[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Among other things, a villain directly to the hero's right bets out on the flop, so the hand can't get checked around. I take it this wait-for-the-turn tactic should not apply in this Q-Q hand? If that's correct, why not?


[/ QUOTE ]
I don't have SSHE handy right now so my comments could be way off. But as I said in my original analysis, if you knew that someone was going to bet the flop and turn, then you could make an argument for waiting for the turn. In the hand in this thread, you do not know that someone will bet. In the hand from SSHE, not only do you know that someone will bet, there's a really good chance that person will bet the turn and allow you to face any remaining players with 2BBs, instead of 2sbs on the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
One last thing: Does the phrase in the p. 166 quote "even for a raise?" suggest that you should also consider the wait-for-the-turn tactic if you're faced with a bet-the-flop/check-the-flop decision in a situation like the K-K hand in SSHE? In other words, if it's checked to the hero in the K-K hand, should he check or bet?


[/ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, it's virtually never correct to give a free card when you have the best, but vulnerable, hand. There are times to wait for the turn to raise, but you always want to make sure at least one bet goes into the pot on each street.

One of the 2+2 books, I think HEFAP, has an example hand where hero checks through AA on the button on the flop in order to manipulate the pot odds on the turn. The logic in the example is well explained. But I've always thought that if that situation ever presented itself to me, either 1) I have gotten so good that I'm able to hold my own against the stars of the sport or 2) I need to find a better table.