NL200 on Full Tilt. My KK runs into heat on a monchrome board.

[wrkingtobegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
??? I thought you were just calling this flop to raise the turn, then I thought you were just calling this turn to rai the river. Duddddee....you have an overpair in a 3-bet preflop hand just push. Your only worried about qq/aa

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell are you? Can you leave this forum sometime soon please?

[/ QUOTE ]

I post mostly on SSNL, and I'm here wondering why you think our line is good: a) checking this flop b)flat calling turn
We have no information on this hand because it was played so passively-villain could be bluffing with AK for all we know. While raising the turn could be a tossup, bet this flop always and its not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you give your reasoning for why you think betting this flop is 'not even close'? I do pretty well in the FT 1/2NL game and I happen to think it is close, as do some other good players. Not saying you're wrong, as I very well could be the one that is wrong, but I'd like to know why you feel the arguement is so one-sided that betting the flop has to be right.

[/ QUOTE ]

By checking the flop behind, villain's turn betting range suddenly becomes much wider than it would have been if we bet. Our hand is very vulnerable. By showing initial weakness and checking, not only do we give villain a free card (villain could very easily have a flush draw with JJ or 1010 which he would probably fold if we bet, also aced kingx), but we make it so that we have no idea where we are at in the hand after villains turn bet. That's why if we are passive enough to check this flop, we should at least be aggressive enough to raise this turn. If we get 3bet, or if we get called and donked into on the river, we can be almost certain that we are beat. Instead, we just call the turn as well, giving us no information and setting up a very tough river decision, and a much much much greater likelihood that villain is misrepresenting the strength of his hand/bluffing. So checking this flop and just calling this turn is bad because:
a) it gives us no information about villain's hand
b)it makes it more likely that villain is bluffing, further complicating our decision
c) denies us the chance to check behind on the turn or river if we choose, to keep the pot small

pot control is very important on hands like this. counterintuitively, betting the flop gives us more pot control here because it gives us the chance to check behind on the turn or river to keep the pot smaller. By checking this flop, we are giving up our positional advantage.

thats where i'm coming from flytrap

[flytrap]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
??? I thought you were just calling this flop to raise the turn, then I thought you were just calling this turn to rai the river. Duddddee....you have an overpair in a 3-bet preflop hand just push. Your only worried about qq/aa

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell are you? Can you leave this forum sometime soon please?

[/ QUOTE ]

I post mostly on SSNL, and I'm here wondering why you think our line is good: a) checking this flop b)flat calling turn
We have no information on this hand because it was played so passively-villain could be bluffing with AK for all we know. While raising the turn could be a tossup, bet this flop always and its not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you give your reasoning for why you think betting this flop is 'not even close'? I do pretty well in the FT 1/2NL game and I happen to think it is close, as do some other good players. Not saying you're wrong, as I very well could be the one that is wrong, but I'd like to know why you feel the arguement is so one-sided that betting the flop has to be right.

[/ QUOTE ]

By checking the flop behind, villain's turn betting range suddenly becomes much wider than it would have been if we bet. Our hand is very vulnerable. By showing initial weakness and checking, not only do we give villain a free card (villain could very easily have a flush draw with JJ or 1010 which he would probably fold if we bet, also aced kingx), but we make it so that we have no idea where we are at in the hand after villains turn bet. That's why if we are passive enough to check this flop, we should at least be aggressive enough to raise this turn. If we get 3bet, or if we get called and donked into on the river, we can be almost certain that we are beat. Instead, we just call the turn as well, giving us no information and setting up a very tough river decision, and a much much much greater likelihood that villain is misrepresenting the strength of his hand/bluffing. So checking this flop and just calling this turn is bad because:
a) it gives us no information about villain's hand
b)it makes it more likely that villain is bluffing, further complicating our decision
c) denies us the chance to check behind on the turn or river if we choose, to keep the pot small

pot control is very important on hands like this. counterintuitively, betting the flop gives us more pot control here because it gives us the chance to check behind on the turn or river to keep the pot smaller. By checking this flop, we are giving up our positional advantage.

