<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:podcast="https://podcastindex.org/namespace/1.0"
xmlns:rawvoice="https://blubrry.com/developer/rawvoice-rss/"

	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: River Decision	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/</link>
	<description>Weekly poker podcast hosted by Andrew Brokos and Nate Meyvis featuring interviews with famous and behind-the-scenes figures from the poker world as well as an in-depth poker strategy segment.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:30:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: foucault		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/#comment-5136</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[foucault]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=5570#comment-5136</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/#comment-5131&quot;&gt;Chip&lt;/a&gt;.

Thanks, Chip, glad you enjoy the blog. I would say the sizing was designed not to give himself the odds exactly but rather to make clear he was pot committed so that I wouldn&#039;t try to &quot;rebluff&quot; him with something that&#039;s actually ahead of him. I do think it&#039;s a potentially exploitable tell if people always try to give you room to shove over them when they have strong hands but clearly commit themselves with big draws, but it&#039;s also very possible to use this as a reverse tell. &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/this-is-why-we-shove-our-draws/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Here&#039;s a post&lt;/a&gt; where I explain this concept in more depth. Hope that helps!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/#comment-5131">Chip</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks, Chip, glad you enjoy the blog. I would say the sizing was designed not to give himself the odds exactly but rather to make clear he was pot committed so that I wouldn&#8217;t try to &#8220;rebluff&#8221; him with something that&#8217;s actually ahead of him. I do think it&#8217;s a potentially exploitable tell if people always try to give you room to shove over them when they have strong hands but clearly commit themselves with big draws, but it&#8217;s also very possible to use this as a reverse tell. <a href="https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/03/this-is-why-we-shove-our-draws/" rel="nofollow">Here&#8217;s a post</a> where I explain this concept in more depth. Hope that helps!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Chip		</title>
		<link>https://www.thinkingpoker.net/2010/06/river-decision/#comment-5131</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chip]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:36:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thinkingpoker.net/?p=5570#comment-5131</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hey, Andrew:

Do you think villain&#039;s bet sizing on the turn raise was designed to give him the proper pot odds to call if you shoved, or was it just coincidence that his standard raise there gave him the right odds to call a shove (given that he had to figure he had 15 outs, and a shove would have given him about 2.5 to 1 on a call)? Is that kind of bet sizing a bit of a tell for a good player&#039;s hole cards and something to consider when making the decision whether to shove the turn or whether to call that scary river? Thanks for your blog; I feel I&#039;ve learned a lot about NLHE from reading your posts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, Andrew:</p>
<p>Do you think villain&#8217;s bet sizing on the turn raise was designed to give him the proper pot odds to call if you shoved, or was it just coincidence that his standard raise there gave him the right odds to call a shove (given that he had to figure he had 15 outs, and a shove would have given him about 2.5 to 1 on a call)? Is that kind of bet sizing a bit of a tell for a good player&#8217;s hole cards and something to consider when making the decision whether to shove the turn or whether to call that scary river? Thanks for your blog; I feel I&#8217;ve learned a lot about NLHE from reading your posts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
