Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It of course looks standard but should be pretty bad theoretically. Only reason for the bet is that it makes the hand easier to play against straightforward opponents. Still checking has to be superior imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't fully understand why the "standard" play and the optimal play would vary significantly. The reason it is considered standard in the first place is because it is optimal for most situations.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

The "standard" play is to pretty much always continuation bet.The optimal play in this situation is the one that gets the most value out of worse hands while not putting much money in when behind. I don`t see how this can be accomplished by betting.
I am not saying betting is bad but I don`t think this is a spot that is so crystal clear that one word answers are sufficient.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

Reads on BB would be helpful. Against your "normal" villain, the only hand we are beating here is AK. I think c/c flop, w/ intent to c/f turn is your best bet. Not sure what betting the flop accomplishes.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

[ QUOTE ]
i like it! you often take it down...

what do we do if the just calls?!

[/ QUOTE ]

We check turn, and probably folds to a bet?

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

oh wow - i should read these hands, i didn't realize BB cold-called

c/f flop seems best - c/c fold turn is okay i guess.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

edit

misread action as well crap

uh yeah c/f turn

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

Ah, thought it was vs CO, change my vote to checking. And this kind of cold call not closing the betting is often queens even though his range probably is somewhat wider than normal when BB and CO are almost 200bb deep.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ah, thought it was vs CO, change my vote to checking. And this kind of cold call not closing the betting is often queens even though his range probably is somewhat wider than normal when BB and CO are almost 200bb deep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very often, especially when it's not 22,33,44,55,66,77,88,99,TT,JJ,45s,56s,67s,78s,9Ts, 9To,TJs,TJo, or QJs.

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

[ QUOTE ]
in a vacuum checking might be better than betting but I think betting is the best for other reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

+1

Re: Continuationbet +EV?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It of course looks standard but should be pretty bad theoretically. Only reason for the bet is that it makes the hand easier to play against straightforward opponents. Still checking has to be superior imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

so wrong. checking makes the hand "easier" and betting is theoretically correct. board is super dry, your hand is very strong here.