[sweetjazz]

Points about checking more limped pots from the BB are well taken. Against a lot of villains I'm always checking the flop and letting them auto-bet. My thinking for betting out is based on a number of factors:

(1) Passive villains sometimes keep checking behind. I don't see any reason to let him take 2 cards off to hit a 3 outer.

(2) Passive villains often peel real light, so sometimes you get them to call a bet with a weak hand that has few outs that they won't bluff with.

(3) I'd like to get a feel for how this particular villain will respond to my lead out bets. Can I pick up a lot of pots by stabbing at limped pots? Does he get stubborn if I keep betting, will he bet on a later street if I check to him after taking the lead earlier?

(4) Early in a session, I want to suggest to an opponent that I play a fairly simple strategy in these hands -- bet out with a made hand (or strong draw) and check/fold garbage. As the match goes longer, if I sense my opponent is picking up on this, I can make a profitable switch, stealing a lot of little pots and more importantly getting in lots of check/raises with my strong hands.

It just seems to me that villain needs to have a certain threshold of aggression to make bluff inducing better than just plain value betting (especially against the worst players who need to keep you honest with weak hands and loose peels). It is a completely different story if a villain who is very aggressive postflop limps in, as then I want to punish his aggression when I have a hand by letting betting his junk for me. For example, the T6 hand is close because I would much more frequently check top pair Ks, Qs and often Js because there are less harmful overcards that can come.

And btw no I didn't quit him, he quit me. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]