|
|
 Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot
I have to disagree here. I'm in late position and everyone behind me (including the blinds) had been really tight. I had been 3bet a few times, once 4betting KK (BB 3bet/folded) and the rest of the time folding. This was one of the first times I had been flatted like this. For blind stealing alone, I think raising 44 (or ATC for that matter if my opponents wouldn't adjust) in this spot is +EV. When you add in some slim showdown value vs passive postflop players and the nicely-disguised sets that I hit occasionally, there is no way I'm not raising 44 in the HJ here. For those players flatting me with better pocket pairs, I can bet them off their hands a lot on K- or A-high boards.
Originally Posted by Sir Pawnalot
As played I would check-raise(Pawnalot style) turn, because I do not think he has AK, AQ often enough and he will fold all pairs. We still have some equity if he calls.
I don't like check/raising the turn because my raise is almost always going to have to be a shove (I don't see him betting much less than $3 if he's betting here), and I'm getting my money in pretty bad. I do think there's a lot of fold equity in a check/raise, but I think there's nearly as much fold equity in leading out here and it'll be a lot cheaper. Even better, any pair that thinks I'm bluffing is only going to call here, giving me a chance to see a river that could give me the near-nuts. A check/raise looks even bluffier (would I really check/raise an A here when I could just put the rest in on the river anyways?) than my looks-like-a-value-bet lead on the turn, so the same hands that call my turn lead are likely to call a turn check/raise, IMO. This way, I get a chance to check/fold or shove (on a 7 or 2) on the river if I'm called on the turn.
|
Reply With Quote