| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:13pm Post subject: $24 - KK Ahigh flop
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70
|
|
Check or bet the flop?
Full Tilt Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t50 (8 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com
SB (t1295)
BB (t2625)
UTG (t2380)
UTG+1 (t1455)
MP1 (t1630)
MP2 (t1320)
CO (t1318)
Hero (t1477)
Preflop: Hero is Button with K[ ], K[ ].
5 folds, Hero raises to t150, 1 fold, BB calls t100.
Flop: (t325) 2[ ], Q[ ], A[ ] (2 players)
BB checks, Hero ?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:17pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:24pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:29pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
| Never check this. C-bet and fold to aggression. I'd even consider a strong 2nd barrel if c-bet is called, as we could well fold out weak Ax's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:49pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Posts: 103 WPP: 185
Location: MO
|
|
| i bet 4x pre and i c-bet half the pot, if he calls hes probly on an ace. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:51pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70
|
|
| bjsaust wrote: | | Never check this. C-bet and fold to aggression. I'd even consider a strong 2nd barrel if c-bet is called, as we could well fold out weak Ax's. |
Why shouldn't we check and why would you bet?
Also I don't think we can assume he will fold low aces without a read that is somewhat decent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:58pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 328 WPP: 137
Location: Norfolk, UK.
|
|
| Bet 3/4 of the pot . . somewhere around 250ish, villain could be calling with such a wide range we have no idea what he has, by checking we allow him to represent the Ace on the turn. If we bet and get called then I'd like to go check/check, but I reckon we bet, he folds more times than not. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 6:59pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 8189 WPP: 133
Location: Sydney
|
|
Personally I would bet 200 here and see what he does. There are plenty of hands that BB could call with that do not contain an ace.
This is a different case to where somebody raises, we re-raise preflop in position and the raiser calls in which case it is better to check behind on the flop. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:00pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Posts: 103 WPP: 185
Location: MO
|
|
| if u check your giving him a free card, at this point your more than likely ahead, but who knows what the turn or river would bring him. so u have to bet here to protect your hand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:02pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 8189 WPP: 133
Location: Sydney
|
|
Just read the thread at the other place. Very interesting reply.
| AMT at the other place wrote: | by betting out 200, unless hes pretty bad/weak as a player (we can assume he may not be great, but we can't assume specific reads that we don't have...), the most likely result will be that he doesn't fold an ace (the chances he has an ace are somewhat relevant, it being a raised pot), and he doesn't give you action/value on hands that you are beating. With mid pairs or Qx type hands, it is likely that you have him drawing thin, and that you won't be able to play a huge pot profitably.
There are not too many turn cards that you're afraid of. Checking the flop allows you to get one street closer to showdown. Also, by checking the flop, your opponents are more likely to believe that you are bluffing on later streets, so what you're effectively doing is controlling the pot when your kings have lost a lot of value on an ace high flop, and getting the most value out of your hand by maximizing against likely hands in an opponents range. Since you'll only get one, possibly streets of value at most out of average players on this board/in this situation, checking the flop is favorable.
If he checked again on the turn, thats the point where I'd normally assume he is unlikely to have an ace and would often go for a value bet. I would almost never check down every street, nor would I often fold to reasonably sized bets on safe turn cards after the flop checks through, though this depends more on the opponent, stacks, bet sizing etc.... | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:02pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70
|
|
| Not the most dangerous board and not many bad turn cards. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:04pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
Why would you check? Are we super hand readers that can only put opp on Ax? He can have a heap of hands for which the A is more of a scare card to him than it is to us. A c-bet gives us a great chance to find out where we are, a check doesnt tell us crap. He could have been planning a c-r, now the turn comes and unless its a K we have no more idea where we stand than we did, except for that now if he leads turn we dont know if he has an A, a Q, paired the turn, or is just plain stealing. Thats a shitty position to be in and could well have us folding the best hand.
And I said I'd consider a double barrel, would depend on reads, table image, etc. Bare in mind it is possible to win hands with the 2nd best hand sometimes. Opp has a hand he called our raise with, but didnt reraise PF, that could mean something, and strength can drive some people out if you feel its worth trying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:10pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 8189 WPP: 133
Location: Sydney
|
|
Betting to see "where you're at" is not a good reason to bet. You bet because you believe you have the best hand or that if you bet opp will fold a better hand. In this case we cannot be sure of either, so I can see the logic for checking.
If you check behind here, you deny opp the opportunity to pull a C-R and also get one street closer to showdown (as AMT says). That said, if you are checking behind here, you cannot fold to a small bet on the turn or river so checking behind is not without its risks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:24pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
| bjsaust wrote: | | Never check this. C-bet and fold to aggression. I'd even consider a strong 2nd barrel if c-bet is called, as we could well fold out weak Ax's. |
If villian is bad enough to call with weak Axs we are never getting him off top pair.
What hands are gonna call our cbet that we beat? Not many. We fold out 0 hands that beat us. I check with intentions to call a smallish (1/2 pot) bet on the turn and river. If checked to on the turn , i bet since now we might get action from hands that we beat , because in there mind we are never checking an ace there.
