It's 25/50 and the guy calls 320 from 2.1k chasing a straight draw
Because it looks like we have a hand so is not a bad idea to call 320 because lots of mugs stack the river.
You think? Exactly half the 8 outs he's chasing make a flush...and would be an action killer anyway. Thats very obvious for this guy to see. Is he gonna be so confident about this calling turn to stack river strat when the flush hits? The action would prob be bet call if the
dropped on the river and you lead, so that strat would have big obvious holes in it. He's just chasing his draw without thought imo. That draw could be clubs, a straight, and I wouldn't be shocked to see hands like A-K in there as well. So if this guy is in fact just bad he would readily bet a lot of his missed hands without thought when you checked to him on the river. Hands he would've folded if you bet.
Posted by: totalise Its not that they NEVER bluff, but it has to be a tendancy that is prevalent in a fair % of players in order to justify calling. Sure, sometimes people will bluff the river, and will steal the pot, but similarly, you cant justify calling on the basis that a smalll % of poker players might or might not bluff in these spots. Its the frequency of which an action might occur that should be the important factor.
That was a good post cos I never thought about not calling after checking. Like I said, if he's bad no doubt he can bet just cos you checked and he missed. But what if he's a good player? That good player can call the turn in this situation knowing any one of 30 cards complete a very obvious draw. Floating the turn to represent almost any card would be the actions of a good player. So obv he will be calling the turn to bluff almost 100% of the time with his e.g. 2-2. Man, that would be good poker and you would feel all pwned and dirty if you c-fold. So while that c-fold option looked good at first I think there's too many different types of players who can and will bluff for lots of different reasons to think about c-folding to one bet. Unless that bet is all-in I suppose. If the guy v-bets good on the river there's no shame in paying him imo.
Author