flop check

[Chipspin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the guy isn't capable of 3-betting the turn with a draw or air, then I'd raise the turn after checking the flop. There's a strong possibility that turned 4s has given him a spade draw or a gutshot, and he'll have to call the raise. And if he 3-bets, it's an easy fold.

Additionally, the raise might fold out A8/99/TT.

If called, take a free SD.

[/ QUOTE ]

a significant portion of our A7s value is coming from bluff equity. raising on the turn destroys this value. in addition, he probably is capable of 3betting a worse hand on the turn and as such the table may be turned on us and not only do we lose the bluff equity we gain by calling the turn we lose a second bet and the pot the times we are bluffed off the worse hand or could have called to try to outdraw a hand we are behind with outs.

as far as folding out A8, 99 and TT goes, do you *really* think he isn't 3betting 99 and TT pf? or even A8s as far as that goes? so that leaves A8o and a discounted A8s which is relatively few combos in relation to his total hand range.

an argument can be made for betting the flop. checking the flop and raising the turn does not make much sense to me in this situation given the villain, the pot size and our holding.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am confused.

First, if he is capable of 3-betting the turn with worse hands, then what I said has no bearing.

Second, I thought you said he was not aggro PF, thereby making 99/TT possibilities.

And third, you are assuming he doesn't have a hand at all on the turn (or he has very little equity) and therefore you are assuming he will only fold to a raise. If this is the only possibility, then yes, of course, don't raise. But I don't think we can just assume he has air here; the turn card added a lot of draws, and if we are ahead, I think we ought to charge those draws the maximum. Especially if charging those draws costs us the same as calling down.

[James.]

[ QUOTE ]
First, if he is capable of 3-betting the turn with worse hands, then what I said has no bearing.

[/ QUOTE ]

gotcha.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, I thought you said he was not aggro PF, thereby making 99/TT possibilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah. good point. it's been a while since i posted this hand and actually forgot some of the details. he's a 7% pfr which is relatively nonaggro pf but we still need to include TT. i'll give you 99 is possibly a limp for him.

[ QUOTE ]
And third, you are assuming he doesn't have a hand at all on the turn (or he has very little equity) and therefore you are assuming he will only fold to a raise. If this is the only possibility, then yes, of course, don't raise. But I don't think we can just assume he has air here; the turn card added a lot of draws, and if we are ahead, I think we ought to charge those draws the maximum. Especially if charging those draws costs us the same as calling down.

[/ QUOTE ]

most of the time he misses the flop. if he did hit the flop, he's usually betting. he does checkraise his good hands on occasion as well. since he mostly bets when he has a piece of the board, that would reinforce that he likely holds air or a very weak hand.

i'm not saying he never has a draw here, but i am saying it is a minority of the time he holds a draw. also, he bets the river improved or not so this means that calling is superior. why? because we still get 2 bets in the times he is drawing, we don't get faced with folding to a 3bet or putting 3 bets in as an significant underdog, and we get 2 bets in the times he has a bluff/very weak hand he would have folded to a turn raise. plus, there is some chance if we raise the turn and he calls we get faced with a river donk putting us in a tough position.

as far as "charging him to draw" and protecting our hand goes, given the pot size and his range this is not really that important. he's not folding a better hand and possibly 3betting a worse one. not a good recipe for a turn raise, but we discussed that prior. thanks for the feedback. i appreciate the debate.