Hi,
I keep reading about "betting for Turn for a free showdown", and I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding the thinking behind it.
Say you're OOP heads up and you bet the Turn with a marginal hand. Villain calls and you head to the river. On the river you check. Now, if villain checks behind you get your free showdown - fine. If on the other hand he bets, you have to pay to get to showdown.
Now assume you're in position. If villain checks to you on the Turn you can 'bet for a free showdown'. Let's say villain calls your bet and then checks to you on the river. Clearly you can then check behind and see a free showdown. But what if he bets out on the river (donks into you)? Then it will again cost you to see the showdown.
So it seems to entirely depend on your opponent's subsequent play whether you in fact get a free showdown.
Am I missing s/thing obvious?
Edit: "Furthermore, you could bet the flop for a free card on the turn, as your opponent will often check to you, giving you the river card for free." - I've taken this from the silver article on bet types. I guess this is the same concept. Is the word 'often' the key. I.e. is it just that if villain does call a bet, they will more often check it to you than bet on the next street? If so, does this mean that 'betting Turn for free showdown' is a play that only works when in position'?
Thanks for any explantions,
Tim