basic? (an arguement)
 

kill an argument. No reads. Just jumped in the game, this is BBs first hand.

PokerStars 10/20 Hold'em (4 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
UTG calls, Button calls, Hero completes, <font color="#CC3333">BB raises</font>, UTG calls, Button calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (8 SB) 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
Hero.....

Plan? Also turn was a 9 completing the rainbow.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

Given that there's a decent chance the hero has the best hand, I would bet the flop and hope the BB raises with a hand I am ahead of.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

Forgot to say, what do u do on the turn if u bet and get raised on the flop. Do u c/c or b/c?

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Forgot to say, what do u do on the turn if u bet and get raised on the flop. Do u c/c or b/c?

[/ QUOTE ]
Well if its just me and the BB and I have no read, I would probably check/call the turn and river. Im sure there are plenty of good arguments for betting the turn, and if someone chose that line I would see nothing wrong with that. The way I see it, if the villain has two overcards, and its just me and him, he will bet this turn almost every time hoping I will fold, so a Big bet goes into the pot whether I check or bet, and I would much rather show this hand down for 2BB then 3BB, plus by checking and calling I can never get outplayed off the best hand. Also, If an Ace hits the river I would check and fold.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

As an aside: If BB was one of those friendly LAG chaps (but not LAG enough that I was confident he would raise with overs) I'd check it to him and see what the action was coming back to me. If it's going to be a twenty out circus going to the turn I'd probably just peel and reevaluate the turn / hope to spike. If it comes back raised I can fold. If at least one of them folds I'd c/r.

As a default donking is probably best. If BB raised the donk I'd bet/call on the turn and fold the river UI if he raised.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

I don't think an unknown raises overs enough to make betting more profitable than checking. I don't think it gets checked through very often, and sometimes you will be able to make a good fold if it comes back to you for 2. Or checkraise the PFR if it is folded back to you.

If you have a read that says that PFR is aggressive enough to raise overs, or one that says he wouldn't continuation bet the flop, then I think betting is fine.

I used to bet into the PFR a lot in these spots, and I still think it is a reasonable play, but I have come to like checking unless I have a reason to believe he'll raise a worse hand.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think an unknown raises overs enough to make betting more profitable than checking. I don't think it gets checked through very often, and sometimes you will be able to make a good fold if it comes back to you for 2. Or checkraise the PFR if it is folded back to you.

If you have a read that says that PFR is aggressive enough to raise overs, or one that says he wouldn't continuation bet the flop, then I think betting is fine.

I used to bet into the PFR a lot in these spots, and I still think it is a reasonable play, but I have come to like checking unless I have a reason to believe he'll raise a worse hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this. The range of hands different people will raise your flop donk with tends to vary a lot, so it makes for some difficult play on the big streets, too. If you can narrow that range down with a read then the flop donk is much better.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think an unknown raises overs enough to make betting more profitable than checking. I don't think it gets checked through very often, and sometimes you will be able to make a good fold if it comes back to you for 2. Or checkraise the PFR if it is folded back to you.

If you have a read that says that PFR is aggressive enough to raise overs, or one that says he wouldn't continuation bet the flop, then I think betting is fine.

I used to bet into the PFR a lot in these spots, and I still think it is a reasonable play, but I have come to like checking unless I have a reason to believe he'll raise a worse hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like your reasoning, and if the flop came out J64r, I would check and see what develops. But on a flop of 864, I feel that the probability of the hero having the best hand is high enough to justify a bet. But i certainly cant disagree with how you approach the situation.

Conceptually I look at 106 on an 864 board almost the same way as if I had AT on an T64 board. Obviously those situations are not the same but I would play them the same in that situation.

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Conceptually I look at 106 on an 864 board almost the same way as if I had AT on an T64 board. Obviously those situations are not the same but I would play them the same in that situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, in both cases, you check, pfr bets there's a fold and a raise and it's you to act. Is your action the same in both examples and if so, what is it?

Re: basic? (an arguement)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Conceptually I look at 106 on an 864 board almost the same way as if I had AT on an T64 board. Obviously those situations are not the same but I would play them the same in that situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the T64 board I like the checkraise even more because I'm fine with checkraising the whole field for value. If I knew PFR would raise with overs then I would bet. But in that spot your hand has a much higher equity IMO and your decision will be simpler when the action returns to you on the flop.