[Rico Suave]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Checking looks suspicious and might result in the flop checking through.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is that a bad thing? Especially if we agree on the principles that, A) neither opponent is ever folding a better hand than your AQ, and, 2) that neither opponent is ever folding a halfway decent draw. And by "halfway decent" I'm including things like gutshots or 2 good overs.



[/ QUOTE ]

i agree a better hand is close to never folding. but any hand with outs that folds is a good thing.

more importantly, why don't you want to collect bets from worse hands with "decent" draws that are willing to pay to play? so in answer to your question, "why is that a bad thing"(in ref. to the flop checking through), because we lose value! if they want to call, fine. if they want to fold, fine. i don't think my money goes in significantly different(in terms of equity dog or fave) by betting versus c/r. betting just makes SURE it goes in.

as for the ranges, i took the top 50% taking out premium holdings or anything that they would raise/3bet pf. for the bb it's conceivable i could have added more suited hands, but i don't think that it's a big deal for the overall outcome. my equity is pretty robust, and on that flop(this is key) alot of worse hands are calling. we had might as well realize it through betting.


[/ QUOTE ]

James:

I understand what you are saying here about your equity being robust and all based on their preflop ranges and that board. I understand that. A bet going in on the flop, in general, is probably a good thing. But...

On that particular board, you are getting raised here a pretty healthy percentage, imo. That board is unlikely to have hit you as the preflop raiser...so many will test you with their pair (not unlikely given loose open limp and BB call) decent draw, or (stretching a bit) overcards. Even when you don't get raised, you will be called in 2 spots a very high % of the time b/c if the flop didn't touch them..then they likely have 2 overs and will peel. So, on the flop, there is almost no chance of taking this down with a bet, a decent chance we get raised, highly probable that we get called in 2 spots (admittedly, we are quite often ahead in this situation). So, I can see that overall betting is probably best, but when we consider the turn.

If we bet and get raised, then we are giving up on the turn without a Q or A. OK.

If we bet the flop and get one caller, then we are likley betting most turn cards. OK. But I think there are tons of turn cards where we aren't getting folds, and then we are going to be in a spot on the river where we be putting in another bet on the river on a thin call.

But what are we doing if we bet and get 2 callers and the turn is a K,J,T,9,8,7,3 or a diamond. Are we still betting the turn 3 way with any of those cards?

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think I am necessarily right here. And just b/c a hand is difficult to play doesn't mean we should take a more passive or "weaker" approach. But being out of position on that board sucks; lots of turn cards are gonna suck; and we have virtually no chance we can take the flop down with a bet. That makes me lean toward considering Harvs line even if and are passing up on a bit of value on the flop.

-Rico