KK vs AA6 flop

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest problem that I can see with checking the flop is that it sets us up to be bluffed out of the pot pretty often on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's why it's important to understand WHAT that flop check does. if you are concerned with getting bluffed off on the turn, that fact in and of itself means we are soliciting more action from a worse hand than we otherwise would by just betting the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
Checking the flop only seems to put us in a series of more difficult decisions on future streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

we should not avoid more difficult decisions at the expense of added value. i'm not saying that's the case here, i just don't like the argument unless both results are equal(which i'm not saying is the case, either).


[ QUOTE ]
And that's not even considering the possibility that SB will call "BS" on a Button flop bet and check/raise with a hand that we beat, when we are also beating whatever Button holds.

[/ QUOTE ]

good point. this has a bit to do with the specifice tendencies of SB and how all of the players in this hand view each other(as well as how they all think they are viewed, respectively). this is a good arguement as not having absolute position on the field is a disadvantage to taking a check the flop line.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying that checking here is not a good option, just that I don't think it's a good option here, with one tricky and one good opponent surrounding us.

[/ QUOTE ]

i am not particularly thrilled with the scenario, either. you seem to be focusing only on the bad things that could happen, though. replay this hand a thousand times both betting the flop and checking the flop and is the value that we net greater in one case than the other? that is the concern. in the great median of things, do these guys call down or give excessive action with 88 or something that they otherwise would not? i guess that is sort of the question. you make an excellent argument against given what we know about these guys, though.

[Harv72b]

I've been trying to compose my thoughts into a decent reply on this for a while now. I'll probably fail miserably, but it's approaching my bedtime (yes, at 1 PM) so it's now or never.

I am a huge believer in the flop continuation bet. I won't make one 100% of the time, but if I don't then it's either because the flop missed me so obviously and terribly that I'm planning to check/fold (like if I opened from MP3 with 87 of spades and the flop came KQ4 of hearts--and I estimate I have zero folding equity), or because I'm just changing things up during a long session against familiar opponents. A few other extraordinary situations, but that's pretty much it. This, incidentally, makes me even more difficult to put on a hand in situations like this, because my observant opponents should know that I'm just as likely to bet here with pocket aces as I would be with 54s. Actually, a bit more likely.

In this hand, I think that a flop bet is going to get us more action from our opponents when we're good. Think about it...if you're the TAG SB and coldcalled preflop with 88, are you going to check/fold here? If you're the tricky Button holding JTo, are you folding to Hero's continuation bet? You're probably going to call & reevaluate on the turn.

On the other hand, if we check this flop, alarm bells start going off in both of their heads. No matter whether or not you have been mixing up your flop checks with the absolute perfect frequency, this is a flop where they expect you to bet, no matter what you raised with. KQ, 55, 97s, whatever...you're going to bet this flop because you're representing the ace high hand that most everyone puts a PFR on. When you check here, that represents more strength than betting, IMO.

What I think ends up happening fairly often is that it gets checked around on the flop, and then checked to you on the turn. Do you bet here? If you do, you are almost certainly not going to be called by any hand you beat. The trickery Button might just decide to raise your turn bet without the ace, though, so you end up probably calling down if that happens. Do you check? Button will probably take a shot at the pot, in which case you're left deciding whether or not to call down. And, again, SB might decide to make a move with his pocket fours at that point, forcing you out of the pot.

There's another thing which steers me towards betting--the natural impulsion that both of your opponents will feel to slowplay if they do have the ace. Again, if you're SB and holding AQo, aren't you going to employ a WA/WB line here? If you're Button & just hit the lotto with your A4s, aren't you going to slowplay to try and suck SB along in the hand? Or just because you're a bad player and slowplaying seems like the thing to do?

In this exact scenario, I would generally go with a bet, bet, check/call line in this hand. If I get raised on any street, then it really depends on what SB does as to whether or not I continue...if Button raises & SB calls two, I'm out. If SB check/raises the turn, I'm out. If it's HU and Button raises me, I'm calling down. If it's HU and SB check/raises me...probably call down out of reflex, but I should be folding. If it goes bet/call/raise on the flop, call the raise & reevaluate on the turn, leaning towards folding UI to a lead bet by SB.

