup24 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 didn't this come straight from Skalansky? i recall him dedicating a portion of a chapter to this. Link to post Share on other sites
David_Nicoson 1 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Like this better? 1/2 NLHEStacksUTG $221Hero $321Button coversPreflop ($3)UTG raises to $6. Hero calls with 9 T . Button calls. Others fold.Flop ($21)A 7 8 UTG bets $15. Hero calls. Button calls.Turn ($66)6 UTG bets $35. Hero raises to $150. Button calls. UTG raises to $200. Hero calls. Button calls.River ($666)Q Hero bets all-in for $100. Button calls. Link to post Share on other sites
David_Nicoson 1 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 didn't this come straight from Skalansky? i recall him dedicating a portion of a chapter to this.I first learned this principle in 2004 by playing a hand like the first example incorrectly and realizing how bad it was after the fact.I'm sure Sklanksy covers it somewhere (and if so I've very likely read it), but any plagiarism was unintentional. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Yeah, sorry, I was just being a douchebag. Your point is a good one, imo. Link to post Share on other sites
Acid_Knight 2 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I was just being a douchebag.Standard Link to post Share on other sites
mtdesmoines 3 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 about the turn shove. I agree.I think at times its better to make an over bet than trying t make the "correct" bet and leave yourself less than you bet previously.Yah. We say we want to make the villain make bad decisions in poker. Why put ourselves in spots where we have to make difficult decisions? Link to post Share on other sites
Dictius 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 OK, Dave's second example clears it up a bit for me.The reason I was confused was what everyone is saying about just shoving the turn. I couldn't really imagine a situation where I would be left with a little bit on the river, instead I would just shove the turn.Does this only apply when we are out of position? If we are in position and bet are we only getting called by hands that beat us? Link to post Share on other sites
David_Nicoson 1 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Does this only apply when we are out of position?Pretty much.If we are in position and bet are we only getting called by hands that beat us?Checking it down works in that case, but we may change our mind about his range based on the check. Link to post Share on other sites
Dictius 0 Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 Checking it down works in that case, but we may change our mind about his range based on the check.Good point, villain isn't going to check the river with a made hand when theres only a bit more left in the stacks compared to the pot. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now