akashenk, on 02 August 2012 - 05:04 AM, said:
Irishguy,You said “A big part of your justification seems to be because you know what the turn is..yes during different stages of tourneys hands play differently. And yes in position villain has more tools but the point is its highly unlikely villain is bluffing/betting a draw here and commiting his stack especially if we've established villain likely puts us on an ace-this would be suicidal.”Actually, with my strategy I don’t care what the turn is, and as long as it doesn’t hit out opponent with some random two pair or straight or flush, I feel we are likely to get a check behind. And if the villain does hit a straight or a flush, they will often slow play it and check behind. The idea is, we don’t put any more chips into the pot unless we know we’re in pretty good shape… unlike what occurred in this real hand… unlike what you are basically doing by calling a turn bet, even if the pot odds say you should. And at no point did I say villain is putting us on an A.. He is putting us on a mediocre hand, whether that is a weak A or something else. Frankly, since just about everyone advocates folding our hand to a reasonable bet on the turn (let’s ignore the flush draw we picked up for the moment), then I don’t see how you think it would be suicidal for our opponent to bet the turn if he did think we had exactly what we have.And by the way, let’s say a club does hit the turn. Doesn’t this present a perfect opportunity for our opponent to bluff in response to our check? Or maybe they have mediocre holdings with a big club and decide to continue to lead after our two checks. Now, if we had c/r, then I think it makes is MUCH less likely they would bluff the turn if a club hit because we look like we have committed ourselves to the pot. They are much more likely to play the “let’s see what happens on the river” game which is exactly what we want with our mediocre hand.You said “Yes maybe villain is betting Aj etc on the turn but oh we'll we're behind and not getting odds to call..the assertion by his play is that he's got us beat when we decide on our flop play its without the knowledge of us turning a draw.::the fact that we do turn a draw makes the hand interesting but doesn't mean we can rewind and play the flop again with the knowledge of the turn:”Yes, if he has AJ/AQ we are behind and calling would certainly not be a good idea in general, even if the pot odds indicate we should. However, look at how great that turn card was as far as our chances of improving. We went from 3 outs against AJ/AQ to 12 outs. We basically quadrupled our chance of winning the hand. Wouldn’t it be nice to see that river for free?Now if we don’t turn the draw, then little has changed except for our chances of winning the hand. The villain will still check behind the majority of the time.Throughout this whole debate, I’m willing to accept that c/c and “seeing what happens” is a reasonable, if not preferred line of play at other points in the tournament. However in this situation, I really have a hard time getting over the fact that you guys are willing to call 4K in a spot where we you will almost always have to fold on the turn. Our hand has almost no chance of improving on the turn, and even if we catch that miracle 10 (the only card that maybe makes us happy), it completes several straights and perhaps a flush. I would say there is no card that can hit the turn that makes us willing to call a reasonable bet. In this case we would have to lead out and hope our opponent is fairly weak, or we just have to kiss our 4K goodbye. Why is this such a great line of play? How is this more conservative from a chip standpoint than c/r the flop... establishing once and for all whether our opponent has a monster or not, making it more likely we don’t have to put in any more money into the pot in a really marginal situation, and giving us a better chance to see the river and improve?
This is the point that's just so off: to say the c c c line is better earlier and bad now is completely contingent on the likelihood that villain bluffs this turn committing his stack-the continued opinion is that it's just not likely..and if you believe that there's a huge likelihood of the turn bluff by c c c you should be advocating calling the turn...You say c r gets us to the river more often-but if he calls we are beat or he has a draw we price him in but either way he's never betting unless he improves-which brings us back to a whole world of issues:1: we price in draws2: we don't raise enough or continue on with our story to fold out better hands3: villian is aggressive enough to double barrel comitt himself in our line but so passive that he never bets turn in yours or never value bets or bluffs river after being checked to twice...completely conflicting thoughts