JJ - 2 barrels then villain bets OTR

Standard play nice hand. Would play it the same. No way I am folding that river to half pot bet.

Hey,
Wouldn't be better stack-out him betting higher on the flop and turn as he probably knows you didn't have in your range and he could hit a pair on the turn.
On the river, as the villain's range should be inelastic he could hit a pair of Q, but induce bluff was very clever, but why not check-raise him? You gonna risk $0.74 per one pot of $2.47.

Cheers,

regarding check raise OTR, don't you think it's likely that only better hands will call?

Originally posted by monteCarlol
regarding check raise OTR, don't you think it's likely that only better hands will call?

Considering a supposed calling range and that he kept playing weaker hands as well good ones I believe you had equity of 59% and based on that check-raise shove would be plus EV.

* based on "River Bet vs Check - SplitSuit Spreadsheet"

Originally posted by Implied

Originally posted by monteCarlol
regarding check raise OTR, don't you think it's likely that only better hands will call?

Considering a supposed calling range and that he kept playing weaker hands as well good ones I believe you had equity of 59% and based on that check-raise shove would be plus EV.

* based on "River Bet vs Check - SplitSuit Spreadsheet"

I think as this is NL2 exploitative plays are enough. We do not need to create slim value theoretical things like this in my opinion. I also do not see how it is +EV in any way to turn your hand into a bluff here.
A c/r will make villain fold unless he has the Q on this limit. It is a bluff move and not a value move.

In my experience if you bring complicated EV calculations and ranges etc. into micro stakes you end of leveling yourself and complicating the game much more than you have to. Nothing wrong with assigning ranges to villains but keep it basic.

Originally posted by Dragar

Originally posted by Implied

Originally posted by monteCarlol
regarding check raise OTR, don't you think it's likely that only better hands will call?

Considering a supposed calling range and that he kept playing weaker hands as well good ones I believe you had equity of 59% and based on that check-raise shove would be plus EV.

* based on "River Bet vs Check - SplitSuit Spreadsheet"

I think as this is NL2 exploitative plays are enough. We do not need to create slim value theoretical things like this in my opinion. I also do not see how it is +EV in any way to turn your hand into a bluff here.
A c/r will make villain fold unless he has the Q on this limit. It is a bluff move and not a value move.

In my experience if you bring complicated EV calculations and ranges etc. into micro stakes you end of leveling yourself and complicating the game much more than you have to. Nothing wrong with assigning ranges to villains but keep it basic.

But based on my 1st comments you don't agree that a check-raise would be better instead check-call?

You should be right! Levelling is one leak

No why? We are ahead of his range and we got max value already if he just bluffed. C/r him will make us waste money as we will now loose more than we would if we just call if he does have the Q.

Originally posted by Dragar
No why? We are ahead of his range and we got max value already if he just bluffed. C/r him will make us waste money as we will now loose more than we would if we just call if he does have the Q.

True! he will call the check-raise just with hands that are winning. Shame on me ---