Blink20
Wednesday, August 17th, 2005, 3:52 PM
QUOTE (NarSARSsist)
I dunno, I'd throw out a small bet, like at least $8. If you check and he takes that as a green light, ooo, that sucks...You raised to $13 when the pot was at $6, and he still called you. Hard to put him as drawing for that flush (plus, he might have taken a stab at the flop if he had a flush draw). If he has a queen, and thought that since nobody bothered with the flop, and his queen might be good, and bets a decent amount at the river, what do you do? If you make a small bet, he might just call it just to see. If he was shooting for something else, well, you've allowed him to do whatever he wants.
I almost disagree with every line in your post
First of all, the blocker bet, the small weak lead into the river, is usually a horrible idea. What's the point of making a bet to deter him from betting. Also look at the stack sizes, that would almost put him in on the river. But assuming he did have a big stack, then putting the weak lead on the river isn't going to deter a bluff much, its going to more so make me pay of a legitimate hand even more. I just went on a rant about those bets in actuary's thread about c alling a big bet bluff on the river, some discussion on that would be cool in that thread...
Secondly, I don't think its hard to put him on a flush draw at all. Thats about the only legit unmade hand that could call on the turn in that spot. With implied odds of getting the rest of him money in on river, then he's almsot getting the right price, a flush draw makes sense here.
If he bets a decent amount at river, I pretty much have to call here. Thing is, he can't bet too much after I just check, whereas if I built the pot more with a weak lead into river, then he can bluff or legit bet a bigger amount.
That's why I see my check on river as good, I can always be swayed the other way, but not with the reasoning that I give him more opportunity to bluff by checking, b/c imo, that's not such a bad thing.....