|
Originally Posted by Malbrack
I can see the advantage of getting AK type hands to fold, since you wouldn't be able to really get any more value from them anyway (unless you think villain would double barrel AK); however, doesn't a flop raise allow the villain to play near perfectly? Wouldn't the villain fold overcards, probably fold 77-88 (and maybe 99), and call or shove with JJ+ (and NFDs+Overs like AdKd which have so many outs they are almost ahead anyway)? (I would if I were villain.)
But I guess the real answer depends on the villain's post- flop tendencies. If you know he is likely to play in a way that raising the flop can exploit (as Griffey mentions), then go for it; otherwise, without some kind of good read, it seems like spew to me.
Betting or raising when you are likely ahead is one of the fundamentals of poker. You have to protect your hand from being outdrawn. If he wants to see if he can spike his A/K/Q/J he'll have to pay for it. The only reason you would not is if you estimate your range isn't (that much) ahead of his. Another element is how strong your hand is, and how easily you can be outdrawn. This hand where many overcards can kill your hand is one, another example would be bottom pair. If your hand is secure (like, you flopped top set on a dead board) then there is less pressure to bet. The only reason you wouldn't want to bet when you are squarely ahead is when you want to slowplay to bet for value lateron. Or alternatively, to push your opponent into a bluff, but that's a play that only really starts to matter in 50NL+ and tournaments.
|