|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Experiment with raised pots
I think I'm going to try an experiment.
When I'm preflop raiser and I'm HU on the flop and the flop is uncoordinated, I will always check the flop when checked to. What do you guys think? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
-EV
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
you should explain instead of just making a broad statement like that.
I'll ask you a question. When you raise preflop and flop top pair or overpair on a non coordinated flop, do you bet all 3 streets and how much do you bet all 3 streets? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
PFR means nothing really, what are your hand ranges...? For 6max you could hold pp's, broadway cards, sc's, Axs, etc and checking them each and everytime time on the flop is -ev.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
I didn't say each and everytime. I said on a uncoordinated flop.
But lets say its uncoordinated flops with no broadway. in this instance I think always betting out, which I suspect what lot of this board does, is incorrect. In this instance you are representing overpair each and everytime and I think its silly to believe that the typical SSNL opponent will believe you. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
Yeah but you should be leading out a majority of the time, let them make the moves to decide if you have the overpair or not. If you only raise when you catch a piece youre going to be way to predictable
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
Not enough information, what is your range? What is your image? What is your plan on turn? What if they lead first?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
You are talking about continuation bets here, right? Yes, doing a continuation bet evertime rags flop will start to get noticed, and called. You should mix it up randomly - I like 60% bet 40% check...some may like more or less...but checking every time? You should also check once in a while when you hit top-pair on the flop, also somewhat randomly. HOH makes a good point, it would always be correct to do a 1/2 to pot sized bet with top pair on the board if no one was watching. Since players learn, in order to get the +EV you have to vary your play here (obviously I am not offering anything new or ground breaking) ... which segways to:
What is the purpose of the experiment? to see what your opponent does on on the turn? I always fall a bit back on my heals when a pre-flop raiser checks to me heads-up. Something is amiss, I'll to do some probing to find out what is going on: he hit and is checking to vary play, he still has an overpair, or he missed. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't say each and everytime. I said on a uncoordinated flop. But lets say its uncoordinated flops with no broadway. in this instance I think always betting out, which I suspect what lot of this board does, is incorrect. In this instance you are representing overpair each and everytime and I think its silly to believe that the typical SSNL opponent will believe you. [/ QUOTE ] I think you're missing the point. If you raise pf, you are obligated to continue the bet on the flop (unless of course your stumble onto trips, or a monster) in which case checking may be appropriate. But by checking everytime you miss the flop, you have no idea where you are in the hand and you would be put in a position to have to call a pot-size bet or more, and that is dangerous. Let them make the decision on what you have, not the other way around. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Experiment with raised pots
-EV should be self explanatory. I think you lose more often than you win. I see very little good coming from checking behind every time you're the preflop aggressor in a HU situation. It completely eliminates the continuation bet, which should usually pick up the pot. When you flop a strong hand on a draw heavy board, it gives your opponent infinite odds. Other than trapping with a solid hand on a rainbow, scattered flop, the only thing I see being slightly positive is when you're against a monster. And then you don't know if they're betting into you because you always check behind or if they indeed have a good hand.
What do you do when they lead? Just cancel the concept and play accordingly? As for your question, I can't answer that. Also too broad. It weighs heavily on the opponent aswell as the hand itself. An overpair could be a pair of Fours. Lots of it depends on information you aren't offering. Sorry. Let us know how the expirement goes. |
|
|