|
|
#21
03-02-2007, 06:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
If he calls a $10 bet into a $26 pot, we know he isn't getting the odds for a flush or straight draw. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, he is. If you bet so that he's getting 2.5:1 on a 8/9 out draw, it's you who is making the mistake. Not him when he calls you. 
|
|
#22
03-02-2007, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
After reading all the responses, I think a lot it comes down to how good of a hand reader he is. I think the worse he is, the more likely you should be to check. and vice verse if he is good. Of course you also have to factor in how you would play stronger hands here. Am I on the right track with this thinking? [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Even against good hand readers it is good to check this flop. You are going to be checking this flop with a pretty wide range. For one thing, I don't think that checking gives away our hand (I'd check some weak aces, definitely the nut flush draw with the A and tiny pairs). But even if you only check this flop with 99-KK, it is still not THAT bad. It is kinda what samoleus said about sometimes letting people know what you have if you can make good decisions based on that.
|
|
#23
03-02-2007, 07:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] After reading all the responses, I think a lot it comes down to how good of a hand reader he is. I think the worse he is, the more likely you should be to check. and vice verse if he is good. Of course you also have to factor in how you would play stronger hands here. Am I on the right track with this thinking? [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Even against good hand readers it is good to check this flop. You are going to be checking this flop with a pretty wide range. For one thing, I don't think that checking gives away our hand (I'd check some weak aces, definitely the nut flush draw with the A and tiny pairs). But even if you only check this flop with 99-KK, it is still not THAT bad. It is kinda what samoleus said about sometimes letting people know what you have if you can make good decisions based on that. [/ QUOTE ] Am I reading that right? You're betting A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] but checking A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on this flop?
|
|
#24
03-02-2007, 07:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] After reading all the responses, I think a lot it comes down to how good of a hand reader he is. I think the worse he is, the more likely you should be to check. and vice verse if he is good. Of course you also have to factor in how you would play stronger hands here. Am I on the right track with this thinking? [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Even against good hand readers it is good to check this flop. You are going to be checking this flop with a pretty wide range. For one thing, I don't think that checking gives away our hand (I'd check some weak aces, definitely the nut flush draw with the A and tiny pairs). But even if you only check this flop with 99-KK, it is still not THAT bad. It is kinda what samoleus said about sometimes letting people know what you have if you can make good decisions based on that. [/ QUOTE ] Am I reading that right? You're betting A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] but checking A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on this flop? [/ QUOTE ] yes
|
|
#25
03-02-2007, 08:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] After reading all the responses, I think a lot it comes down to how good of a hand reader he is. I think the worse he is, the more likely you should be to check. and vice verse if he is good. Of course you also have to factor in how you would play stronger hands here. Am I on the right track with this thinking? [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Even against good hand readers it is good to check this flop. You are going to be checking this flop with a pretty wide range. For one thing, I don't think that checking gives away our hand (I'd check some weak aces, definitely the nut flush draw with the A and tiny pairs). But even if you only check this flop with 99-KK, it is still not THAT bad. It is kinda what samoleus said about sometimes letting people know what you have if you can make good decisions based on that. [/ QUOTE ] Am I reading that right? You're betting A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] but checking A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on this flop? [/ QUOTE ] yes [/ QUOTE ] Ok you've blown my mind. Why would you check it when you've got so much more equity?
|
|
#26
03-02-2007, 10:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
Another thing to consider is are there really that many hands with aces in them that villain could hold here? I don't think so. He pitches most Axs hands and reraises most all the time with AJs/AQ/AK hands (I guess this could depend a bit on your image but in this game people are reraising or folding AQ/AK).
Problem with checking is that you would never check behind AK/AQ/sets on this drawy of a board. So we are telling villain that we don't have an ace. This isn't necessarily a bad thing as he'll fire on the turn with most everything and we can call his bluff. So if we check I think we should be calling two streets unless the board gets really bad because he'll know we don't have the ace. If you bet (which is fine to do) it should fold out most of his non-ace holdings (except maybe 99/TT and of course draws) he might c/r some draws and he's prob c/r sets as well. All in all I like checking with the intention of calling down
|
|
#27
03-02-2007, 11:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NL200 | KK, Ace high coordinated board, Tough Opponent
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] After reading all the responses, I think a lot it comes down to how good of a hand reader he is. I think the worse he is, the more likely you should be to check. and vice verse if he is good. Of course you also have to factor in how you would play stronger hands here. Am I on the right track with this thinking? [/ QUOTE ] Not really. Even against good hand readers it is good to check this flop. You are going to be checking this flop with a pretty wide range. For one thing, I don't think that checking gives away our hand (I'd check some weak aces, definitely the nut flush draw with the A and tiny pairs). But even if you only check this flop with 99-KK, it is still not THAT bad. It is kinda what samoleus said about sometimes letting people know what you have if you can make good decisions based on that. [/ QUOTE ] Am I reading that right? You're betting A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] but checking A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] on this flop? [/ QUOTE ] yes [/ QUOTE ] Ok you've blown my mind. Why would you check it when you've got so much more equity? [/ QUOTE ] YOu only gain equity when someone calls, and giving a free card here is not a big concern.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
