Oh So Standard?

[Freelancer]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't feel that checking causes me to make mistakes. if you bet, there's a good chance you'll have a river decision, so it's possible to make a mistake there too.

i don't think checking is a bad play for image either, it can cause thinking villains to bluff you less, etc.

i think both plays are fine (though i do prefer checking); what's important is understanding the reasons to make the plays.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can agree with that. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

if you understand why you can also make the least mistakes in the rest of the hand so yeah its incredibly important...

[Dan Bitel]

OK,

tannej and freelancer, both checking this flop and betting it are fine.

Reasons for checking are pretty obvious. Not enough worse hands call you, and you can still get value out of those hands later. WA/WB, no better hands fold, easier to get to showdown etc etc.

Reasons for betting are that we do get some value, we're less likely to make mistakes later in the hand, we protect vs possible 6 outers etc.

Irish pete,

just b/c we rr preflop, DOES NOT mean we have to cbet. And if we do cbet, its certianly not for information. Lets say you bet and he calls...what information have you got? Lets say he raises, are you sure he isn't bluff raising thinking you have AK? Like tannej has said, on the turn, we might fold vs some...call 1 barrel vs most and call 2 barrels vs very aggressive players

all,

I don't like the 3bet preflop here too much, for these kind of situations exactly. I'm much more happy vs an UTG raiser when i have position to just call and play some poker postflop.

[Freelancer]

[ QUOTE ]
OK,

tannej and freelancer, both checking this flop and betting it are fine.

Reasons for checking are pretty obvious. Not enough worse hands call you, and you can still get value out of those hands later. WA/WB, no better hands fold, easier to get to showdown etc etc.

Reasons for betting are that we do get some value, we're less likely to make mistakes later in the hand, we protect vs possible 6 outers etc.

Irish pete,

just b/c we rr preflop, DOES NOT mean we have to cbet. And if we do cbet, its certianly not for information. Lets say you bet and he calls...what information have you got? Lets say he raises, are you sure he isn't bluff raising thinking you have AK? Like tannej has said, on the turn, we might fold vs some...call 1 barrel vs most and call 2 barrels vs very aggressive players

all,

I don't like the 3bet preflop here too much, for these kind of situations exactly. I'm much more happy vs an UTG raiser when i have position to just call and play some poker postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely and its about the same thing I mean. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
Been having soo much trouble lately with 99-JJ postflop after 3 betting preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]


It almost feels sometimes like people are looking for "permission" not to play JJ-99 aggressively preflop. Well here you go: <waves hand authoritatively, blesses calling with JJ-99> It's ok to stop three-betting preflop. Problem solved.

Your three-bet here with those stacks makes sense if your opponent will call often preflop and lay down on the flop with less than top pair, such that you are gaining value by putting in money preflop, or if you believe you can go to the felt with second or third pair profitably. The latter requires either a hyperaggressive game or a complete chip spew. Neither seem to be the case here, especially because you are debating whether to cbet.

Matt

[Abramovic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Been having soo much trouble lately with 99-JJ postflop after 3 betting preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]


It almost feels sometimes like people are looking for "permission" not to play JJ-99 aggressively preflop. Well here you go: <waves hand authoritatively, blesses calling with JJ-99> It's ok to stop three-betting preflop. Problem solved.

Your three-bet here with those stacks makes sense if your opponent will call often preflop and lay down on the flop with less than top pair, such that you are gaining value by putting in money preflop, or if you believe you can go to the felt with second or third pair profitably. The latter requires either a hyperaggressive game or a complete chip spew. Neither seem to be the case here, especially because you are debating whether to cbet.

Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

So, as played, to cbet, or not to cbet?

[Scottery]

I play this exactly the same.

I think he has KQ.

GL

Scott.

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
So, as played, to cbet, or not to cbet?

[/ QUOTE ]

cbet hard.

[poppingit]

I still maintain that the hard was quite standard and that a cbet is needed in order to fold out hands that may outdraw us. Betting is not always for value but also to protect our hand. Villian has overs to our pair here very often and checking the flop cant be the correct move here. There are hands we beat (AK) that we want to fold out and because we have position we can easily manouvere ourselves on turn and river if we are called on the flop. As the title suggests, this is oh so standard.

[bias1]

bet flop to
a) get value from multiple draws
b) get value from second pair (which sticks around more then it should) and the PPs that "put you on AK"
c) balance out the times you bet with AA/KK/AK

[fees]

you DEFINITLY dont need to 3b pref with these hands, but you cant flatcall/3b all the time.. seems exploitable or just not as +ev as mixing it up.. as for the flop checking and betting are both good.. but it depends on your opponents range.. is he spewy in 3b pots.. does he call alot of 3bs IP or OOP.. will he be hero cally.. etc.. pretty striaght forward stuff if you think about it in these terms