AKo UTG 10handed

[BadMongo]

[ QUOTE ]
i hardly think NOT making a continuation bet with A Ko on this flop is a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] I just showed you mathematically why it is. If you disagree with any of my assumptions, please tell me which one(s).

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see anything in the OP that would indicate that this is the case. What would make you think that?

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i hardly think NOT making a continuation bet with A Ko on this flop is a big mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] I just showed you mathematically why it is. If you disagree with any of my assumptions, please tell me which one(s).

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't see anything in the OP that would indicate that this is the case. What would make you think that?

[/ QUOTE ]

for one, i think your math is based on your experiences at low buy-in levels.

secondly, OP has no reads on villian.

thirdly, if you wanna bring up the Gap Concept, doesn't it state [you need a better hand to call a raise with than you need to raise with]? if you're gonna raise more than is needed with A Ko and a player with better position cold calls a larger than normal raise pf, what range of hands then do you put a villian that you have no reads on?

lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her.

[pokerlaw]

As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

but even with a CB the majority of the time, which do you prefer:

having a read or,

not having a read?

which is more valuable to you:

having a read when you make your CB or,

not having a read?

this hand happens to involve a villian which Hero doesn't have a read on. how in favor are you of CBng into the flop against a villian you have no read on who called a larger than needed pf raise and has the benefit of acting last?

[FlyWf]

1. 200 isn't a remarkably non-standard preflop raise with deep stacks and 25/50 blinds.
2. His math is based on a 52 card deck with 4 suits, 13 cards from 2 to A per suit.
3. "lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her."

This is a very difficult sentence to parse, but if I'm reading it right I think you are accidentally agreeing. Which is good, because the other guy is right.

When he called the PF raise in LP we narrowed his range from "two cards" to a "pretty good hand". When he re-raised, we can narrow his range more, to "pretty good hands that like T72 rainbow flops". But we didn't know he was holding the 40% of hands that call PF and like this flop until he reraised. The beauty of the CB is that if he called with 88 he'll fold the better hand, and if you check his KQs is going to bet into you and you'll fold the better hand. The CB allows you to narrow his range tremendously. He'll fold nearly all of the hands AKo beats and some that it doesn't. He'll call or raise pretty much entirely with hands that beat AKo. This isn't limit, you don't get paid off outkicking other people's toppair, and if you are going to checkfold when AK doesn't hit the flop you'd be bettter off just folding it PF.

I think if you call here you are getting shown AT or JJ nearly every time. The OP's question has an obvious answer.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
As per the debate as to whether to continnuation bet AKo here or not, I can't really see why you wouldn't a lot of the time.

Yeah, I like a check here, against CERTAIN players, but my general rule here is to CB BY FAR.

My gripe, if there is one, w/ this play is that the CB is too small, I like to do 275 here b/c t200 seems more weakish and I am more liable to RR a t200 than a t350 with nothing - but maybe that is just me...

[/ QUOTE ]

i do also prefer a larger CB.

[BadMongo]

[ QUOTE ]
for one, i think your math is based on your experiences at low buy-in levels.

[/ QUOTE ]

I stated that as an assumption, so yes.

[ QUOTE ]
secondly, OP has no reads on villian.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does this hurt my analysis?

[ QUOTE ]
thirdly, if you wanna bring up the Gap Concept, doesn't it state [you need a better hand to call a raise with than you need to raise with]?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you read what I said about the Gap concept? Of course it means you should have a better hand to call a raise than to raise yourself... I'm not disputing that. My point was that a lot (if not most) low buy-in players are unaware of this concept, so you can't immediately put the villian on a tight range just because he called a raise.

[ QUOTE ]
lastly, you may not have seen anything from the OP to assume he is staring at one of those 38.7% of hands that may call/raise his/her's continuation bet on the flop because he has no read of villian who is involved in the hand with him/her.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know that. If you know that, then why did you post this:

[ QUOTE ]
something tells me this is one of the 38.7% of hands that will call/raise A K's continuation bet so i prefer checking

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand your point here. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

My point is this:

1) If this is a low buy-in tourny, the typical (i.e. no reads) villian is unaware of or does not follow the Gap concept. He will therefore have a wide range of hands.

2) Given a range of hands for any villian, we can determine the EV of a continuation bet on the flop. I assumed a reasonable (for the villian) range of hands and calculated that a continuation bet is, in fact, very +EV on this particular flop.

3) We can conclude from these results that NOT making a continuation bet (i.e. checking) under these circumstances is a mistake, because we are needlessly giving up a significant amount of EV. The OP therefore made the correct play up to this point.

Of course, after the CB and the all-in by the villian, hero should definately fold.

[45suited]

The OP did not give enough information to reply to this thread with much confidence. Some questions that I feel are relevant:

1) What is your READ of the villain? Has he been playing a lot of pots? How aggressive has he been post flop?

2) How many players are left at the table?

3) What are the actual stack sizes? I have a hard time believing that everyone has t1500 in level 3.

Against certain players (me, for example), C-betting this flop would be chip bleeding. I'm not calling a 4XBB raise with a hand that I'm folding to a T high flop in the face of a weak C bet.

But how can anyone give a concrete answer w/o even taking into account a READ of the villain? That is the key factor in this hand. We're not playing against bots, we're playing against people who we should have some kind of read on by the time L3 rolls around.

I'm not a big C-bettor, but against certain players, I'd C-bet this flop. Against others, I wouldn't. It DEPENDS. Face it, by this time in the game, if certain players called your 4XBB raise, you'd have alarms going off in your head. If another player called your raise, you'd be salivating at the prospect of playing the pot HU against him.

It's kind of hard to give a concrete answer without taking into account the tendencies of your opponent in this situation. However, I will say that I would tend to raise less PF (t150), so that if I did C-bet, my C-bet could be a higher % of the pot without costing me so many chips.

[Oluwafemi]

45suited:

i agree with your post.

1. this was no read
2. a full table- 10 handed
3. i have a hard time believing that everyone has t1500 at Lv3 too.

the key problem with this hand is NO READ on villian. simply pulling out some math figures to support CBng into the flop against a villian that you don't have some inclination of how he plays by this level is troublesome.

[ QUOTE ]
Against certain players (me, for example), C-betting this flop would be chip bleeding. I'm not calling a 4XBB raise with a hand that I'm folding to a T high flop in the face of a weak C bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, villian's pf call is very key, especially when you consider you have NO READ. Hero can't even say whether the opponent is sphincter tight, average, solid, or a splashing fish.
flashing lights in your rear view mirror should not be ignored because if you speed up [CB] without fully knowing what's going on, then you could be in for more than just a high speed chase.

[Taraz]

I think the major difference of opinion on this hand is what kind of credit is given to the average player when no reads are available.

It seems that Oluwafami is giving the villain credit for being a decent player when he calls the pf raise because we have no reads. Bad Mongo, on the other hand, is saying that the "average" player that we will be playing against is bad and will call the pf raise with a wide range of hands.

I would tend to agree that when there is no read on the villain we should tag him as a typical (read: BAD) sng player and that we shouldn't be giving him credit for having a hand that can beat AK on the flop.