|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 10/15/2008 11:41:39 PM PACIFIC |
 Betting high pair post-flop, Aisthesis, 24. Oct 2003 10:34 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| My basic question is: How long and how hard should one assert a high pair? In both examples I'll assume a "normal" table (let's say I've just sat down at it a few hands ago and have no reason to believe that anyone is playing unusually but haven't yet gotten a detailed read on the individual players) at $1/$2 Example: I limp in with Ks-Jc along with a few other players. We flop Jd-8c-4d. So I have high pair and someone might have a flush draw. My usual betting strategy is to bet pot in such a situation, and that seems to work pretty well. So let's say the pot is $9 and that's what I bet. Everybody but Joe, who calls (and sits after me, hence has not checked prior to my bet), folds. So going into the turn we have a $27 pot. Case 1: The turn is a diamond, say 2d. What do I bet now? My J still looks pretty good, and the K is probably good kicker, although Joe might have A-J. Although my J does clearly have some vulnerabilities, I would tend to want to bet 1/2 the pot here ($14). Is this correct? Joe might have stayed with Ad-Kh, for example, hoping to beat my pair, and with the longshot flush bonus. He really SHOULD have J-something in my opinion, in which case I probably win. Or he might have pocket Q-Q, in which case I'm again in trouble, but that's less likely anyway. Or he might have A-8 (with the 8 pair and the hope of pulling an A), in which case I definitely need to make him pay to see draw cards. Case 2: The turn is As or Qs, also hurting my hand. Here, too, I would be inclined to go ahead and bet out 1/2 the pot. In both cases, if Joe raises my bet, I think I should probably just fold. And if he calls, I should probably check the river unless I were to get a J or a K (not diamonds). This type of situation happens quite a bit, so I would be most interested in hearing some expert opinions on correctly betting in situations like that. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Betting high pair post-flop, Jav, 24. Oct 2003 11:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| That's always a tough decision. If you don't have a diamond, you don't want to give him a free card that might make him the flush. But another pot sized bet is risking a lot of money when he might already have the flush. I think you have to know the player well to really decide what to do. If you make a pot sized bet on the flop, and then 1/2 pot sized bet on the turn it may leave you open to being bluffed off the pot. That almost screams that you are scared of the flush, and also gives anyone with overcards and a diamond the odds to call you. Against most players I think you probably want to make a decent sized bet (around the size of the pot, maybe a little less), or check if there's good reason to believe you're already beat. But I think that is one of those difficult decisions which having knowledge of your opponent can help you make the decision. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Betting high pair post-flop, Aisthesis, 24. Oct 2003 11:43 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks very much for the helpful comments! At the low-stakes tables I'm currently playing (usually .25/.50), 1/2 plus of pot on the turn is usually viewed as fairly assertive by the generally conservative players: Pot going into flop at, say $2.50, then with my bet and call we would have $7.50 going into the turn, which would mean that $3.75 is half the pot. I'm guessing when I "graduate" to higher stakes table, I'm going to need to bet closer to pot as a general rule. But I think the critical thing is the point you brought up of losing control of a pretty strong hand by giving up the ship too soon. Unless there's good reason to believe you're truly beat on the turn here, I think we're basically in agreement that you need to be guardedly assertive on the turn despite your vulnerabilities. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Betting high pair post-flop(knowledge of opponents), WilliamS, 27. Oct 2003 09:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This thread brought me to a question I have been pondering for a while now. Should we sit down at a NL table without knowledge of the players we will be playing against? I have had an extended period of losses over the last month. Looking back, the majority of the losses came at NL tables and many of my mistakes were the result of not knowing my opponent. I still feel there is a vast opportunity for profit at these NL tables, but I feel it requires a certain amount of scouting first. Maybe require isn't the right word, but I feel scouting could have drastically improved my results the last month or so. Although it is proving to be tediously boring and time consuming I feel it is time well spent. Is anyone else doing this and seeing favorable results? What all are you looking for? Thanks Will | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Betting high pair post-flop(knowledge of opponents), Blade, 27. Oct 2003 10:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| When I play NL.....I start by playing ultra tight aggressive. I wait until I have monster hands and bet very aggressively (ie pot then 1 1/2 pot) while doing this I study the table and I find out who will call large bets with weak hands. I concentrate my full attention on these players until they are broke...then I either find someone new or leave. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Betting high pair post-flop(knowledge of opponents), Aisthesis, 27. Oct 2003 10:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Although I'm not always successful in disciplining myself to follow this advice, here's my opinion: Definitely do go ahead and sit down at tables where you don't know anyone--I'd do this once in a while just to improve my game even if I had the option at sitting down at a table where I have consistently won money off of most players. But at an unfamiliar table, play the hands very conservatively at first, until you get a read on the players. In case of doubt, definitely fold until you are starting to get a decent read. If you want to be REALLY cautious, you can take a seat and just watch for a couple of rounds before even putting in a blind. But generally, I feel like I observe the table better if I'm actually playing. As to which table to choose, online I generally look for tables where lots of people are staying in pre-flop because I feel like that means people are putting money in on dubious hands. Otherwise, I think it's a question both of mood and style. For me, my biggest winnings (and losses) have been against maniacs, but I feel like I can consistently make more money against timid players. Sometimes I feel like taking the big risk for some fast money (find the maniac or calling machine and wait for the right hand). Sometimes I'm more interested in trying to slowly ease my bankroll up a bit (look for timid players, preferably who will limp in pre-flop on nothing but fold easily later on). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|