Autobettor flops top set

[sweetzer]

I realize that comments are easier with specific hands and sets of opponents, however this situation occurs often enough to have value as a general question.

I have a tight aggressive style. If I have raised preflop I routinely autobet the flop if first to act. Yet on those occasions where I have flopped top set, etc., this can be costly. On the other hand, on showdown, revealing that I bet out with top set certainly lends credence to the majority of times that I bet with squat.

I would like comments first on the autobet, especially regarding number of opponents. Second, how suspicious does it look to check the flop after raising, especially with an aggressive image. Lastly, what seems the optimum percentage of times to bet as the preflop aggressor if you are not going to autobet?

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I realize that comments are easier with specific hands and sets of opponents, however this situation occurs often enough to have value as a general question.

I have a tight aggressive style. If I have raised preflop I routinely autobet the flop if first to act. Yet on those occasions where I have flopped top set, etc., this can be costly. On the other hand, on showdown, revealing that I bet out with top set certainly lends credence to the majority of times that I bet with squat.

I would like comments first on the autobet, especially regarding number of opponents. Second, how suspicious does it look to check the flop after raising, especially with an aggressive image. Lastly, what seems the optimum percentage of times to bet as the preflop aggressor if you are not going to autobet?

[/ QUOTE ]

I try not to auto- anything. No matter what poker "rules" people try to impress upon you, almost nothing is truly invariable. I just posted a hand elsewhere on the forums and someone gave me the old "misplayed on every street" line but I don't agree because I think the situation warranted my actions. The same applies to your situation: sometimes it will be appropriate to check your monster, sometimes not.

OK, I know that doesn't help you at all. So, while I don't have any hard-and-fast percentages to give you, I very rarely check when I flop a set. Position comes into play very strongly, here. I am a lot more likely to check if someone aggressive is behind me and a lot less likely to check if I am on the button and no one else has bet. However, sometimes I find myself in a situation where I let it check through even if I am last to act. It's very situation but I almost always bet when I hit something like a set. I usually bet when I miss, too, if I raised pre-flop but I would not call it an autobet.

SpaceAce

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
I would like comments first on the autobet

[/ QUOTE ]
autobet is wrong. auto-anything is wrong.

kenny

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
autobet is wrong. auto-anything is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think this kind of response could have been safely predicted, and it doesn't really offer anything to the original poster.

ONLINE in general people are very wary of flop checks indicating a set. if you're playing at a casino, unless you are checking AK on an A72 flop occasionally this sort of play is going to be extremely flagged. in general mid-to-high games, i think betting is more deceptive. if you've got pocket kings and they flop is k75, though, it's very unlikely they hit any of it. i'd check something like that against non-overaggressive opponents.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
autobet is wrong. auto-anything is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think this kind of response could have been safely predicted, and it doesn't really offer anything to the original poster.

ONLINE in general people are very wary of flop checks indicating a set. if you're playing at a casino, unless you are checking AK on an A72 flop occasionally this sort of play is going to be extremely flagged. in general mid-to-high games, i think betting is more deceptive. if you've got pocket kings and they flop is k75, though, it's very unlikely they hit any of it. i'd check something like that against non-overaggressive opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]
Astro,

i think u misunderstood his question (or i did). i think the question her is whether or not to auto-bet the flop, period. even when you miss.

Kenny

[risen]

Whether by choice as shown by the poster, or neccessity, (Those who play multiple tables) the autobet feature can be useful and deceptive if used sparingly and in different situations. Even though the base assumption is to put everyone who raises preflop on AK until shown otherwise, we often give our opponents too much credit for being able to see what we hold. We all know that there are a wide variety of hands worthy of a raise in early position, I think there is more value to the autobet on the ragged board outlined above and a showdown of your monster after everyone folds than a check, trying to see if anyone caught a piece. On a scarier or more coordinated board a check is more often in order, but only if you intend to cold call instead of check raise.

But if this situation comes up so often, you might want to see why you're first to act and Raising from EP so often, perhaps occasionally not raising those EP monsters would show some added value through deception.

How often have you flopped top pair playing from the button only to get check raised on the river by a pair of Pocket Aces? And were you cursing or admiring the slow playing bastard?

[Nightwish]

If I raised pre-flop and no one re-raised, I will bet out on the flop 95% of the time. The only exceptions are possibly when I raised with something like AK or AQ in EP, got 5 or more callers behind me, and flopped absolutely nothing. I will almost never slowplay a flopped set if I raised pre-flop. That move looks so suspicious that practically no one falls for it at limits of 5/10 or above.