Giving up after failed Check-Raise steal?

[mahhddgtp]

Hey guys.. . Say your opponent raises and you call from the blinds to see a flop.... You figure that you have a decent hand that may be able to flop well and if the flop is nothing but middles you'll be able to check-raise and steal the pot...

Opponent was a 23/16. When the jack hit I was thinking about firing, but that's definitely not the best card to represent (even though my mindset should've been to keep repping the set). I took too long thinking about what I was going to do, so I just checked because I figured I was no longer credible. He behind and bets 1/2 pot when it's checked to him on the completed FD river.

My question is how often do you just give up after an attempted steal only check-raise? (assuming you don't improve). How often are we supposed to be firing barrels here if you do check-raise? 85% of the time?

[AdrienD]

Originally Posted by mahhddgtp

I took too long thinking about what I was going to do, so I just checked because I figured I was no longer credible.

You don't know that, some people think acting slow and taking time is strong and acting fast weak so I would still bet and fold if he raises.

Originally Posted by mahhddgtp

My question is how often do you just give up after an attempted steal only check-raise? (assuming you don't improve). How often are we supposed to be firing barrels here if you do check-raise? 85% of the time?

As long as they fold enough, mahhddgtp. Keep pounding on them until they give you a reason not to. But its generally a better idea to do this against a looser range than a tight UTG raiser cause an UTG raiser has so many more hands he will go with than his late position looser range.

[postoakpoker]

I probably wouldn't be cr bluffing at 10nl, and if I did I would ONLY be doing it against a player who has an extremely high cbet percentage, plays fit or fold (i.e. he'll just immediately give up if he has 2 overs with no draws), and the board is extremely dry where he's unlikely to have hit it hard enough with a hand that he'll have trouble letting go. that's a lot of conditions to even start thinking about cr bluffing.

as for this hand I would give it up. spending a relatively small amount of BB's to show an opponent who you're deep with that you're capable of cr bluffing isn't necessarily a bad thing, although at 10nl I don't think you need to worry that deeply about your meta game

[mahhddgtp]

Originally Posted by postoakpoker

I probably wouldn't be cr bluffing at 10nl, and if I did I would ONLY be doing it against a player who has an extremely high cbet percentage, plays fit or fold (i.e. he'll just immediately give up if he has 2 overs with no draws), and the board is extremely dry where he's unlikely to have hit it hard enough with a hand that he'll have trouble letting go. that's a lot of conditions to even start thinking about cr bluffing.

as for this hand I would give it up. spending a relatively small amount of BB's to show an opponent who you're deep with that you're capable of cr bluffing isn't necessarily a bad thing, although at 10nl I don't think you need to worry that deeply about your meta game

I agree with you on that last part... His Cbet% was 83% -- That's why I was pretty shocked to see him call me. Since he was UTG, I figured he wasn't holding broadway cards.. Probably something like 88-TT... If he was holding broadways, they may have been suited for the Flush Draw... Assuming I was right, I wasn't much of a favorite.

[Aji89]

I'd be less inclined to make this play against an UTG opener since 66+ will make up a greater proportion of his UTG range than his range for opening MP and beyond. Since the flop is so drawy, your c/r won't push him off an overpair or something like overs + FD.

[no eff eks]

Originally Posted by postoakpoker

I probably wouldn't be cr bluffing at 10nl

This, at least not with a hand that has so completely missed the board. When you've got better than ~30% equity against their range then you should be c/r-bluffing quite often.