I was flipping through a recent issue of CardPlayer magazine (read: devouring every word from cover to cover) when I noticed something strange in the closing segments of an article by Jim Brier. The article, which was entitled "An Interesting Heads-Up Hand," contained Brier's account of "a well played Hold'em hand from out of position" involving calling a sophisticated opponents opening raise from the big blind with pocket fours.
Naturally, Brier demonstrates how this is an uncomfortable spot, and he proceeds to detail the account of the hand which he considers to have been played well. The options for the player holding 44 were evaluated for each street, the first of which was to simply call pre-flop (I've got no problem with that). Then the Q62 rainbow flop was check-called by the BB (still no problem, seems better than betting, better than check-folding as well as better than check-raising). The turn produced a 5 and the decision (correct) was to lead out. The 5 is one of the least scary cards if you thought your 44 was good on the flop, and since you also picked up a gut-shot might as well take the lead and put some pressure on Mr. Late Position pre-flop raiser and make him react to your bet at this point. Granted, the betting limits have doubled, but the turn was certainly a good card for your hand (whew, OK, still no problems with all of the decision-making/analysis going on...).
Alas, just as the recent ellipse implied, my problem with the advice was for the section that discussed the right move for the river, which was another Q (still no flush possible). The question posed by the author was "Should you bet or check?" Just for the sake of the not-so-objective readers out there, I'm going to give you the answer from the article as well as what I would have done, but I'm not going to tell you which is which. I'm going to leave it up to you to decide which play you think is correct.
Argument 1: Check. Since you bet out on the turn and were called there is no way of knowing that your 4's are the best hand. You do not want to get raised in this spot, especially if you'll fold to a bluff. By checking with the intention of calling you create an opportunity for your opponent to bluff, as well as reduce your loss if he was indeed slow-playing a big hand. He also may check behind you with a winning hand like 77 or 88.
Argument 2: Bet. Since you bet out on the turn and were not raised, the Q on the river is a great card for your hand as it was not likely to have improved your opponent's. Also, if you had flopped top pair with the Q you might have played it by check-calling the flop then betting out at the blank on the turn. As well as this, you could also even get a call from a hand like AJ by your opponent if he thought you were making a stab at the scare card on the river.
As much as it pains me to use a little restraint, I'm going to postpone revealing which argument was used in the article (of course if you have access to CardPlayer you could just go look it up). Next time I'll tell you which argument was mine and expound a little on why I thought that the article was wrong.
P.S. - I am smiling to myself as I imagine some of the more spiteful readers of this blog squirm about not knowing which one of the arguments is mine. Guys, if you still read this blog, you're going to have to wait until next time before you know what my opinion is and disagree with it.
