Some tourney hands

[ACE2M]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

he has a point there. If you were at my table i would be actively looking to play pots against you specifically given the info you provide on yourself.

[LuckyLloyd]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

against a good player i believe that your decision is -EV all day long.

Ok, so you think that bet folding the flop is best in two then? Why is that better than checking if we think our opponent is a thinking player? Is there value in that? Can he call us with worse?

[LuckyLloyd]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

he has a point there. If you were at my table i would be actively looking to play pots against you specifically given the info you provide on yourself.

Really?

- I'm not going to overplay any medium hands against you;
- I'm not going to give up easily in a pot against you;
- You willl have to go to showdown a lot and have the best hand in order to win the pot;

Also, these are three hands. You can read the rest of the background info again. I'm not taking weak passive lines with all of my hands.

[LuckyLloyd]

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

lol:

- You would like me to bet for information and find out "where I'm at" eh?
- You would like me to play bluff catching and showdown value strength hands strongly so that "I take control of the pot";
- You believe that you can never call - just fold or raise, right?
- Ultimately, you would like me to play my hands ultra transparently so that I "define" what I have and allow my opponents to play perfect poker against me, yeah?
- Playing "strong" and "having balls" is much better than injecting some element of deception and taking lines that widen ranges huh?


By the way, I posted these hands because I am slightly unsure as to whether I could have played them better. But, you need to convince me of a better line. I don't find you terribly persuasive so far FWIW. 

[byronkincaid]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

can you explain why you think hand 1 is fine?

I suppose the theory is that he would check/call the river with a hand with showdown value therefore he either has a big hand or a bluff. I think this is called having a polorised range or something.

There was an interesting thread I think in MSNL on 2p2 a while ago where someone came up with a hypothisis that if you either had to C-Bet every flop or check every flop you are better off checking. For every arguement that people came up with why you would be better off C-betting there was like an equal and opposite arguement for checking, eg bet so you don't give a free card with which he might outdraw you - check and give ourselves a free card so we might outdraw him. Bet as a bluff so we get better hands to fold - check so that he can't raise us on a bluff and get us off the better hand. etc etc etc. The thread is good for understanding when to C-bet and when to check and this is something that I have had some trouble with and I still C-bet too much probably.

Also it seems clear to me that the more you raise pre-flop the less you can C-bet. If someone only raises AA and KK they can C-bet every flop but if someone raises 50% of their hands clearly they can't hit the flop every time. LL seems to be playing pretty LAG here and obv he has to mix it up but in general C-bet for value and as a bluff but not with marginal hands with showdown value which is pretty much what all these hands are.

[ACE2M]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

against a good player i believe that your decision is -EV all day long.

Ok, so you think that bet folding the flop is best in two then? Why is that better than checking if we think our opponent is a thinking player? Is there value in that? Can he call us with worse?

Yes if i get raised it absolutely is.
it's better because as you say yourself you have basically turned your cards over, if it was the other way round can you see anyway you are losing the hand with any cards against this play. He might have AJ and check it down but he's a mug if he does.
The value is winning a reasonable pot now or not losing a bigger one to a better hand or allowing the best hand to get pushed out. I don't see a single thing going for your play, please convince me otherwise?

there is a time and place for trying to get value out of 1 pair and this ain't it.

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

he has a point there. If you were at my table i would be actively looking to play pots against you specifically given the info you provide on yourself.

Really?

- I'm not going to overplay any medium hands against you;
- I'm not going to give up easily in a pot against you;
- You willl have to go to showdown a lot and have the best hand in order to win the pot;

Also, these are three hands. You can read the rest of the background info again. I'm not taking weak passive lines with all of my hands.

1,  loose passive calling station
2,  loose passive calling station
3,  loose passive calling station

i'm looking to value bet the ... out of you because of these 3 points and maybe take away some pots if you tell me what your hands are.

[boldie]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

against a good player i believe that your decision is -EV all day long.

Ok, so you think that bet folding the flop is best in two then? Why is that better than checking if we think our opponent is a thinking player? Is there value in that? Can he call us with worse?

Yes if i get raised it absolutely is.
it's better because as you say yourself you have basically turned your cards over, if it was the other way round can you see anyway you are losing the hand with any cards against this play. He might have AJ and check it down but he's a mug if he does.
The value is winning a reasonable pot now or not losing a bigger one to a better hand or allowing the best hand to get pushed out. I don't see a single thing going for your play, please convince me otherwise?

there is a time and place for trying to get value out of 1 pair and this ain't it.

