thoughts on cbetting AK in position

I have been thinking a lot about how to play AK best in position when you raise preflop and get called and flop nothing. A few months ago I cbet it 100% figuring that I have the best hand a lot and have good equity to make TPTK vs smaller pairs and the slight possibility of someone folding an underpair or bottom pair type hand made it seem very very +ev but I have spoken with a highly regarded HSNLer who has suggested that I start checking in these types of spots for a few reasons:

a) yes, you may have the best hand but with my image, people will NEVER fold a better hand (e.g. a pair)
b) I can't really call a check-raise with no pair so this opens the door for me to put in a cbet and get blown off the best hand vs checkraise (semi)bluffs
c) your hand looks very weak when you check behind the flop so vs the right players on the right boards I can snap off turn/river bluff(s)

----

These are all valid points but when I think about sklansky's fundamental theory of poker which goes something like

if you have the best hand you should bet

with that said, if I expect my opponents are defending their blinds light and only make a pair 33% of the time on the flop and rarely have pocketpairs (since most people reraise those) doesn't betting 66% of the time (or more) make better sense than checking?

[fukkeneh]

I personally think you should play every hand the exact same way, no matter who your opponents are, giving no regard to their current perception of you, or flop texture.

If you make up a chart on the optimal strategy and follow it without ever devitating.. you can always make sure you are playing optimally.

Maybe Sklansky has put one in his book like in the index??

[fslexcduck]

this post is nothing short of groundbreaking.

[btmagnetw]

[ QUOTE ]
These are all valid points but when I think about sklansky's fundamental theory of poker which goes something like

if you have the best hand you should bet


[/ QUOTE ]a non playing uNL player is about to correct you.

that's not what the FToP says. it says when you play a hand the same way as if you knew the player's hand, you profit. so if you know your opponent has nothing but also know that he's prone to c-r you when he doesn't believe you, then you should check behind, or at least reraise his c-r.

[ipokeder]

help me i'm drowning

[exalted]

[ QUOTE ]
so if you know your opponent has nothing but also know that he's prone to c-r you when he doesn't believe you, then you should check behind

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhhhh.... if you could see his hand, then the optimal play for you would be to bet for value, if he C/Rs you, you can call to induce bluffs on later streets or RR AI for value, depending on the situation.

Checking with AK when you know you could have the best hand is a mistake according to the fundamental theorem, but it is a smaller mistake than betting, and having to fold the best hand to a semibluff raise by our opponent.

I think it isn't bad to check AK sometimes, but mostly with the intention of giving up (on wet boards, 78T, etc). 23T I'm betting there 80% in position with AK.

[TxRedMan]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been thinking a lot about how to play AK best in position when you raise preflop and get called and flop nothing. A few months ago I cbet it 100% figuring that I have the best hand a lot and have good equity to make TPTK vs smaller pairs and the slight possibility of someone folding an underpair or bottom pair type hand made it seem very very +ev but I have spoken with a highly regarded HSNLer who has suggested that I start checking in these types of spots for a few reasons:

a) yes, you may have the best hand but with my image, people will NEVER fold a better hand (e.g. a pair)
b) I can't really call a check-raise with no pair so this opens the door for me to put in a cbet and get blown off the best hand vs checkraise (semi)bluffs
c) your hand looks very weak when you check behind the flop so vs the right players on the right boards I can snap off turn/river bluff(s)

----

These are all valid points but when I think about sklansky's fundamental theory of poker which goes something like

if you have the best hand you should bet

with that said, if I expect my opponents are defending their blinds light and only make a pair 33% of the time on the flop and rarely have pocketpairs (since most people reraise those) doesn't betting 66% of the time (or more) make better sense than checking?

[/ QUOTE ]

POTY.

I srsly lol'd at the ftop part.

grimmy grimmy grimmy, can't you see........

[greg nice]

no wonder youre down 700k

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
that's not what the FToP says. it says when you play a hand the same way as if you knew the player's hand, you profit.

[/ QUOTE ]
If the cards were face up on the table, the right play would be for the better hand to bet and charge the weaker hand to draw. Grim's synopsis is right.

[BaddTag]

G-Star please PM me I'm interested in Coaching and your thinking in this post impresses me.