0 barrelling

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is bad poker IMO. Poker about putting your opponent in a position to make a mistake. The fact is, if you bet here, he's almost always making a mistake by calling if he doesn't have a SD'able hand, a 5 or a 7. This is because he should face another bet from you on the turn and then he will have little choice but to fold UI (thus making his flop call bad) or make a hugely -EV call(in the broad sense obviously not in this specific case unless he has less then JT high).

Now, are there opponents where this is a good check? Sure. If the guy is going to peel the flop and turn in this tiny pot with Q8 or is going to c/r you with 2x or random overcards, you should check, but the average small stakes player is not this loose or this aggressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it mean that when I call with Q8s or Q9o in the BB against a raiser on the Btn or CO, and the flop is
346 rainbow.
I check, the raiser c-bets and.... I should almost always fold? right?
34

[/ QUOTE ]

Mostly yes, but not always. It depends on the player and what you expect to get out of him if you make a pair. If he's the kind to check behind on the turn when he has nothing, peeling is ok. Also against good hand readers, you can't just fold every time you have nothing in this spot or you'll let them play perfectly against you.

[waffle]

I'm done w/ this thread, but I want to clear up a misconception that I often see on this board.

[ QUOTE ]

Let's recall another key fact here the pot is 4sb. If we bet and win it more then 20% of the time, we've made a profit. On the turn the pot's 3BB. If we bet and win it more then 25% of the time, then we make a profit.


[/ QUOTE ]

Let's recall another key fact. If you bet at a 4sb pot and win it more than 20% of the time, this proves that betting is more profitable than open folding. But it does not prove that betting is more profitable than checking.

[milesdyson]

Actually it is possible that we can bet and win 20% of the time or slightly more and still have that be the worst of all options. This would only be the case against a select type of villain, but it's worth noting.

edit: I didn't notice you mentioned open-folding. Yes, that's all it proves.

[Leader]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm done w/ this thread, but I want to clear up a misconception that I often see on this board.

[ QUOTE ]

Let's recall another key fact here the pot is 4sb. If we bet and win it more then 20% of the time, we've made a profit. On the turn the pot's 3BB. If we bet and win it more then 25% of the time, then we make a profit.


[/ QUOTE ]

Let's recall another key fact. If you bet at a 4sb pot and win it more than 20% of the time, this proves that betting is more profitable than open folding. But it does not prove that betting is more profitable than checking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that's true, but the value of checking is 0 + or - your IO when you hit + value from future bluffs. In the vast majority of cases, bet-bet on low/drawy boards or bet-check on dry/high is going to take down the pot well in excess of the break even point. You're not going to make that up in the small fraction of cases where you improve to a better hand and get paid. Now if your flop bet takes the pot down 21% of the time and the turn bet takes it down 27% of the time and you don't have a SD'able hand, you might have a case on some boards against some players.