JSHamm
Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, 7:34 AM
QUOTE (Scott3705 @ Tuesday, July 25th, 2006, 7:00 AM)

First, you should not think in terms of 23% of your stack. It's a cash game. Stack sizes mean nothing and only gross amounts should be considered.
Second, I"m not saying tha calling is better than folding. For my game it is because people run this line on me w/ air and I feel the need to try to keep people honest. What I am saying is that calling is much better than raising because the price of being wrong if we push is much higher than our return for being right if he is bluffing. If I call and he bets the turn, I am willing to fold at that point if another small card peels because I'm usually behind now. So basically when you propose and all-in or fold on the flop, I think that's not a very good way to approach this situation. (unless you think you can fold jj-99)
First, when I mention stack %, I don't mean to use it as a decision maker necessarily, but rather a point that it's a large chunk to simply call with.
Second, I do see your line of thinking and wouldn't say calling is completely wrong but rather another option to use. What gets me, though, is barring any 8 on the turn, no matter what card comes off we're folding to a bet? That just seems weak and passive. Again, no real read of the player was given but we've shown strength in this hand, too and I'd rather take the pot now IF the Hero thinks he can get them to lay the hand down or pick off a bluff attempt.
Also, let's say we call the flop and villian checks the turn, we're betting here right or checking behind as well giving them a free card on the river?
I do see calling as the minimal risk (besides folding of course); however, I also think it hands over power to the villian as well as gives him more opportunity to catch on the turn and river if he only has overs.
Granted, given my line I could go bust here and basically lose a buy-in; however, I still think raising gives us more chance to win than calling. I'll admit I definitely see the benefit to your line as well, though.