If the board was drawy (say 2 diamonds) , i would cbet and fold to a raise , but this hand no. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:25pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70
|
|
| bjsaust wrote: | | Why would you check? Are we super hand readers that can only put opp on Ax? He can have a heap of hands for which the A is more of a scare card to him than it is to us. |
As Taipan said betting to see where we are isn't a good reason to bet.
Also your reasoning supports checking more than betting.
We don't know where we are at as you say, so isn't it better to keep the pot size under control and build a pot if he checks again on the turn (since we are ahead then pretty sure)?
Also why would we bet if the A is a scarecard for him?
We don't want him to fold a worse hand.
It's not like we have AK on a missed flop and want him to fold a better hand.
I can see reasons to bet, because we might get more value out of weaker hands and may only lose one bet if we are behind, but your reasoning makes little sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:42pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
| Meh , even what if the board DID have 2 to a suit , we cbet/fold? Vs. agressive opponent we could very likely be folding the best hand if we do this since a fd/combo draw/ is gonna play it the same way.... i guess im getting too far away from the orginal hand , |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 7:56pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
I'm not convinced here. We seem to be setting ourselves up to lose out on this hand in multiple ways by checking. We can fold to a weaker hand, or we can call down a better hand. The only profitable line with checking is catching a bluff, or hoping he's betting a Q.
You've both said betting to see where we are isnt a good reason to bet, but I see it as a great reason to bet. Someone explain why its a bad reason? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 8:00pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
| taipan168 wrote: | | You bet because you believe you have the best hand or that if you bet opp will fold a better hand. In this case we cannot be sure of either, so I can see the logic for checking. |
Sans any reads I believe we very often DO have the best hand here. Its a mistake to put most opps on an ace in this situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 8:01pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
| Someone bump the old gabe thread , that is the one that really got me thinking about being in position with KK when a Ace flops and it's checked to you (heads up) , and i think the post Taipan quoted by AMT is a beautiful description of why betting here is "generally wrong". If we were OOP than betting is the best line IMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 8:04pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
| bjsaust wrote: | | taipan168 wrote: | | You bet because you believe you have the best hand or that if you bet opp will fold a better hand. In this case we cannot be sure of either, so I can see the logic for checking. |
Sans any reads I believe we very often DO have the best hand here. Its a mistake to put most opps on an ace in this situation. |
Ok & if we DO have the best hand , what are we protecting it from? Chances are villian is drawing slim. What value do we get out of betting? What do we beat the villian is going to call a bet on this flop? If we check behind , we WILL more than likely get value out of a Qx type hand , or may induce a bluff. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 8:15pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight Flush

Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 8189 WPP: 133
Location: Sydney
|
|
I think this is a bit different from the Gabe situation because that involved a 3x raise by opp out of position, a 9x re-raise by Hero in position with KK, a flat call by opp then an open check on an A high flop by opp, action to us. In Gabe's case I think we can narrow opp's range much more which tends to bias the range more heavily to Ax-type hands than in mattiesmat's hand.
That said, the logic that we chase out worse hands and only get called by better hands that AMT laid out so well still stands. However, I don't think that betting this flop is as big a mistake in mattiesmat's hand as it is in Gabe's hand since opp's range is clearly wider in mattiesmat's hand than in Gabe's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 11:07pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
I guess my point is, using a check flop, c/c turn, c/c river approach, we probably put more money into the pot and still have no idea if we're ahead or not.
What does a 1/2 pot sized bet on turn mean? What does a 3/4 or pot sized bet on the turn mean?
We have no idea what opps hand is, but theres at least some chance it can improve on the turn. PPs < QQ could hit a sit, KJ or KT could hit a straight, KQ and QJ could hit two pair.
I guess its an argument between trying to extract more value and trying to take the pot while we think we could be ahead. Theres 325 chips in the pot atm. Sure it would be nice to extract more with a hand like KK, but its still better than 20% of our stack before we started the hand.
I guess one point through this thread, is other than the copy/paste from the other place, I'm only seeing people say do this or dont do that, without explaining why they think thats the correct me. My thinking might be wrong, or my thinking might be right but my conclusion/line might be wrong, but at least I'm giving reasons why I use that line. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Jan 2008, 11:15pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 3817 WPP: 142
Location: Ballarat, Australia
|
|
| Quote: | | depends on opponent. most of the time its call, fold to another bet on the river, or call and check behind river. most people wont bet twice without an ace because they are scared of you slowplaying AA AK. |
Thats Gabes response to what you do if you check behind and opp bets turn. I like that approach much better than the call turn, call river approach advocated earlier. Calling two bets seems like a much more expensive approach than c-betting to 'find out where you are'. Heck, thats what you're doing when you call both bets anyway, you're just curious about what he has by that time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 12 Jan 2008, 12:00am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 1359 WPP: 87
Location: Just runnin...
|
|
| bjsaust wrote: |
I guess one point through this thread, is other than the copy/paste from the other place, I'm only seeing people say do this or dont do that, without explaining why they think thats the correct me. . |
So by this statement your saying that i didn't give any reason to why i would check behind? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 12 Jan 2008, 12:06am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Posts: 721 WPP: 70 | |