Damned passive fishes lol. So I find that I'm often getting into spots where, for example, I c-bet a dry flop, say A94 and get called, turn goes check-check, i hit second pair on the river and he checks, so I figure he wouldn't play an ace that way and put him on 9x or some type of medium pocket pair, I value bet my pair of jacks and he snaps Ax.Obviously this is very player-dependent, so i should be trying to get good reads and then make this decission accordingly, but say we're totally readless on the 3rd hand of the match. What are your standards for this kind of situation vs a random? How do you feel this changes with different stakes? I'm currently at 33s.Thanks for any feedback!
you made a nice value bet on the river, you are right when saying that he isnt supose to play this ace that way. Adjusting your play for the later hands.10$, 22$, 33$, 55$, 110$, there is always fish, losing player, tilt player, I think you shouldnt worry about the stakes, just play your best poker and try to focus on your oponent, trying to figure out how he play.
Hey Roamus, this is betterways from today. Man, had a +6BIs day, would be +8 if I hadn't let you win! :)))Thanks for the comment! My question about the stakes was because I thought I might be using an incorrect approximation of a standard player's tendencies at those levels. It wasn't a question about a single hand, just an example of something I thought was happening to me a bit more frequently than it should.If the guy is a good player he might put me on air and figure his best shot at value is to let me bluff, and if he's very bad he might just not understand he can value bet, but do you think it's a good assumption that a standard random will be betting top pair for value on a board like that after check-call / check-check?