NLTRN Low Level Theory-Type Situation

[cwar]

Why would hands like AK etc call the flop? This doesnt seem like the type of villain to float.

[ChicagoRy]

I see very weak preflop players call down bets with AK all the time. When they call preflop that generally means a flop call with a big hand like that in my experience.

I only see players like this once out of every 20 or so matches though. I think they generally will call though.

Betting the flop if you think he is likely to fold non overpairs, I agree with that.

If you thought he'd likely call with most overcards would you still bet the flop?

[cwar]

[ QUOTE ]
I see very weak preflop players call down bets with AK all the time. When they call preflop that generally means a flop call with a big hand like that in my experience.

I only see players like this once out of every 20 or so matches though. I think they generally will call though.

Betting the flop if you think he is likely to fold non overpairs, I agree with that.

If you thought he'd likely call with most overcards would you still bet the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course I would hed be putting in more money with a weak hand we crush.

[ChicagoRy]

So about half the time you're 77-23 against overcards, half the time you're dominated against overpairs. You have also not gained any decent knowledge about what he holds that you couldn't assume when he called preflop.

Isn't it better to check the flop if he's calling with overcards?

[Dromar]

[ QUOTE ]
So about half the time you're 77-23 against overcards, half the time you're dominated against overpairs. You have also not gained any decent knowledge about what he holds that you couldn't assume when he called preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Betting the flop could help us get information if you need it so badly. Personally I think betting/raising for information is usually an excuse to give away money.

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't it better to check the flop if he's calling with overcards?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're asking if it's better to not put money in when we have a good chance of being ahead. I assume that's as opposed to not putting money in when he's almost exclusively got a big hand. The answer is no. If you're more likely to be ahead, you should be happier to put money in.

Perhaps you're behind more than you're ahead. But it's still better to bet when you might get called by worse hands than to bet when you'll only get called by better ones.

I'd bet approx. 100% of the time on this hypothetical hand, BTW. And if I knew he'd call my bet with any two overs, I'd probably push all in.

[Spacer]

[ QUOTE ]
So about half the time you're 77-23 against overcards, half the time you're dominated against overpairs. You have also not gained any decent knowledge about what he holds that you couldn't assume when he called preflop.

Isn't it better to check the flop if he's calling with overcards?

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet from > 1/2 pot to pot on flop, fold to any significant aggression on turn, doubt he c/r's flop, but fold if he does.

If he calls with overcards, and lucks out, that's fine, we've his call is a mistake, he is calling with bad odds and will make us money long term.

Why would we give him a chance to catch an pair here for free, by checking the flop?

A lot of the time a player that passive will fold all but overpairs here to the flop bet, and if he calls the flop bet, we know not to put any more into the pot unless we improve.

That said, most of the time if he checks the turn and bets on the river (<1/2pot?) I probably call there.