fletcher23

AllenBlay

There wouldn't be any way to classify a hand other than just presence of the player at a particular street because checking down can be part of a strategy. You talk about the hands that you lost at showdown that were checked down, but shouldn't that be almost perfectly offset by hands you won that were checked down to showdown? Unless you are getting to the flop with worse hands than your opponents, everything should just wash and it shouldn't skew you down low. I'm assuming this is always heads-up because check-downs all the way in multi-way pots should be extremely uncommon.

As an aside, you really shouldn't have too many check-downs to showdown all the way. Even if you are behind, you only have to get your opponent to fold 1/3 of the time with a 1/2 pot bet to be as well off, and if you happen to be ahead you profit even more if they call.

fletcher23

Yeah, I wouldn't think it would happen so much, but it does. I am playing one of the medium skill games with "more aggressive" opponents.

I've got about 12K hands in.

So far I've gone to showdown and lost $17 or less (an amount I used because it's one standard preflop raise at 2-5) a total of 149 hands. I have a total of 176 showdown losses where I've lost more.

So that's almost as many no-money-postflop losses as legit losses.

If I have position or if it's heads up, I am much more likely to just bet air on the river in a checked pot to take it down, but a lot of these I'm out of position (usually in the blinds) and there are 3-4 players seeing the flop and just checking it around all the way.

Is this normal? Maybe I just need to skip up to tougher tables and crank it up to "much more aggressive" to be more realistic?

fletcher23

This is out of 552 total hands that I went to showdown, so that's a pretty big chunk.