Yeah, a lot of the time we're going to bet the flop & both opponents are going to fold. A few of those times, we might have induced action by checking the flop...but we also might induce too much action, and irregardless we are going to be putting ourselves in some extremely delicate situations (like when SB decides to lead the turn after the flop is checked around). But I think that a great deal of the time when we check the flop, it just ends up getting checked to us again on the turn where we're in the exact same situation, but now with an even lesser chance of getting worse hands to call.

[fuzz66]

what about going for a check-raise here.its not likely either is holding a strong ace.with a raise, hero can represent a stronger ace,it might also buy a free look at 4th and 5th for a chance at catching a king. if no one bets on the flop, come out betting on 4th street.if your check-raise is bumped,i would let the hand go.

[SeaEagle]

From Harv: [ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a lot of the time we're going to bet the flop & both opponents are going to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
From Fuzz: [ QUOTE ]
its not likely either is holding a strong ace

[/ QUOTE ]

Eventually, I’m going to post "I think hero should check this flop and here's why", but in the meantime I want to show that betting here appears to be immediately –EV. This doesn’t mean that betting is necessarily wrong, but it is a big consideration.

In order to do this I'm going to go off on a bit of a tangent. There's a lot of numbers and whatnot in the next section, so if you don’t want to follow the math, just skip to the end of the post.

Tangent:
I think a lot of us don't do a good enough job understanding how our opponent's hand ranges come out in actual hand combinations and, by not understanding the 'percent of hands', we're not able to really use those hand ranges to pick the best path through a hand. A couple of months ago I started counting combinations whenever I detail-analyzed a hand and, as I start to memorize the stuff I'm finding, I believe it's led to the largest increase in my poker skill in over 2 years.

Here's a trivial example:
I have A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] in the BB. 4 folds. MP2 raises. 4 folds. I call.
Flop: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img],6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img],3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. I bet, villain raises.

I used to think "either he's got a big A, or he's trying for a free card for his flush draw, or he’s bluffing/behind", and my default line was to call and donk a safe turn so I didn't give a free card but didn't overpay when behind. Then one day I sat down, counted the combinations and figured out the EV for the hand based on logical play going forward. There are 41 combinations of AA-A9 and only about 5 flush draw combinations. When I plugged this into an EV formula (based on winning 10% when behind, 100% when he’s bluffing, and 60% when he’s on a FD) it turns out that he needs to be bluff-raising 35% of the time for me to justify calling his raise, and very few people bluff-raise that much. Instantly my default play changed to trying to get away from the hand as soon as possible (usually this means c/fing the turn, but sometimes I'll just fold the flop).

So let’s apply this to the villains' hand ranges in this hand.
After the flop there are:
65 Pocket pairs
59 Ax (based on all AK-A8 and A7s-A2s only)
24 broadways (based on all suited and KQo)

I assumed button 3-bets half of each of these groups so his % breakdown is 44% PPs, 40% Ax, and 16% bw. I assumed sb 3-bets JJ+ and AK/AQ so his breakdown is 42% PPs, 39% Ax, and 20% bw.

So now the interesting part . Based on these hand ranges, there is a:
63% chance at least one opponent has an A
3% chance both opponents have broadways
18% chance both opponents have PPs
16% chance one opponent has a PP and the other has a broadway
If we say that villains will always call with PPs and never raise (basically, the best case) then the immediate EV of a bet is " (2 * % both have PP) + (% one has PP and the other has a BW) - (% I’m behind)" or (2 * .18) + (.16) - .63.
Or -.11 sb.

And since there are very few outs for whichever hand is behind, we will need some serious outside factors to overcome the immediate EV loss.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
And since there are very few outs for whichever hand is behind, we will need some serious outside factors to overcome the immediate EV loss.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will put more thought into this (and some sleep) before I attempt a proper reply, but my gut instinct is that any information we glean from a flop bet, combined with the likelihood that this will get us heads up or at least make the turn and/or river easier to play, would more than cover that serious outside factors thing.

