2/4 shorthanded big slick

ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
Anything you think i should have done differently?
By the river I almost checked behind him (i thought maybe he was slowplaying) but decided that #1) he was too good a player to try a river check raise, aswell as the fact that i put him on the flush draw on the flop and decided to stick with my gut
Opinions?
 

Attachments

  • akhand.JPG
    akhand.JPG
    80.3 KB · Views: 37
gord962

gord962

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Total posts
1,648
Chips
0
Well done - nothing more to say about your play. I would suggest the villian was chasing a flush.
 
Jesus Lederer

Jesus Lederer

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 9, 2005
Total posts
416
Chips
0
Check the river with medium strength hands, especially if you have position.

ChuckTs said:
By the river I almost checked behind him (i thought maybe he was slowplaying) but decided that #1) he was too good a player to try a river check raise, aswell as the fact that i put him on the flush draw on the flop and decided to stick with my gut

Why do you consider that a "good" player wouldn´t attempt a river check-raise with a great hand? Imagine that he had you beat. In that situation his check raise would have been better than just betting on the river, because in that scenario he would have won your $50 bet plus some more money from a possible call.
I´m not saying that check-raising is better than betting, but in my opinion it´s a very valid option depending on the style of your opponent. If he´s passive then you must bet, but if he´s aggressive then you must consider check-raising to induce a bluff or a bet with a worse hand than yours.

BTW if you thought that he had a busted draw, then why not just check on the river? You would have won anyway. You didn´t lose those $50 but you risked it unnecessarily.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Chips
0
i dunno, i've always seen the river checkraise as weak because it's not guaranteed that your opponent will bet. On other streets, if your opponent checks behind you, you have the next card to put in a big bet/value bet.
I just prefer leading out because if you've got a strong enough hand to check-raise with, then i wouldn't take the risk of having your opponent check behind you and lose that extra value bet on the end. Though when the ch-r. works it does bring in a nice profit.
You make very good points JL...
as for betting the river, i wasn't 100% sure that he had the flush draw, maybe he had a smaller PP and thought i was just making a continuation bet, or he might have had a KQ or KJ type hand...so my river bet was a value bet, but as you said it is probably safer to check behind him.
Also, this is a medium strength hand by most standards, but as i said in a different thread about 2/4 shorthanded, AK hitting your K on the flop with nothing else but rags is a very strong holding; usually at this point i'm either stuck with a weaker kicker or maybe an underpair or maybe even just ace high, so my river bet was more of a value bet than anything.
 
spore

spore

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 4, 2006
Total posts
491
Chips
0
Pretty good play definitely. I definitely agree with the bets on the flop/turn. The only other possibility that I would point out on this hand is a 67s. A lot of "good" players play medium suited connectors. With straight and flush draws, that would explain the check/calls.. and a check/raise on the river would be entirely valid when the straight card came.

Not entirely likely, but a possibility to think about nonetheless.
 
Starting Hands - Poker Hand Nicknames Rankings - Poker Hands
Top