KK and terrible flop

[Shattered]

[ QUOTE ]
I c-bet here because I also c-bet if I had an ace. If Im in position I check behind. Yes I realize a c-bet turns our hand into a bluff, but so what? Were not trying to get value really out of anything. Were trying to take the pot down now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet here every time if I have an ace as well. I also bet if I have Q high, a pair of 4s, whatever, you have a ton of fold equity. I don't bet here with a pair of kings. Do you see the difference? Kings have showdown value and don't need to bet for protection. I bet jacks here, but never kings.

Why are you trying to take down the pot now? There's few reasons to break the Fundamental Theorem of Poker and allow your opponent to play perfectly, and the one that everyone seems to be saying is to prevent you from making a mistake on later streets (as evidenced by people saying you have to bet to find out where you are.) The thing is, it's almost impossible to make a larger mistake later: It's not like you're going to be calling 2 PSBs. In fact, you get the same amount of information for the same amount of money after villain's turn action. Keeping the pot small and take it to showdown, maybe throwing in one valuebet or calling one bet along the way, is much better than trying to win just what's in the pot now by essentially bluffing at it.

[ QUOTE ]
C/c is pretty bad here as youre going to have villain fire at you with a large part of his range but the problem is he could easily fire the turn again.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just wrong. It takes a special type of player to double barrel bluff a board this dry, and villain is the polar opposite of that player.

It seems to me that everyone's so terrified of not knowing whether their hand is good or not that they just want to bet, getting the information at the cost of a lot of EV.

[Profish2285]

You just contradicted yourself. You said you agree with betting but now you dont because youre getting the info at the cost of alot of EV. Betting here allows you to set the price of the hand and ideally take the pot down. It doesnt take a special type of player to double barrel, he could have a weak ace and think its good, which it is. So you check the flop, face a psb and fold. Or you can bet the flop your size, get folds sometimes, and fold to a raise. You got better info by betting and the times you pick up the pot by being aggressive negate the times you get raised.

[slush420]

I would bet here like everytime as fish will call gutshot str8 draws and also check them behind. By not betting you are giving them the opportunity to catch a free card when in reality you can make that extra bet from them every time their gutshot doesn't make it. This is a clear bet as it is for info and value as well.

[HappyElephant]

With bet and c/c you lose one bet if you are beat but with c/c you win a bet if he bluffs, so why is c/c so bad?

[Shattered]

I give up. I'm fairly sure no one's even reading my posts. Profish, you seem to be just skimming for buzzwords as you seem to have gotten every point of my post wrong. Maybe that's my fault for presenting my point of view unclearly, but stuff like how you could think I was referring to him betting twice with an ace when I clearly said double barrel _bluff_ is beyond me.

[Profish2285]

I dont skim through your post, I analyze each part. Ahh forget it it seems like every post I make you think is wrong so just ignore my advice then please.

[slush420]

HappyElephant.. c/c is bad here because this player doesn't bluff often enough. His AF is 0.6.

[bsball8806]

c/f or c/c this flop is so bad. A LP player is calling our continuation bets with most anything, straight draws and pocket pairs included. Just because it's a 3bet pot and an A shows up, it doesn't necessarily mean villain has an A. JJ and QQ probably call this flop too.

That being said, your flop bet is too small. I hope you don't usually continuation bet 56% of the pot. This just smells like a bluff. You should be betting at least 3.75, I probably bet 4.

The turn is a little more tricky. He has an extremely low aggression factor, and he just called your flop bet. I think it was Pokey that said that when it comes to aggression factors, it's plays that seem out of the ordinary you have to watch for. With an AF that low, him calling your c-bet defines almost nothing except the fact that he likes his hand: he could have JQ, KJ, 99, JJ, QQ, AQ, or even a 10. Calling is just what he does. I think with most of these hands, given his low aggression, he probably checks behind the turn. A 10 or strong A probably bets, but the others either try for a free card, or try for showdown ASAP.

If he checks behind, and the river is a blank, c/c a reasonable bet (at this point he may try to either valuebet/bluff his JJ/QQ/99/KJ.

[Baintz]

I'm with Shattered on this one, his thoughts are spot in imo.

Yes I bet an ace here, as I do with 44 or 76s. However, sometimes I'll check the flop with AK, checking more often with AA, sometimes checking a T too.

C/C lets him bluff at it if he's beat, and your average villain is not betting 2 streets here without an A or T.

If we bet, he may call with his 99 or w/e. We're forced to check the turn, and he may turn his hand into a bluff on turn.

It gets said a lot on these forums and it's true - we're not looking to make the hand easier to play, , we're looking to make the most +EV play. I can't see how betting this flop is the most +EV.

[Shattered]

I don't think everything you post is wrong, in fact I respect a lot of your advice. I just don't feel the need to respond to the ones I agree with. I'll give it one more try.

Your line: Bet/fold flop, check/fold turn, check/fold river.

My line: Check/call flop, check/fold turn and check/fold river. Maybe throw in a valuebet on the turn or river if flop went check/check.

First off, reasons to bet as opposed to check.
1. For protection. Villain has at most 4 outs and isn't going to be stacking you even if he hits.
2. For value. No worse hand calls.
3. As a bluff. No better hand folds
4. For information. This alone is usually not enough to bet anyways. In this case, it most definitely is not, as you get THE SAME INFORMATION when you check/call: Another bet means he has you beat.

In both cases, you've invested the same amount of money after the flop and you're not going to be putting in any more, as villain will virtually never be betting twice without you crushed. The only difference is, in my scenario, sometimes you're still ahead after the flop. In your line, you never are.

With that, I'm done with this thread.