lol zeebo

just bet the flop. the only hands that are calling that insane river shove are hands that wouldve called the flop/turn anyway.

On February 11 2010 11:42 joLin wrote: just bet the flop. the only hands that are calling that insane river shove are hands that wouldve called the flop/turn anyway.

Only hands that call it are boats - wanted to try to get him to catch up. More value this way than flop bet I think. Obv hitting quads is always good.

well its hard for him to catch up in the first place since theres only 2 overcards to this board that might give him top pair.

and then theres some draws on the flop that you want to protect your hand from. its not invincible.

youre only getting called by Qx on the river (or a pocket pair if hes really retarded), both of which wouldve called you on the flop anyway, plus draws that wouldve called.

This isn't zeebo... zeebo would be if he called you here with 4s

bet flop for sure.

So hard for him to have anything on flop but I wasn't planning on checking turn but turn made it even more unlikely he has anything + he was really bad and we were HU (other guy was sat out).

On February 11 2010 12:09 rgfdxm wrote: This isn't zeebo... zeebo would be if he called you here with 4s

Ok - thought it was no-one folds a boat. My bad.

Oh, it is. But the point of the zeebo theorem is to realize that fish way overvalue terrible full houses just because a full house is such a strong hand overall. The fish in this hand has top boat - that's just bad luck and the only reason his call is even questionable is because you played the hand poorly and had to overbet shove the river. His call technically fits the literal statement of the zeebo theorem but has nothing to do with what the theorem is trying to teach.

Ok. I still am not sure about flop bet - seems 90+% of the time I get a fold there and then. By checking I underep the hand and are more likely to get calls with marginal hands on the turn. Ok - it turned out weird on the turn - especially with his exact hand. Vs his exact hand Qx I can of course play it much better but any hand other than Qx?

The problem with checking the flop is that you suicide on spade turns, you're not happy about queen turns, and high cards are as likely to scare him as to help him improve. Underrepping a hand is not important against fish - this is the logic fish use when they limp AA and then check every street. You're opening yourself up to reverse implied odds (here against spade draws), and failing to get value from a chunk of his range that won't bet but will call a bet.

If you get a fold 90% of the time on the flop that's because he has garbage 90% of the time. Against a lot of his range you just can't get value, and you're overestimating how much trying to underrep your hand will do to fix that. Check to let aggrofish bluff, but trying to underrep your hand against a standard or stationy fish is just hemmorhaging value.

Ok ty - I appreciate your comments. My thought process was that I rarely get value here Vs most of his range and if I can get 2 streets that's great but I am unlikely to get them on the flop and turn but on the turn and river it is more likely. I understand the issues with the draws but I thought they were likely a small part of his range and if a spade hit on the turn clearly I am not stacking off. If he had A high he will call a flop bet but fold to a turn bet unimproved - same for all pairs probably (excluding the unlikely premiums). If he has a draw he calls the flop anyway so am I really changing much by checking? Ignoring the turn and river play in this case (as it was freaky) am I really losing value here?

Once again - ty for your input I appreciate it from clearly better players - trying to learn!

On February 11 2010 12:48 rgfdxm wrote: Against a lot of his range you just can't get value, and you're overestimating how much trying to underrep your hand will do to fix that.

i think this is important. against garbage you just wont get value, and letting him see a turn wont help 90% of that garbage. itll only help if the turn is an ace (non-spade) and he has Ax. you can see this isnt going to happen that often.

the hands that youre trying to get to call you on the turn will also call a flop bet, i think you need to realize this is why checking the flop doesnt help.

On February 11 2010 13:35 4Kingell wrote: Ok ty - I appreciate your comments. My thought process was that I rarely get value here Vs most of his range and if I can get 2 streets that's great but I am unlikely to get them on the flop and turn but on the turn and river it is more likely. I understand the issues with the draws but I thought they were likely a small part of his range and if a spade hit on the turn clearly I am not stacking off. If he had A high he will call a flop bet but fold to a turn bet unimproved - same for all pairs probably (excluding the unlikely premiums). If he has a draw he calls the flop anyway so am I really changing much by checking? Ignoring the turn and river play in this case (as it was freaky) am I really losing value here? Once again - ty for your input I appreciate it from clearly better players - trying to learn!

well its not like youll get 2 streets out of ace high by checking the flop, same thing for pairs.

if he has a draw it changes a TON if you check the flop, bcuz you can get 2 streets out of his draw on the flop/turn but you wont get 2 streets on the turn/river. most of the argument for not checking the flop is so we can get 2 streets out of draws. we also want 3 streets out of Qx.

all other hands you can expect maybe 1 street from. against these hands it doesnt really matter if you bet the flop or turn bcuz youll likely get a peel and then a fold. none of these hands are going to improve to 2nd best hands anyway (except Ax hitting an ace) bcuz if he has a pocket pair hes going to improve to the best hand if he hits.

Thanks - that makes sense. Appreciate the comments.

TT hand

OK not quite the same but similar principle....

Salient differences:
1)Tom was not the pfr, so his flop check is completely different because he is not checking-instead-of-cbetting
2)Tom is OOP, so when he checks the flop he is checking to the pfr who he can expect to cbet a large amount of the time
3)That board is way drier so Tom doesn't have to be concerned about any draws
4)Tom's opponent is a good reg, not a stationy fish (his opponent won't call off several streets with weak hands like fish will)

#4 is most important btw, followed by #2

On February 12 2010 00:13 rgfdxm wrote: Salient differences: 1)Tom was not the pfr, so his flop check is completely different because he is not checking-instead-of-cbetting 2)Tom is OOP, so when he checks the flop he is checking to the pfr who he can expect to cbet a large amount of the time 3)That board is way drier so Tom doesn't have to be concerned about any draws 4)Tom's opponent is a good reg, not a stationy fish (his opponent won't call off several streets with weak hands like fish will)

Wow wasn't expecting this - my apologies - didn't expect you or anyone else would be looking at this hand any more - added it to send to a mate for a laugh + I was a little drunk when added. You are right and I would have pointed out all the above too - it was kind of vaguely similar in that he had quads Vs a boat and that's it.