[NL2-NL10] NL2 - AT top pair oop

    • MancaMulas
      MancaMulas
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.03.2009 Posts: 4,491
      Grabbed by Holdem Manager
      NL Holdem $0.02(BB) Replayer
      SB ($1.60)
      Hero ($2)
      UTG ($2.06)
      CO ($1.88)
      BTN ($2.20)

      Dealt to Hero T:spade: A:diamond:

      fold, CO calls $0.02, fold, fold, Hero raises to $0.12, CO calls $0.10

      FLOP ($0.25) 9:club: T:diamond: 4:diamond:

      Hero bets $0.18, CO calls $0.18

      TURN ($0.61) 9:club: T:diamond: 4:diamond: J:spade:

      Hero...


      villain unknown. would you bet here again?
      what plan for the river if he calls again?
  • 1 reply
    • luizsilveira
      luizsilveira
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.11.2010 Posts: 2,320
      Grande Mancamulas!

      I think it's close. But my answer would be: yes!

      Reason: there are a few more hands that will call a bet on the turn but won't call it on the river. Plus we don't want to check back and bluffcatch on the river, as we can't really bluffcatch on 1/2 of the deck (and :diamond: , 7, 8, Q, K, you got the picture).

      The good part is: I don't think an unknown would ever bluff-raise there (even two pairs might have a tough time raising it up) so by betting we will invest the same we would on a river call and will have roughly the same information with a bit more value.

      (and the villain is not complete unknown; he limped the CO - that moves him a bit towards the "known" domain already :tongue: ). I mean, villain is probably at least a bit passive. Less reason to raise as bluff or to call both flop and turn to bluff river.

      That said, I think I'd only bluff catch on a A or T river. Most of the time I think he's checking back what we beat.

      Finally, checking turn is def. no disaster - but I think if you check there it's check/fold. Check/call is bad since we will be clueless on the river (even though it's obv. a less bad line vs. a passive than vs. an aggressive player who would pound on our weakness).