50NL AKs hows my line?

[Micro Donk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not just bet $20-25 on the flop instead of over betting your entire stack? [I am thinking there is $30 in the pot on the flop]

[/ QUOTE ]

No one has Hero covered, so the flop bet is really only about a $35 bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually SB has hero covered

[/ QUOTE ]

you mean the SB that folded PF?

[slush420]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not just bet $20-25 on the flop instead of over betting your entire stack? [I am thinking there is $30 in the pot on the flop]

[/ QUOTE ]

No one has Hero covered, so the flop bet is really only about a $35 bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually SB has hero covered

[/ QUOTE ]

SB folded pre flop

[Draidin]

LOL yes! that guy! ,->

[mickb70]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Re-raise pre-flop gets a pot size we like and we hit so our stack is going in. I like check-raise on flop and we are rarely getting called by anything we beat by leading out. Turn is not likely to hurt us in case that it gets checked all the way around.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is terrible advice. Nothing can hurt us? How about a J?! a Q?! both make 1 card straights. Any 9 or 10 could allow villains crappy 2nd or 3rd pair to become best as well. I bet $25 on the flop, call shove, or just shove any turn if called on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK I said turn is not _likely_ to hurt us which you read as nothing is going to hurt us. You've named 14 cards that _could_ hurt us. I still think one 31 out of 45 turn cards is a _likely_ outcome. Agreed?

We both agree that all our money is going in the middle by the turn. So we would bet to fold out either:

1) hands that are beating us (someone folding a set of 9s or 10s????)
2) a hand that could improve to beat us on the turn. (AQ, AJ?, AT??, QT?, JT, J9??, 89)

We might check to get a bet out of a hand we beat:

QQ,JJ,KQ,KJ?.

So in the event that players both check (lets say 80% chance) and turn card is bad (29% chance) and it has improved someone (lets say 2players/4cards 50%) then there is an 11% chance that checking is a bad line. Is there less than a 11% chance we may induce a bet from a hand we beat? Plug in any numbers you like for likelihood of checking around and arrive at the conclusion that my advice is terrible (i.e. betting is clearly better than checking)

[Delzek15]

Seems very standard... Your bet is only $35 which is pot sized.

[matrix]

seems OK - but I much prefer a c/r all-in on this flop.

BOTH UTG & CO are very aggressive players - and will likely see our check as weakness - CO plays over half the hands he is dealt and bets/raises TWICE as often as he calls so I think he bets a much larger part of his range that we have beat than he calls our flop bet with.

If he has the straight or KT or a set then it's going in anyway - if he has the straight draw or TPworseK he's going to bet OR call our bet - but if he has a small pp or some trash that whiffed he is going to fold to our flop bet more often than not - but if we check this flop with the intention of shoving any turn if it's checked through we give him some rope to hang himself with.

Vs TWO aggro opponents check raising here is not FPS imo - it's trying to use their natural tendencies against them.

vs an aggro and a Loosepassive - I like your line here - it's not bad vs these two I just think that c/r is slightly better.

[72over]

There's no need to check raise here. The pot is tasty enough and you can't afford to let them draw cheap. Bet pot on the flop.

[thoman8r]

I agree with matrix. You guys have to realize that a 83/28/1.2 and a 50/14/2.7 are both VERY aggressive post-flop. The chances that both check behind are pretty slim. Actually if both do check behind it's probably more likely that we are beat already than if one of them bets.

[stylos]

[ QUOTE ]
BOTH UTG & CO are very aggressive players - and will likely see our check as weakness - CO plays over half the hands he is dealt and bets/raises TWICE as often as he calls so I think he bets a much larger part of his range that we have beat than he calls our flop bet with.
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with matrix. You guys have to realize that a 83/28/1.2 and a 50/14/2.7 are both VERY aggressive post-flop. The chances that both check behind are pretty slim. Actually if both do check behind it's probably more likely that we are beat already than if one of them bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Am I missing something here or is 1.2 AF far from VERY aggressive post-flop...even 2.7 AF I wouldn't consider VERY aggressive post-flop. OP only has 30 hands logged with them also, which isn't exactly the the ideal number of hands to make a read dependent play on a large pot drawy board. I like the line as is.

[Kasane]

Considering their vpips, they're very, very aggro.

I still don't think I agree with c/r -- but it's not as awful as some have said.