Re: Any reason not to bet the river?
- From: "Raider Fan" <raidersgotscrewed1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 12:49:52 -0700
On Oct 4 2005 9:33 PM, Oliver Tse wrote:
> The river put another straight on the board (on the "AZZ" end, as the
> 12-year-old character "Miami" from Tilt would put it) and your river bet was
> probably only going to be called if you are beaten.
>
> You made a negative expectation bet on the river when there are multiple
> straights on the board and you don't have any of them...
Wrong! Betting the two pair is a value bet. Plenty of people call down
with A9, K9, etc. Those are much more likely than the crap holdings
someone would have to have to beat the two pair.
______________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
.
- References:
- Re: Any reason not to bet the river?
- From: Oliver Tse
- Re: Any reason not to bet the river?
- Prev by Date: Re: How do you think these reults stack up?
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Gary Carson is PRO-death penalty
- Previous by thread: Re: Any reason not to bet the river?
- Next by thread: Re: Any reason not to bet the river?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|