This is not a hand that we should be looking to get away from, at least not until we are told rather firmly that we need to think about that. And I will say that, based on the reads you gave, I did assign a slightly more liberal coldcalling range to Button here. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
I've been trying to compose my thoughts into a decent reply on this for a while now. I'll probably fail miserably, but it's approaching my bedtime (yes, at 1 PM) so it's now or never.

I am a huge believer in the flop continuation bet. I won't make one 100% of the time, but if I don't then it's either because the flop missed me so obviously and terribly that I'm planning to check/fold (like if I opened from MP3 with 87 of spades and the flop came KQ4 of hearts--and I estimate I have zero folding equity), or because I'm just changing things up during a long session against familiar opponents. A few other extraordinary situations, but that's pretty much it. This, incidentally, makes me even more difficult to put on a hand in situations like this, because my observant opponents should know that I'm just as likely to bet here with pocket aces as I would be with 54s. Actually, a bit more likely.

In this hand, I think that a flop bet is going to get us more action from our opponents when we're good. Think about it...if you're the TAG SB and coldcalled preflop with 88, are you going to check/fold here? If you're the tricky Button holding JTo, are you folding to Hero's continuation bet? You're probably going to call & reevaluate on the turn.

On the other hand, if we check this flop, alarm bells start going off in both of their heads. No matter whether or not you have been mixing up your flop checks with the absolute perfect frequency, this is a flop where they expect you to bet, no matter what you raised with. KQ, 55, 97s, whatever...you're going to bet this flop because you're representing the ace high hand that most everyone puts a PFR on. When you check here, that represents more strength than betting, IMO.

What I think ends up happening fairly often is that it gets checked around on the flop, and then checked to you on the turn. Do you bet here? If you do, you are almost certainly not going to be called by any hand you beat. The trickery Button might just decide to raise your turn bet without the ace, though, so you end up probably calling down if that happens. Do you check? Button will probably take a shot at the pot, in which case you're left deciding whether or not to call down. And, again, SB might decide to make a move with his pocket fours at that point, forcing you out of the pot.

There's another thing which steers me towards betting--the natural impulsion that both of your opponents will feel to slowplay if they do have the ace. Again, if you're SB and holding AQo, aren't you going to employ a WA/WB line here? If you're Button & just hit the lotto with your A4s, aren't you going to slowplay to try and suck SB along in the hand? Or just because you're a bad player and slowplaying seems like the thing to do?

In this exact scenario, I would generally go with a bet, bet, check/call line in this hand. If I get raised on any street, then it really depends on what SB does as to whether or not I continue...if Button raises & SB calls two, I'm out. If SB check/raises the turn, I'm out. If it's HU and Button raises me, I'm calling down. If it's HU and SB check/raises me...probably call down out of reflex, but I should be folding. If it goes bet/call/raise on the flop, call the raise & reevaluate on the turn, leaning towards folding UI to a lead bet by SB.

Yeah, a lot of the time we're going to bet the flop & both opponents are going to fold. A few of those times, we might have induced action by checking the flop...but we also might induce too much action, and irregardless we are going to be putting ourselves in some extremely delicate situations (like when SB decides to lead the turn after the flop is checked around). But I think that a great deal of the time when we check the flop, it just ends up getting checked to us again on the turn where we're in the exact same situation, but now with an even lesser chance of getting worse hands to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