thats where i'm coming from flytrap

[/ QUOTE ]
I see what you're saying, and most players would probably bet this flop, but when you mentioned that his turn bet range became much wider, that's EXACTLY what I want when I checked the flop. I now get value wheras he may have less than nothing and would give up on the flop. I also get to see if a safe card comes off on the turn, and how he reacts. It's tough to get value out of these hands. Also, there are normally about 3-4 regulars at every 1/2NL table, so mixing it up, and showing you're willing to check a good hand on the flop is very important. I rarely fail to C-bet against 1 player in position, so this is a good time to mix it up, and make villain think he has a stealing opportunity.

[wrkingtobegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
??? I thought you were just calling this flop to raise the turn, then I thought you were just calling this turn to rai the river. Duddddee....you have an overpair in a 3-bet preflop hand just push. Your only worried about qq/aa

[/ QUOTE ]

Who the hell are you? Can you leave this forum sometime soon please?

[/ QUOTE ]

I post mostly on SSNL, and I'm here wondering why you think our line is good: a) checking this flop b)flat calling turn
We have no information on this hand because it was played so passively-villain could be bluffing with AK for all we know. While raising the turn could be a tossup, bet this flop always and its not even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you give your reasoning for why you think betting this flop is 'not even close'? I do pretty well in the FT 1/2NL game and I happen to think it is close, as do some other good players. Not saying you're wrong, as I very well could be the one that is wrong, but I'd like to know why you feel the arguement is so one-sided that betting the flop has to be right.

[/ QUOTE ]

By checking the flop behind, villain's turn betting range suddenly becomes much wider than it would have been if we bet. Our hand is very vulnerable. By showing initial weakness and checking, not only do we give villain a free card (villain could very easily have a flush draw with JJ or 1010 which he would probably fold if we bet, also aced kingx), but we make it so that we have no idea where we are at in the hand after villains turn bet. That's why if we are passive enough to check this flop, we should at least be aggressive enough to raise this turn. If we get 3bet, or if we get called and donked into on the river, we can be almost certain that we are beat. Instead, we just call the turn as well, giving us no information and setting up a very tough river decision, and a much much much greater likelihood that villain is misrepresenting the strength of his hand/bluffing. So checking this flop and just calling this turn is bad because:
a) it gives us no information about villain's hand
b)it makes it more likely that villain is bluffing, further complicating our decision
c) denies us the chance to check behind on the turn or river if we choose, to keep the pot small

pot control is very important on hands like this. counterintuitively, betting the flop gives us more pot control here because it gives us the chance to check behind on the turn or river to keep the pot smaller. By checking this flop, we are giving up our positional advantage.

thats where i'm coming from flytrap

[/ QUOTE ]
I see what you're saying, and most players would probably bet this flop, but when you mentioned that his turn bet range became much wider, that's EXACTLY what I want when I checked the flop. I now get value wheras he may have less than nothing and would give up on the flop. I also get to see if a safe card comes off on the turn, and how he reacts. It's tough to get value out of these hands. Also, there are normally about 3-4 regulars at every 1/2NL table, so mixing it up, and showing you're willing to check a good hand on the flop is very important. I rarely fail to C-bet against 1 player in position, so this is a good time to mix it up, and make villain think he has a stealing opportunity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mixing it up is definitely good, but in a vacuum it is definitely better to bet this flop. Your looking at this hand from a maximizing value perspective, but I think we need to look at it from a minimize losses perspective. With the preflop action of a raise of 10Xbb, this is a DANGEROUS hand. Even if villain has nothing now, roughly 25% of the deck (any diamond, any ace)can come on the turn or river and could easily give villain a better hand. Thats a 50% chance by the river that villain will improve if he's drawing with a flush draw or AK. More importantly than this however, this is one of those hands I don't think we can play in the dark. I think we need to find out early in the hand if villain has a hand or not, and use our positional advantage to check behind on the turn if he calls. By not doing this, we are faced with a very large river bet in a very large pot, and it could mean alot of things. This is especially true because AQ and QQ fall fairly neatly into villains range preflop range here.