[NL2-NL10] nl5 zoom AA

    • dadude77
      dadude77
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.10.2008 Posts: 1,516
      villian is 40/35 with AF of 4, I was guessing kind of maniac?

      Grabbed by Holdem Manager
      NL Holdem $0.05(BB) Replayer
      SB ($6.73)
      BB ($8.02)
      Hero ($7.70)
      UTG+1 ($5.44)
      CO ($4.69)
      BTN ($3.56)

      Dealt to Hero A:club: A:spade:

      Hero raises to $0.15, UTG+1 calls $0.15, fold, fold, SB calls $0.13, fold

      FLOP ($0.50) 3:diamond: 7:spade: 2:spade:

      SB checks, Hero bets $0.40, UTG+1 folds, SB raises to $1.40, Hero calls $1

      TURN ($3.30) 3:diamond: 7:spade: 2:spade: Q:diamond:

      SB bets $5.18 (AI), Hero ??????
  • 6 replies
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      FLOP
      I always think, that check/raise is a set, because it represents a very strong hand imo. He's kind of loose-maniac, but still...
      I have two sides. One side would fold, because he's afraid of a set.
      The other one would reraise, because he's a maniac, and could be doing that with a draw.

      Well, in either cause, calling his raise is not an option imo.
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Hello dadude77,

      Preflop: Raise 4xBB.
      Flop: Being so deep I'd just Bet/Fold it while there is no information even on hand sample which most likely is small.

      As played
      Turn: When you calling the flop then you beat practically the same hands on the turn, so should have easy answer here.

      Best Regards.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      FLOP
      Why do we bet? Does the line of thinking goes like this:
      I can check or bet. Bet is better than check, so I bet.

      I mean, its very probably that they are going to fold. This flop would be perfect for a contibet imo with nothing. No high cards, only little connectedness.
      So, its very hard to bet for value here. IF this is a perfect Contibet flop, doesn't that automatically imply, that we can't bet for value, therefore we should check?
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Not gonna talk even about this case cause Checking here is just HUGE mistake and I'd categorize it even into a leak.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Originally posted by veriz
      Not gonna talk even about this case cause Checking here is just HUGE mistake and I'd categorize it even into a leak.
      Could you point out please, that where is the exact mistake in my thought process Veriz? I really don't see it :f_cry:

      1)Value betting: betting to get called or raised by a worse hand. Betting just because we probably have the best hand is NOT sufficient to bet for value.
      2) I find it hard to believe, that someone with 2 overcards is going to call this, or with MP, or BP. It's nearly impossible to bet for value. Yes, maybe a FD, but he has a flush draw here like 1 out of 10 times, and the flush completes only 1/5 of the time, I wouldn't be afraid of that.
      3) Checking can make weaker players to take a stab at the pot on later streets, and we can be happy with the extra value. (I did the same in a live casino, and the guy bluffed me on the turn, and on the river aswell. If I bet, he'd have folded on the flop. He mucked right after I called his riverbet, so he had nothing)
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Why would you want ever to Check behind on a board where you even need to protect your hand?