NLCash: Leading OOP
 

How many here have integrated this into their game? How often/what kinds of hands do you do this with?

I hate to talk in absolutes, especially regarding something like HU, but I for one am in the camp that almost never leads OOP.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

Big mistake not to lead OOP IMO. Another weapon in your arsenal develop a good metgame for it, depending on what your villain does polarize it strong or weak.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

[ QUOTE ]
Big mistake not to lead OOP IMO. Another weapon in your arsenal develop a good metgame for it, depending on what your villain does polarize it strong or weak.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're going to have to get into specifics to convince me.

If I have a hand I like CRing is best since it puts money in the pot by villain... if I don't like my hand I can C/F or C/get free card.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

[ QUOTE ]
How many here have integrated this into their game? How often/what kinds of hands do you do this with?

I hate to talk in absolutes, especially regarding something like HU, but I for one am in the camp that almost never leads OOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you talking about on the flop? On turn and river there are lots of spots for it.

I only really lead flop vs. bad passive calling stations, when I want to get full value from their chasing tendencies and when they rarely bet flop.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

[ QUOTE ]
C/get free card.

[/ QUOTE ]
So can villain.
Also you said it yourself you c/raise range is very polarized to strong and thats something thats very easy to exploit.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
C/get free card.

[/ QUOTE ]
So can villain.
Also you said it yourself you c/raise range is very polarized to strong

[/ QUOTE ]

There's your problem right there.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many here have integrated this into their game? How often/what kinds of hands do you do this with?

I hate to talk in absolutes, especially regarding something like HU, but I for one am in the camp that almost never leads OOP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you talking about on the flop? On turn and river there are lots of spots for it.

I only really lead flop vs. bad passive calling stations, when I want to get full value from their chasing tendencies and when they rarely bet flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just talking about flop.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

Generally speaking you should lead:

a) With hand that is probably ahead against a passive (preferably loose) opponent

b) Against an opponent who probably didn't hit the flop and won't try to float

If you have a hand that is probably ahead a check/raise is usually better if you think they will cbet. If they are passive you are better off just leading into them rather than giving a free card.

If you think you may be behind or racing but you have fold equity leading is better than checking. There isn't any point in checking through and probably losing at showdown if you could bet 60% of the pot on the flop and win it 1/2 the time.

Edit: Fixed some wordy parts.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

There's a reason it's called donking the flop...

I agree with LJ for reasons stated. First, it's not a very believable bluff. Second, we lose tons of value with our strong hands. Thrid, getting raised OOP sucks and most of the time we won't have much, unless you're doing this with monsters, which again I don't like. Finally, c/c allows us to control the size of the pot while allowing villian to bluff. If villian has a good enough hand to call a bet, he's probably betting himself. Therefore we get to the turn the same way, except without the added risk of a raise.

Re: NLCash: Leading OOP
 

Against passive opponents that won't cbet often, it's tough to maximize the value of your premium hands OOP without leading a variety of flops.

I was in the camp that basically never did it, but then started experimenting with it and liked my results.

If you're going to lead the flop OOP, you also have to do it with marginal holdings and semibluffs as well.