Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

Well, lots of discussion was generated from a comment I made about a hand that was posted here. But most of it wasn't about the specific hand since I headed off in a more general direction. Now we can get back to it. And I will reprint something I wrote in another thread since it spells out my exact reasons.

The problem is that it concerns a slightly different hand than what was posted. Because I skim a lot. My answer might be the same for the actual hand posted but it would be more debatable. On the other hand I think that most of those who disagreed with me will still disagree for this slightly altered hand.

Here is what I thought I read.:

5-10 blinds. Two limpers. Loose agressive player makes it 50. You call in the big blind with two sevens. Both limpers call. Flop is KQ7 no suits. Players have about 2500 in front of them. I disagree with those who would come out betting on the flop. To quote tmy other post:

I recommend a check IN THIS SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCE because:

1. A bet may win it right there which will usuually cost you money if there would have been a continuation bet.

2. A bet may win it right there which will also often cost you money even if there is no continuation bet. That occurs when the turn gives someone a draw, a GOOD thing for you in No Limit, (with one card to come) though not in Limit. Or when one of the two limpers have something like QJ that you would have squeezed out on the flop.

3. With this flop it is easily possible that one of the limpers has a draw that your flop bet will not make fold (with two cards to come, that's not so good) but a check raise will.

4. Since the flop doesn't allow for two different overpairs any semi rational preflop raiser is not necessarily going to lose more when the smoke clears with AK or AA then he would if you didn't come out betting.

5. If you bet your set into three players behind you, it shows strength that will dissuade a player. who might have raised bluffed head up, to do it here.

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

[ QUOTE ]
3. With this flop it is easily possible that one of the limpers has a draw that your flop bet will not make fold (with two cards to come, that's not so good) but a check raise will.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do we want a draw to fold when he's not correctly priced in when we have a set of sevens?

Edit: especially when we may get semi-bluff raised?

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

[ QUOTE ]
2. A bet may win it right there which will also often cost you money even if there is no continuation bet. That occurs when the turn gives someone a draw, a GOOD thing for you in No Limit, (with one card to come) though not in Limit. Or when one of the two limpers have something like QJ that you would have squeezed out on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey David,

I don't know about you but i have a very hard time getting off sets so i'm not sure this holds true for me. When my opponent picks up a draw on the turn and the stacks are deep he'll often have implied odds to call a pot sized bet. Especially if he has position on me. Of course it also depends how transparent the draw is and how tricky the opponent plays.

By the way...I think most of what you've written the past few days is gold and i love the discussion it's been generating.

Thanks!

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

yes this is specific. and you did say the raiser was loose and aggressive.

the way i play this depends on knowing my opponents. i usually play it as you describe. however, if i have an opponent who often will reraise with AA, or AK, because he thinks i am drawing, or too find out where he is, i bet out, expecting the reraise. if you have an opponent who overplays AA or overplays top pair, you want to lead out - IF you expect a reraise.

point 5 you state that there are 4 opponents. but here i am not really concerned with the other two, mostly the raiser. can i get him to reraise? if one of my opponents played something like JT, i am happy to have him come alone too. but this will usually be heads up very quickly.

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

Even assuming that in this specific situation (agg player in position with a multiway pot) it is true checking the set is the most profitable play considering the hand in the vacuum:

1) check raising with a set increases the likelihood of having a huge problem where people know you check raise your monsters, thus if you want to make a credible bluff you will need to check raise bluff, which is obviously going to be very expensive when you do run into a hand

2) and will make your medium strength hands play HIGHLY transparently, check calling sucks and leading out when weak will get pots stolen from you constantly against good players

I am also very appreciative of the general discussion this is sparked, and I hope your book is completely misinterpreted by new players or ignored, and does not help anyone play better!

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

David,

As I stated in one of your threads, I agree w/ your general premise regarding who wins the most and why, and how changes in strategy affect the earn of these different types of players.

In fact, I have covered that specific point in various posts in the past in this forum when I've discussed how to exploit certain types of players who give way too much action across the board and the changes I make in my game when facing the small handful of aggressive players who do a really good job at mixing up their play.

So, big picture, I think we pretty much agree.

However, wrt this hand, I continue to disagree. That is because of the following things.

Guys in the middle will be involved with hands like K4s and will call your flop bet and get stacked when they improve to a second best on the turn. These guys will fold to your checkraise, though. In a lot of games, the range of such hands that will call that flop bet is far wider than top pair.

Aggressive PFRs will often raise you with hands like AK on the flop, but will proceed with caution after you checkraise. If the board stays friendly, you probably stack them anyway. But you can often build a bigger pot against these guys and increase your likelihood of stacking them by leading into them on the flop.

Certain turn cards on a board like this can kill your action against hands that would be willing to give a ton of action on the flop. (This point is reduced somewhat by the fact that you changed the flop to rainbow)

There are other reasons as well (including balancing reasons when considering the range of hands we're going to lead with vs. checkraise or checkfold), these are just a few.

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

[ QUOTE ]

There are other reasons as well (including balancing reasons when considering the range of hands we're going to lead with vs. checkraise or checkfold), these are just a few.

[/ QUOTE ]

for anyone else commenting:

even if you grant david his points i still dont think check raising works well in terms of shania, and we ARE discussing general theory here, not the "best line in a particular hand"

right? please give feedback

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

Best first post ever.

Re: Coming Full Circle Back to the KQ7
 

hhahahahahahahahahahhaha