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

he has a point there. If you were at my table i would be actively looking to play pots against you specifically given the info you provide on yourself.

Really?

- I'm not going to overplay any medium hands against you;
- I'm not going to give up easily in a pot against you;
- You willl have to go to showdown a lot and have the best hand in order to win the pot;

Also, these are three hands. You can read the rest of the background info again. I'm not taking weak passive lines with all of my hands.

1,  loose passive calling station
2,  loose passive calling station
3,  loose passive calling station

i'm looking to value bet the ... out of you because of these 3 points and maybe take away some pots if you tell me what your hands are.

them's my thoughts on these hands as well.

[ACE2M]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

can you explain why you think hand 1 is fine?

I suppose the theory is that he would check/call the river with a hand with showdown value therefore he either has a big hand or a bluff. I think this is called having a polorised range or something.

There was an interesting thread I think in MSNL on 2p2 a while ago where someone came up with a hypothisis that if you either had to C-Bet every flop or check every flop you are better off checking. For every arguement that people came up with why you would be better off C-betting there was like an equal and opposite arguement for checking, eg bet so you don't give a free card with which he might outdraw you - check and give ourselves a free card so we might outdraw him. Bet as a bluff so we get better hands to fold - check so that he can't raise us on a bluff and get us off the better hand. etc etc etc. The thread is good for understanding when to C-bet and when to check and this is something that I have had some trouble with and I still C-bet too much probably.

Also it seems clear to me that the more you raise pre-flop the less you can C-bet. If someone only raises AA and KK they can C-bet every flop but if someone raises 50% of their hands clearly they can't hit the flop every time. LL seems to be playing pretty LAG here and obv he has to mix it up but in general C-bet for value and as a bluff but not with marginal hands with showdown value which is pretty much what all these hands are.

i understand. I too continuation bet too much but do it a helluva lot less than i use to.

i just have an aversion to these spots and tend to be losing most the time when i call.

[LuckyLloyd]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

against a good player i believe that your decision is -EV all day long.

Ok, so you think that bet folding the flop is best in two then? Why is that better than checking if we think our opponent is a thinking player? Is there value in that? Can he call us with worse?

Yes if i get raised it absolutely is.
it's better because as you say yourself you have basically turned your cards over, if it was the other way round can you see anyway you are losing the hand with any cards against this play. He might have AJ and check it down but he's a mug if he does.
The value is winning a reasonable pot now or not losing a bigger one to a better hand or allowing the best hand to get pushed out. I don't see a single thing going for your play, please convince me otherwise?

there is a time and place for trying to get value out of 1 pair and this ain't it.

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

yeah I know it doesn't make sense chief......should have read "I'm crap" but that would have been way too harsh as it might pay off and there are things like pot-control to consider when OOP...My reply was more of a rant than a reply..I just think all three hands show a massive degree of weakness and it bothers me rotten when pre-flop raisers don't have the balls to atleast stick another bet in.

Poker isn't about "balls" or appearing "strong" - yada, yada, yada. I'm not going to just lump out a continuation bet because I flopped TPTK. The board texture means that I have flopped good showdown value; but could not possibly continue the hand if he raises a flop bet from me. Same holds for the turn.

Given that he raise, called on a seven handed table, a reasonable range includes plenty of pocket pairs; a lot of aces; KQsuited sometimes maybe; MAYBE some suited connector type hands.

Therefore, he misses this flop a lot and will just fold if we continuation bet when he has like 2 - 5 outs. This is bad for us.

Or he has hit this flop pretty hard and can own us in position given stacksizes. Or he has whiffed completely nut may take a stab at it.

I don't really care if I appear "weak" or "crap" in your or anyone elses eyes. I believed at the time that the EV of checking this flop is much better than betting it.

If he's hit it you can get out cheaper on the flop than you can by calling bet after bet.
You decide to give out free cards on all flops and than you decide to call everything down that he does. It really isn't a wonder that oppo has been owning you at the table for three hours as all you've been doing is let him decide whether he takes down a big pot or lets you win a small one. You have no control in any single one of those three hands you've shown..that can not be the wise thing to do in all cases.


