[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
this question is most applicable when playing vs. a tough opponent with good hand reading skills, and then it is difficult as tough opponents tend not to play big pots with one pair type hands, so it will be hard regardless of how you play it.

you really need to get lucky and hope that he has either two pair or top pair, and the board to be draw heavy, as this way he may put you on a draw and bet big to protect his hand, it is much more difficult to get paid with a set when the board is non-threatening, as they tend to immediately give you credit for the set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree. It's also less profitable when the big raiser is acting after you. In other threads on this forum I've read that it is best to lead bet at least the pot or slightly bigger on draw heavy boards, and less (about 1/2 to 2/3) on rainbow, drawless boards. This applies whether you are leading with the set, a draw itself, an overpair, or pair-kicker (in which it may not be a good idea to lead in the first place unless your kicker is strong).

[ QUOTE ]
ok so that being said, when the board is non threating i like to make a weak lead on the flop, then check the turn and hope he bets. if he checks behind on the turn then lead out with a pot size/or slightly larger then pot size bet hoping it will look like a steal.

[/ QUOTE ]

This part fits in with the meta-strategy I summarized above.

[ QUOTE ]
with a draw heavy board i like the check call on the flop and C/R on the turn, as he will often times bet big to force out the draws, and your call on the flop will look less like a made hand due to the draws.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you often lead with draws wouldn't leading with a set fit in better? That said, your method is interesting.

[ QUOTE ]
remember, there is no rule that every time you hit a set you will get paid off. and good players often can recognize the doyle play of leading with a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't realize it was a "doyle play". Agree that on drawless boards against decent opponents, it's just hard to get paid off big. On boards with draws, the big pairs (held by skilled players) won't pay off as much, but the draws can crush you (assuming you have other opponents). That's why it seems overbetting "drawfull" boards seems right.

[ QUOTE ]
but remember that little "it depends" caveat you brushed aside in the beginning is huge. and the biggest variable in this situation is YOUR table image, that is what your opponent thinks of you. if you have been playing very aggressively then it will be much easier to get paid off regardless of how you play the hand. if you have been playing very tight/conservative it will be much more difficult.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

Regards,

Rick

PS I'm probably not adding much new here. I'm just getting to the point in no limit where I'm beginning to understand what is going on. Of course with the level of play found in the restricted buy in games, I do OK but I'm hoping if I post more (and people blast my mistakes) I can eventually move up.

On occasion I'm in a restricted buy in game with 200 to 400 times the big blind in chips (with other opponents who are deep). That's when the game is fun and especially profitable. But I'm not ready to buy in that big in unrestricted buy games where you are far more likely to be up against tough opponents. I'm not tough yet.