Apathy style theory question SSNL version - Checking flop in the blind

[carrotsnake]

Master, no, its not useless, its true. This is about as broad of a topic as you can say, and there is NO possible way to classify the amount of EV lost by never leading. However, what I meant is it depends on your own game, not the flow of the game, how much you'll lose. A good player oop will lose less, a bad player will lose more cuz his ability to manipulate the pot size, and therefore his EV, will be lower. A good player would be able to take this singular line and using bet sizing manipulate the pot.

<3

[RiverFenix]

Apathy questions are either/or. Checking here is the correct answer, there isn't enough downside to always checking as opposed to always leading.

If I had to always lead I'd be damn sure to 3bet a lot more often and call almost never. Playing hands OOP sucks w/o the initiative.

[Grunch]

Are you saying that checking is always the right answer in real life, or only when presented with the choice between always checking and always leading?

[punter11235]

[ QUOTE ]
i check this flop pretty damn close to 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. I would need very specific read to bet out and I am yet to ever have one.

[Grunch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i check this flop pretty damn close to 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. I would need very specific read to bet out and I am yet to ever have one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somebody tell me whyyyyyyyyy the suspense is killing me!

[RiverFenix]

Apathy theory questions are you have to do one of two options every single time youre in that situation. In this case checking is clearly the better option.

My range for calling out of the BB when its going to be HU is pretty much only mid/baby pockets, occasionally AT-8s - rarely is it expanded, occasionally I 3b the PPs. I believe this pretty optimal. With this range checking gives me a lot more options and credibility than leading does.

[kitaristi0]

RiverFenix,

I just put Apathy in the title to look cool and to pretend that I belonged in HSNL as well. I agree that if the question was between always checking and always betting that checking would be the correct answer.

[kitaristi0]

Maybe a silly question but do you think always checking the flop in this situation is exploitable?

[Grunch]

RF (or anyone),

Given that you check the flop almost every time here, of the times you don't fold on the flop how often would you say you are check-raising the flop?

What's your general line with say a flopped set?

[RiverFenix]

Not really as it becomes too game theoryish. As long as you vary your c/rs, turn donks, other turn plays villian shouldnt ever really be able to grasp where you are at.

You lose ev by always checking, I'm guessing more than people think at SSNL, but that shouldn't make you exploitable.