The winning player in a tourney has never been the man who called his opponents bets all day long...really it hasn't.

he has a point there. If you were at my table i would be actively looking to play pots against you specifically given the info you provide on yourself.

Really?

- I'm not going to overplay any medium hands against you;
- I'm not going to give up easily in a pot against you;
- You willl have to go to showdown a lot and have the best hand in order to win the pot;

Also, these are three hands. You can read the rest of the background info again. I'm not taking weak passive lines with all of my hands.

1,  loose passive calling station
2,  loose passive calling station
3,  loose passive calling station

i'm looking to value bet the ... out of you because of these 3 points and maybe take away some pots if you tell me what your hands are.

them's my thoughts on these hands as well.

Huh? So you guys are going to "actively get involved in pots against me" because I'm a station and value bet the bejaysus out of me? That statement doesn't really make sense.

If you are going to actively get involved me and go after me a bit it implies that you are going to do it with a wider range than usual. But if I'm taking lines with these medium strength hands and we're going to showdown a lot your wider range is going to have to flop good a lot for this to be profitable. And my lines are designed to get you to bluff a lot so I can just check, call.

It would be better to go after me if I was playing absurdly tight and folding a lot postflop; or playing absurdly tight and just blindly betting postflop because you would have great bluff equity or implied odds - meaning you could target me with a wider range - particularly given how deep the structure is.

In any case, I refer you once again to the detailed background information provided for each of the three hands. I'm not playing ALL my hands weak passive and, who kows, I may have the abillity to adjust against specific opponents somewhat.

[boldie]

I completey understand you don't play all your hands this way (or you would have been out of the tourney a lot earlier) but yes If I widen my range here and hit the flop hard (2 pair + will do it) against you I can start betting knowing that if you have top pair..decent kicker you are bound to pay me off.

These three hands might not be a good example as to your style of play..however they do have one thing in common and that is that you play them very passively. You might have a good reason, you feel, to do so but it's not the way I'd play them and all me, and Ace, are saying is that; if we are at the table seeing you play these hands like that the picture we'd build up off you is very likely to be of the sort of person who will pay us off heavily if we flop the nuts.

and if I open up my range here and you pay off potsize bets on the turn and river (or just below that) you are giving me odds to be in justabout every pot with you..even if you raise it to three times the BB preflop.

[LuckyLloyd]

I think hands 1 and 3 are fine. Hand 2 is tough, I think I C-Bet it even though you are turning TPTK into a bluff?

Boldie this doesn't make sense mate

you're also saying "and I am a weak calling station..call me with any 2 pre-flop and odds are you'll get me off the hand

can you explain why you think hand 1 is fine?

I suppose the theory is that he would check/call the river with a hand with showdown value therefore he either has a big hand or a bluff. I think this is called having a polorised range or something.

There was an interesting thread I think in MSNL on 2p2 a while ago where someone came up with a hypothisis that if you either had to C-Bet every flop or check every flop you are better off checking. For every arguement that people came up with why you would be better off C-betting there was like an equal and opposite arguement for checking, eg bet so you don't give a free card with which he might outdraw you - check and give ourselves a free card so we might outdraw him. Bet as a bluff so we get better hands to fold - check so that he can't raise us on a bluff and get us off the better hand. etc etc etc. The thread is good for understanding when to C-bet and when to check and this is something that I have had some trouble with and I still C-bet too much probably.

Also it seems clear to me that the more you raise pre-flop the less you can C-bet. If someone only raises AA and KK they can C-bet every flop but if someone raises 50% of their hands clearly they can't hit the flop every time. LL seems to be playing pretty LAG here and obv he has to mix it up but in general C-bet for value and as a bluff but not with marginal hands with showdown value which is pretty much what all these hands are.

i understand. I too continuation bet too much but do it a helluva lot less than i use to.

i just have an aversion to these spots and tend to be losing most the time when i call.

These spots are tougher because we don't simply bet out with the intention of folding to raises. But, well, the objective is not to make hands easier to play. It is to maximise your EV.

Oh and btw, most tournament players (myself included) misuse the continuation bet horribly. It's something that needs to be used in ever greater moderation these days IMO. It doesn't get the auto respect it used to and when used too much it is kinda like throwing chips down the drain.

However, that being said, it is of course important to balance your range and mix things up. At the very least, it should be much more of a decision in most hands. Always doing it irrespective of your holding or flop texture cannot be correct.

