[Pepsquad]

[ QUOTE ]
ok, let's say for example he's opposite me with an opponent between us on both sides (this is how it was, he wasn't directly to my right). if i bet, he usually just calls. a recent example is where i had something like KJ and flopped QJJ. but if i checked, i'm almost sure he will bet (he wouldn't maybe if the flop was very ragged, that's about it), in which case i'll make more bets by then raising, right?

i mean, given i have a big hand and it's very unlikely i get drawn out on, c/r will win me more bets than leading. i might even pull a trifecta, earning me 3 extra BB's.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the hand such as you describe above, I favor leading out on the flop. I have a hand that is strong, but more vulnerable than it appears. I feel that by leading on the flop, I'm in a better position to manipulate the pot later in the hand based on how it develops. By leading the flop, you still get the standard calls AND keep the pot smaller than you would by check-raising in case of a bad turn card (A,Q,10 or a 4-flush card). Since we KNOW Mr. Maniac will bet when checked to on the turn, we have the luxury of waiting for a safe turn card before c/r-ing the expensive streets.