|
|
 Originally Posted by spoonitnow
This
Originally Posted by daviddem
is why this
Originally Posted by Donachello
Being the PFR I might have been inclined to b/f the flop to protect my hand.
and this
Originally Posted by daviddem
I think I b/f this flop for about 80-90% pot trying to represent a strong A.
make no sense. Instead you should realize that your hand has decent strength against your opponents' ranges once a few checks happen. So we check, and after a few checks happen, on the turn or river we can start making decisions about value betting or making a call.
Our flop betting range should consist of some appropriate amount of value bets with strong hands (sets down through Ace-something) and [semi]-bluffs with hands that have much less showdown value, like KJ of diamonds or 76s. Then we check a lot of medium-strength hands since we will be able to play those profitably against our opponents' checking ranges.
What this comes down to is, like many things, putting your opponent on a range and thinking about how your opponents play their ranges, which neither of the replies so far have done.
Now I know you guys have probably skimmed over some poker eBook you found laying around on the Internet and think you have good reasons for betting here, but you don't. So get with the program here and figure out why that is.
It's true I read a few books and I probably do not yet make sense of everything. I have a few more lined up such as Professional No Limit, Let there be range and Easy Game which I hope will help clarify these issues.
It very possibly is totally stupid to bet this flop. However, Spoon, let me ask you: does what OP said here also not make sense then?
Yes, but before I continue I am going to look into this a bit further. When I bet they will fold 66% of their preflop range, that the probability that they both fold is .66^2 or 43%. So if i treat the flop as there is no more action, thus assuming that I c/f turn. If I bet 51 cents, and they only with the range above I break even. (Not to mention that I get some value out of hitting trips on turn.
And is that not reason #3 for betting mentioned in Easy Game, (capitalization of dead money)? Later on in the "showdown theory" chapter, the author argues for example that one should be inclined to cbet TT on a A22 flop (A22 being taken as an example of dry flop) far more than KK on the same flop, first because TT had less showdown value than KK, but also because TT is much more likely to be outdrawn than KK. Finally, in "the great debate" chapter (vol II), he gives the arguments of both the "tend to bet" side and the "tend to check" side, one of the compelling ones in favor of betting being that aware players will know what part of our range we check and what part we bet, and we become exploitable unless we start to balance.
I'd be glad to hear your thoughts about the above, and how it applies (or not) to this hand.
Finally, if I understand correctly - and I am happy that you correct me if I am wrong -, is the idea here not to get to showdown as cheap as possible with our decent hand? Is it not arguable that against an aggressive player who will hammer weakness, the cheapest way to do that might be to bet the flop?
In the hand above, could we not possibly have gone to showdown cheaper had we bet the flop? I would argue that SB's turn betting range is possibly his entire preflop range, which would compel us to call or raise. He may very well simply be making a stab at the pot following the general display of weakness on the flop and the blank turn card. I would not at all be comfortable with raising. As for calling, which does not show much strength, he could well second barrel the river with all his range. And if we think that is the case, then we are again compelled to call or raise. Basically, are we supposed to mathematically decide whether to put money in on the flop or not without looking at how the hand might play out on the later streets?
Edit before I get yelled at: in the above paragraph, we are not "compelled" to call or raise on the turn and river, we are eager to call or raise, because we are ahead of the range of our opponent. In fact, we "manipulated" his range by checking and so doing possibly inducing a bluff on the turn and/or river. So rephrasing this, I would say that the difficulty lies into putting your opponent on a correct range on the turn, because you have to decide how often he is bluffing in this spot or not, and that is not easy. On the other hand, the information you get by betting the flop (not a reason to bet by itself) makes the job of putting your opponent on a goddamn range much easier for beginners...
Finally, if anyone has a reference to some book, post or article that further explains the concepts above, please pass on.
|
Reply With Quote