Putting in 0 bets postflop with AA

[Jeffage]

Flop seems like pretty much the easiest bet in the world to me. Why would you check?

Jeff

[luckychewy]

[ QUOTE ]
The limper and the button are probably in the 50/10/0.8 range.

Flop is 7s5s5d. Check, Check, I check, button bets, BB raises, limper 3bets, I fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the button was an overly aggresive player and always bet when checked to, I could see c/r'ing, although even then I would still bet. I can't see why you would check here, please explain. As played I'd cold cap, and if it's a 5-bet cap I'd still 4-bet.

[haakee]

A flop bet will likely make subsequent decisions easier as well.

[legend42]

[ QUOTE ]
I checked because something felt weird and I had an overwhelming impulse to check. Afterwards I was trying to figure out if there was any redeeming value to this play if it had occurred on the internet (i.e. no visual cues).

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to explain more than that. Was the BB counting out chips for a check-raise? Did the limper shift in his seat as if he just ejaculated in his pants when he saw the flop? Did you get the feeling everybody missed, and wanted to give hands you had drawing almost dead a chance to hit something on the turn? What? And do these "impulses" usually turn out to be correct for you?

I don't mind the fold after all that action. If I did continue, I'd definitely 4-bet and make the button call 3 cold or give you position on the others for the rest of the hand. But the flop check is really bad without more solid reasoning than that it "felt" right at the time.

[andyfox]

"something felt weird and I had an overwhelming impulse to check."

I'm trying to conjure up what an overwhleming impulse to check is. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

While I can't conjure it, if I had it, if I did, I imagine I'd certainly have an overwhelming impulse to fold once it was 3 bets back to me.

That said, the flop can still be a posturing street, especially since the pre-flop raiser gave an indication that he had just unimproved overcards.

Regards,
Andy

[Ryno]

"But the flop check is really bad without more solid reasoning than that it "felt" right at the time."

This is what I want to know...how bad was it. I think with a hand that is not too vulnerable in a medium size pot, there are plusses and minuses. If the button checks, then the BB leads the turn and the limper calls with an underpair, and I raise, that is far superior to betting the flop and getting 1 or two callers, then losing them on the turn and/or getting one of them to look me up all the way. Also, people have talked about making the hand easier to play, but I think watching peoples reactions to someone taking the lead away from the pre-flop raiser is very valuable.

On the internet I would bet this flop 100% of the time.

EDIT - where I say "not too vulnerable" above, I mean to hands that would not call 1 bet on the flop.

[Ryno]

Andy, this hand is all your fault, you told me to play AA like AK so that's what I did [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[legend42]

[ QUOTE ]
This is what I want to know...how bad was it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not terrible. But it is significantly -EV, IMO. These guys might call one small bet drawing practically dead. And it's a lot easier to root out a 5 after betting. For instance, if you had bet this flop and then it came back to you for three more bets, I think you have a much easier fold.

[ QUOTE ]
I think with a hand that is not too vulnerable in a medium size pot, there are plusses and minuses. If the button checks, then the BB leads the turn and the limper calls with an underpair, and I raise, that is far superior to betting the flop and getting 1 or two callers, then losing them on the turn and/or getting one of them to look me up all the way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the math would bear you out on this one. And I think checking the flop then raising the turn is MUCH scarier to people than just betting the whole way. Not that you're going to get rid of a 5, but I wouldn't be surprised if A7 folded that otherwise would have called down.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, people have talked about making the hand easier to play, but I think watching peoples reactions to someone taking the lead away from the pre-flop raiser is very valuable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess there might be something to say for that. But I think the natural reaction of most players when you don't bet that flop when checked to is one of basic puzzlement. After all, you'd usually bet almost 100% of your preflop raising hands there, right? So I think not betting just makes them wonder if you flopped quads or something. Or, they think you missed completely and start jamming with their 87. I don't think you like either of those too much.

Not to mention you're going to feel sick if the flop gets checked around, the board comes running spades, and some schmo takes down the pot with Js9h. I think this one's pretty simple. You have aces, you got a good flop, bet it.

[elindauer]

Hi Ryno,

I think the general hatred of your flop check is quite overstated. If you have the ace of spades, for example, checking this flop can act as an excellent slowplay, as you would love for people to turn top pair (22:1 against true odds) or turn a lower flush draw (drawing dead) and lose 1, 2, maybe even 3 big bets drawing to these crap hands. Further, if the button is known to be aggressive enough to bet lots of hands when checked to, this would further provide a lot of merit to your check.

If you don't have the ace of spades and the button is passive, obviously checking is bad, as you do not want people picking up spade draws in this pot. Those are two big ifs though, you haven't given us enough information to condemn / condone your flop action.


After checking, I think folding is ok. Yes, it's possible that the button bet, and then the next guy raised light, and then the next guy reraised light... there is certainly some chance that you have the best hand. Still, I think you are drawing near dead often enough / get outdrawn often enough when ahead that folding is ok.

good luck.
Eric

[andyfox]

Mea culpa.