Nl600 flopped flush - Page 3

holy shit wait is there no fish in this hand? i was operating the entire time under the pretense that BB was a fish.

as i said before i also agree that vs regs u shouldnt have anything but a checkcall range on this board on flop and turn for balance and its prob the most +EV by a good margin anyway in a vaccum vs regs nowadays

On May 21 2012 14:40 n0rthf4ce wrote: also once we get cold-called it should be pretty obvious we are not bluffing the turn when we bet. we need to bet big to get value.

see the whole logic behind that is bad in games nowadays. essentially it just proves that checkcall is far and away superior as everything were getting value from is going to be betting itself. ur never getting hero'd vs regs if u lead and barrel 3 times, or if u checkraise at anypoint but the river. so checkcall is the best line. best for balance and best for value

On May 22 2012 01:16 DooMeR wrote: Show nested quote + On May 21 2012 14:40 n0rthf4ce wrote: also once we get cold-called it should be pretty obvious we are not bluffing the turn when we bet. we need to bet big to get value. see the whole logic behind that is bad in games nowadays. essentially it just proves that checkcall is far and away superior as everything were getting value from is going to be betting itself. ur never getting hero'd vs regs if u lead and barrel 3 times, or if u checkraise at anypoint but the river. so checkcall is the best line. best for balance and best for value

One trend I'm starting to notice is that many of the good regs are multi barreling this board both less frequently as a bluff, and also less frequently for thin value. Curious of you are noticing the same thing?

It makes sense though if we are always going c/c c/c c/r that they should be firing river far less often....this leads me to the conclusion that if those assumptions are true, we want to start c/r'ing turn and jamming rivers regardless of the card....

Thoughts?

ye i do agree. i do just as u mentioned personally. its tough when people take such passive lines and are sometimes capable of turning hands into bluffs. which is why its so nice to have a pretty balanced range when your in that spot. ive thought about the situation too a lot but not sure what i like to directly exploit things. if they are barreling less bluffing more should be the opposite of what we want to do imo. i dont think people 2barrel this board and give up much. i dont have deep thoughts about the spot in general atm though. been up for 24hours so im surprised i got that much out. rain check while i try to come up with something more intellegent.

On May 22 2012 01:16 DooMeR wrote: Show nested quote + On May 21 2012 14:40 n0rthf4ce wrote: also once we get cold-called it should be pretty obvious we are not bluffing the turn when we bet. we need to bet big to get value. see the whole logic behind that is bad in games nowadays. essentially it just proves that checkcall is far and away superior as everything were getting value from is going to be betting itself. ur never getting hero'd vs regs if u lead and barrel 3 times, or if u checkraise at anypoint but the river. so checkcall is the best line. best for balance and best for value

im on the peachy train for two reasons. setting up your entire range to be c/c c/c c/r sucks and is murderable for anyone good. second there is this stupid idea that every non 3b pot, your goal is to make the pot such that on the river you are shoving for around pot. sometimes 1/2 or 1/3 potting turn to set that up is bad [when you have a wide value range that is very susceptible to a lot of bad rivers for instance] so just be a monster and bet bigger

On May 22 2012 23:38 PoorUser wrote: Show nested quote + On May 22 2012 01:16 DooMeR wrote: [QUOTE]On May 21 2012 14:40 n0rthf4ce wrote: also once we get cold-called it should be pretty obvious we are not bluffing the turn when we bet. we need to bet big to get value. setting up your entire range to be c/c c/c c/r sucks and is murderable for anyone good. second there is this stupid idea that every non 3b pot, your goal is to make the pot such that on the river you are shoving for around pot. sometimes 1/2 or 1/3 potting turn to set that up is bad [when you have a wide value range that is very susceptible to a lot of bad rivers for instance] so just be a monster and bet bigger

If you are talking about spots where 1/3-1/2 potting the turn, I'm assuming it's likely a scenario where the flop was 3bet and called. If that's the case, the call of the 3bet is a trap or a pure float/draw with very marginal equity looking for the turn to check through so that it can jam river. I guess you must be assuming that some opponents are peeling the flop 3bet w/ very marginal showdown value in order to induce you to bluff jam the turn.....?

Either way you look at it, I can't fathom jamming being better than betting real small on the turn since your flop 3bet bluffs are likely going to have like 20% equity at best whenever you are behind.

You also said that if you are 3betting the flop wide for value that betting small on the turn leaves you susceptible to bad rivers, but the point of betting the turn so small is that villain either does one of two things ---he jams his draws that have ~20% equity against our value range, or he ends up defining his range so narrowly by taking the line of c/r flop then call 3bet then c/c a tiny bet on the turn that we can play the river pretty much perfectly given we have position (unless villain does something super funky like open jam -- and I only mention that because I've had guys I view as extremely strong players take that line against me which is what makes this such a curious topic IMO). But even additionally, we get a super cheap price on our turn bluff the times we have air, and the inverse is true of the statement you made that our small turn bet allows villain to realize more equity behind at a cheaper price because the times he is trapping, he now has to worry that we are giving ourselves a great price to see the river which clearly ends up working in our favor since we have position.

I feel really confidently about this, but I know you and Eric are really brilliant players, so if you can tell me what you think is wrong with this line of thought I'd be very interested.

The only thing I can think of is if you are constantly playing against guys who are running zero equity bluffs on you--this type of stuff happens so incredibly rarely at mid stakes in my experience and our application from practice might differ because of that.

I guess no response means I'm probably either just right or that I'm out of my mind.