[Sunny Mehta]

[ QUOTE ]

why not do this on the flop? in SS brunson writes that all significant decisions are made on the flop. i still believe this is basically true.


[/ QUOTE ]

limon,

though I do think there are valid arguments to both sides, my reasoning is basically because there is only one card to come as opposed to two - WHICH ALSO MEANS one street of betting left as opposed to two....it's hard to make a blocking bet/raise on the flop if you then check the turn and have to play one more street.....also, I have a feeling that many games we all play in now are deeper than in Brunson's day (can't say for sure but take a look at the buy-in chart he shows in the book) WHICH MEANS that commitment decisions and commitment raises are often made on the turn (or even the river) and not the flop.....in games where everyone is 300BB deep, it's hard to make any kind of threatening raise on the flop period, and many people (often correctly) will take a card off on the flop with many hands......

I read through that old thread of yours that someone referred to in this thread, and while I agree with a lot of your reasoning (as well as the other people's counter-reasoning), I think the crucial point is when you say "IF YOU PLAN ON GOING TO THE RIVER"......when I'm 300BB deep I'll sometimes call bets (even pot-sized bets) on the turn with a made hand (I'm not talking about a drawing hand) and then fold to a pot-sized bet on the river because of a good read and a lack of being committed (because of stack depth).....that almost never happens with 100BB's - my decision is made on the turn/flop.......for example, say I had AK on an A-rag-rag board and called two pot-sized bets in position against a tight player - there are certain times I might fold the hand to a big river bet if I knew that particular player would never bet one pair like that on the river.....