Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

If the villain was on a total steal with a trash hand (as he may have been in order to fold to this stop and go), why would he not have considered folding pre-flop? I think if he was willing to fold at this point, he may have been willing to fold preflop too.

Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think if he was willing to fold at this point, he may have been willing to fold preflop too.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that this is wrong. Villain always calls. Even if he hates calling and having to show trash here, he still makes the call.

Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

Well, to the same argument used against why the stop and go doesn't make sense, you're assuming a rational villain following reasonable strategy. That villain doesn't fold on the flop. It's a pretty narrow range of hands AND of villains who would consistently raise preflop and fold to the stop and go in this situation.

I guess I'm saying that if someone is willing to fold on this flop to this bet, then you aren't ALWAYS going to get called if you go all-in preflop against the same villain in the same situation.

If there's a margin of difference in who is willing to fold the flop to an all-in vs. fold the obvious stop and go, it's a thin one.

Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

Easy fold. You've got 400 after the bb is posted. If you have to fold your sb next hand then you've got 4k on the button. I'll take that. No way you can push PF here. Maybe you get lucky and pf raiser is on a small pair and u can race PF with your overs. But I like my chances better on the button with 4k. Like was stated the stop and go gives you a better chance to win the pot without a showdown but I call you there with one card no matter the flop.

Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, to the same argument used against why the stop and go doesn't make sense, you're assuming a rational villain following reasonable strategy. That villain doesn't fold on the flop. It's a pretty narrow range of hands AND of villains who would consistently raise preflop and fold to the stop and go in this situation.

I guess I'm saying that if someone is willing to fold on this flop to this bet, then you aren't ALWAYS going to get called if you go all-in preflop against the same villain in the same situation.

If there's a margin of difference in who is willing to fold the flop to an all-in vs. fold the obvious stop and go, it's a thin one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree it's thin. I would also say that even a thin difference is worth exploiting every time. Also, if your reads/table image make you believe that pushing gives you more FE, then that's what you need to do.

The key to me is thinking about the hand, and doing the option that gives you the most FE. I firmly believe that against an avg opponent here a stop n go gives you a little extra FE. The thing I don't like is when players blindly push saying 'well, he'd never fold on the flop anyways'.

The truth is, there is no never in poker. I believe that villian might occasionally throw away a hand here PF (and wrongly do so). I also believe that villian will toss a lot of hands you are behind on this flop (again, wrongly so). The key is, which move gives him the greatest opportunity to make a mistake?? I firmly believe the stop n go does here.

-Rizen

Re: A stop-and-go hand that actually worked
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just push it in pre, or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way pushing preflop is better than the line OP took. What advantage does push have over a stop and go??

I could see merits for a fold, but it's debateable.

[/ QUOTE ]