excellent response sleepyhead! my thing is, when i put these guys on ranges', our equity edge against them is quite significant. i am not really worried about an ace in this spot. i understand what the flop check does in terms of misrepresentation. this is a concept of huge importance in this situation! the effects of misrepresenting your hand CAN have a tremendous impact on how your opponents decide to proceed with their hand. for one, if the flop checks through, it gives button or sb a chance to hit one of their collective outs(i think they have hands like 77, JTs, or QJ far more often than an ace), OR gives them misinformation that leads them to think their pocket pair might be good. since the pot is small surely we shouldn't object to them staying in with 2 outers or drawing to runner, runner trips should we? i think against aggro opponents like this, they will a)bluff because you have shown weakness or b)they will hit a collective pair "out" that forces them to payoff or "value bet" themselves quite often or c)they are induced into thinking they have the best hand with their pp; you just need to give them some line to nibble on. i feel as if i'm not giving a good explanation, and alot of what you are saying is pretty standard 2p2 mantra that i once fully agreed with; given the new dynamics of alot of LHE games and the direction the games have taken with more "TAG"-like players it is necessary to explore other options to exploit their playing style. i think this is a less-than-perfect, yet valid example of one of these situations. we need to also keep in mind we simply open-raised from MP2. this should keep our range fairly wide as it will often look like a steal attempt. also, i think button will bet with a wide variety of hands that he may fold if we bet ourselves. sb being a decent player won't overcall on the flop most of the times b/c if he is strong enough to overcall he is usually strong enough to raise(a flopped boat or trips), but he will more often call a bet from button or c/r to try to get it HU. i would almost expect a c/r from him. thing is, say he c/r and we call he will rarely fire again on the turn with 44 or JTs or whatever. and if he does he will certainly relenquish by the river. if he doesn't i think we can probably find a fold as many players don't bet when it seems apparent that they will be called, unless it's a bet for value. in fact if sb overcalls our flop bet after button calls warning bells would be going off for me. true, we are sometimes stuck paying off an ace the occasional times someone has one, but i feel that this is more than made up for by the extra action we stand to gain given their ranges.

fwiw, i ballparked ranges as follows:

button: 66-44,A9s-A2s,KJs-KTs,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,76s,AJo,KQo

sb: 88-22,ATs-A2s,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AJo

outside of a couple more combos i feel like they would fold or 3bet much else(i.e. AQ or 99 OTB, etc.).

edit to say crap: i think i left the offsuit aces out except for AJ+. i can't see them calling pf with A2o-A9o but if your read is as such so be it. i assumed sb would fold those most of the time and button is 25/12 or whatever which isn't so loose that he's coldcalling with A8o i don't think. including these hands would certainly increase the likelihood of one of them having an ace, however.

[SeaEagle]

I was going to reply to your long post (thanks, by the way; excellent thoughts) but I thought much of your thinking was encapsulated in the short one:
[ QUOTE ]
I will put more thought into this (and some sleep) before I attempt a proper reply, but my gut instinct is that any information we glean from a flop bet, combined with the likelihood that this will get us heads up or at least make the turn and/or river easier to play, would more than cover that serious outside factors thing.


[/ QUOTE ]
What information can you glean from the flop? As you point out, a call or raise from button means nothing. A call or raise from sb probably narrows his range to PPs and Ax. The only time you can fold is if the action goes "raise, 3-bet" and sb is virtually never 3-betting here with any hand.

What is the benefit of getting HU? You'll gain almost nothing in equity and you'll give up any chance at future bets. You also don't really make it any easier to play future streets because raises/bets no longer mean as much (i.e. if you bet the turn and button raises you, he's not bluffing near as much in a 3-way pot as he is HU).

[ QUOTE ]
This is not a hand that we should be looking to get away from, at least not until we are told rather firmly that we need to think about that.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the crux of this hand. You want to get to showdown. You'd like to minimize the size of the final pot the 63% of the time you're drawing almost dead and you'd like to maximize the pot when your opponents are drawing almost dead. I believe WA/WB theory applies here even though the hand is 3-way.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
button: 66-44,A9s-A2s,KJs-KTs,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,76s,AJo,KQo

sb: 88-22,ATs-A2s,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AJo


[/ QUOTE ]
FWIW, this appears to be very close to my range. I had them calling a few more Axo and not calling with lower suited connectors, but those differences don't affect the percentage and EV calcs to any great degree.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
What is the benefit of getting HU? You'll gain almost nothing in equity and you'll give up any chance at future bets. You also don't really make it any easier to play future streets because raises/bets no longer mean as much (i.e. if you bet the turn and button raises you, he's not bluffing near as much in a 3-way pot as he is HU).

[/ QUOTE ]

i intended to mention this and forgot. the effects(and benefits)of keeping the pot "protected" by leaving it 3handed actually make the hand easier to play IMO. i also agree with the WA/WB sentiment as, even multiway, it applies(not the specific "line", but the idea in practice).

[MoreWineII]

This is textbook way ahead or way behind and my line would tend to be c/c, c/c, bet folding to a raise. I feel you usually extract the most this way from worse hands and lose the least to better ones.

Obviously I'm not calling two bets at any point.