[LuckyLloyd]

and if I open up my range here and you pay off potsize bets on the turn and river (or just below that) you are giving me odds to be in justabout every pot with you..even if you raise it to three times the BB preflop.

A common theme in most of the bets I have called in these three hands is that they aren't close to full pot bets (aside from the turn bet in hand one). Might be something to think about? 

[MANTIS01]

First time I've read a thread on Blonde in a little while and would like to add my thoughts to the discussion. It's funny when you read a debate through from the start to the finish because you are smacked in the face by the testosterone that dominates the thought process of players.

Anyway I agree with Lloyd when he says "poker isn't about balls or appearing strong". Many players fall into this trap and loose a lot of chips. So what is poker about?....It is about INFORMATION.

As such I think a pre-flop strategy of e.g....

(every open I will make during the 75 – 150 level will be 450 irrespective of hand strength or position).

...is a good one because it denies your opponents ANY information regarding the strength of your hand. I employ this strategy religiously.

Any information that your opponents gather about you during a hand is rendered useless unless you show a hand. They can speculate about what your actions MIGHT mean...but they wont KNOW. They wont KNOW unless they have a hand to connect it all together. This is the problem I have with the term "showdown value". What does this really mean in the scheme of things? If we call and showdown every hand here we give ALL our opponents a shed load of information about us and the way we play. I think this much overlooked point deserves a lot of consideration.

I will rarely show a hand if I take a pot uncontested. On the occasions I do show, it is solely to garner some sort of future reaction from other players by manufacturing an image. What other reason could there be to provide this free information?

If the only reason to check-call (especially the river) in all three examples is because you think you may just have the best hand then the decision seems a bit isolated to that specific hand and not the overall tournament objective. The showdown "value" to you if you loose with the 6's in Hand 1 is check-calling all the way with top set next time.

But here we have the point for me. You are lucky to see top set once in a tournament. Most tournament situations are quite marginal. So putting money into a pot by calling and showing down weakness gets you an image that is going to be difficult to exploit later on, especially considering the stack sizes in play. You can only win one way and that way furnishes the table with a lot of information. And poker is a game of information.

I raise pre-flop with the 6's in Hand 1, mainly because it is a fair hand and stands a reasonable chance of being ahead right now. That's why I put money into the pot. After assessing the texture of the flop and the check-check in front I would still hold that opinion....and put money into the pot. So in a way a continuation bet for me is about a continuation of attitude. But as per pre-flop strategy I would bet the same amount whether I had 6's or top set on that board...a "continuation" of strategy....that gives no information. Hopefully I showdown top set and not 6's because this will give a lot of c-bet credit. I don't really want to showdown the 6's, I probably wont be ahead and I can't exploit the image I create.

Your opponent might only fold worse hands here but I think that is a good thing. I don't want to see how the texture of the board develops with 6-6 because I'm pretty sure it's not going to develop in my favour. I want to push marginal hands based on an image of showing down strength. Giving players free cards when your hand is quite marginal but incredibly vulnerable doesn't make sense to me. Your first priority is survival and getting worse hands to fold is ok as things stand. As it goes there are a couple of draws on the board that may get involved.

At some point you need to decide if you have the best hand and what hand your opponent has...imo you loose the information you need if you are just check-calling all the way. Playing the hand this way denies you information but gives your opponents lots of information just because you think you might have the best hand...but if you think you have the best hand then why not c-bet the flop? If worse hands go away then good, you are not holding a set. But quite often people DO call with the worst hand...the call on the end with 6's in this hand for example.

[totalise]

hand 1 im not too sure about, if hes a top omaha player he can definately valuebet thin, but given the way you played the hand, what hands does he think will call him down that he beats if he has say 89 or other hands like that, i think if he has a marginal hand given the way you played it, hes more likely to want to snap off a bluff if hes not particularly strong, and i think theres a chance you can have missed draws here fairly often, so I'd call and feel ok about it.

hand 2 no idea, probably check/fold if he is a thinking player that rarely makes stone cold bluffs and can read our hand well, can he expect us to play AK this defensively and still fold the river? I donno.


hand 3 looks standard

[AlexMartin]

I like hand 1.

I dont like hand 2 as much. I think playing abc some of the time esp if ur a tricky player isnt the worst option. After all baby needs to be paid.

I like hand 3 the best.