Flop raise HU situation deeper analysis

[nichtgut]

Hi Peter!
Great post. Another common situation is this:
You have TT, openraise and the BB calls. The flop is K high with some kind of a draw, let's say K63 with a 2-flush. BB bets out. What do you think is the best line here?
I like calling the flop and raising the turn, take a free SD. But that move makes you vulnerable to a turn 3-bet and you sometimes miss to draw out, if you fold. If you just call down, you will sometimes let his draw out on you cheaply. Folding on the flop sounds weak. What do you think?

/Nicht Gut

[Peter_rus]

You're way stronger in this situation then in one i pictured above. I consider 3-betting flop, betting turn, checking/betting river depending on turn and river as one of my line. I also like your line with call down flop and raising turn/folding to 3-bet. Occasionally i also simply calling to river and be if checked to. Many people with K in hand (and weak kicker) would call down to river but they very like to c/r with weak hands/draws to represent K in case you have no K. With K in their hand they afraid you muck middle pairs or 3-bet strong kings or AA and they loose more when behind and win less when they ahead, with weak hands they want to get some folding equity and find out where they are hoped to catch some AQ-AJ, middle pairs in trap. That's why i often 3-bet flop with AQ here also.

[nichtgut]

Thanks. In my scenario however, he bet into me on the flop, didn't checkraise. Does that change anything, or do you like to raise the flop and then bet the turn, bet/check the river?
I often find that when they bet out like that they have the K, whereas if they CR the flop, they are more likely not to have it. And if they check-call the flop and check-raise the turn, what do you do then, is that a clear fold in your opinion?

/Nicht Gut

[Peter_rus]

I'll keep him honest majority of time. I hate been bluffed for one bet on flop. I let him to know that if he plan to bluff me it will cost him way more chips then 1 small bet usually. I can muck AJ for one bet here occasionally or some tricky hands without SD value but not TT.

[lil']

Peter,

This is a great post, and I hope you continue to write more in the future. The math is the weak side of my game (I'm too lazy to do it), but it's nice to see the numbers back up some of what I've been doing, instead of going by feel.

[phish]

Your post is very interesting because as I read thru it and read your response, it occurred to me that my 'solution' to your problem would take a different approach. You analyzed it mathematically (making assumptions of what he's likely to raise with, of course) to come up with a strategy. Whereas my 'solution' would be based more on how to affect the play differently.
In other words, against an opponent who plays like him, my solution would be to check the flop more often instead of automatically betting it (both strong ones, medium ones, or weak ones). It was this automatic bet that encouraged him to play back at you so frequently, especially if you had a tendency as you said to fold a lot on the turn. But if you check more frequent on the flop, he'll probably bet into you more frequently on the turn, which means he'll be betting more frequently with nothing. So now it becomes more profitable to call him down with an unimproved ace and, of course, you'll want to raise much more frequently on the turn with your strong hands (or wait till the river to raise), medium hands, or a good draw. I think this way, you'd put him on the defensive such that if he learns he bets the turn he is very likely to get raised. You want to 'train' him to play more predictibly. Of course, you still need to mix it up and not play predictibly.
I'm probably not too articulate above, but I just thought it interesting that my 'solution' takes more of a 'behaviorial' stand (with math/stat implicit within it) while yours take a more math logical analytical approach.

[cartman]

Peter,

I read on of your responses to an old post in a link that Johnny Boom Boom posted regarding blind play. In it I think you said something about bad position heads up against a raiser when you defend in the big blind being somewhat offset by the fact that he will auto-raise you on the flop anytime you want him to. Were you talking about leading into him, him raising, and you 3-betting on the flop? If so, what strength hand would you take this line with. I usually check-call and check-raise the the turn with my monsters (2 pair of better) and check-raise the flop and bet the turn with one pair hands that I think are in front. What would you suggest?

Thanks,
Cartman

[Peter_rus]

Your line seems to be good and i guess it can pretty often be more profitable than auto-betting flop. Though if i know you often check flop i would call preflop to defend my BB much more than i actually use to against you. So as always - mixture is a key.

[Peter_rus]

I've talked about check-raising him. Earlier i very rare use betting first action as it seems weak and looks like you pretty scared and need folding equity, while c/r looks like you're not so scared and gladly come to SD or at least to a river. On 15/30 limits i used to play this way more often especially when i have TPBK or any pair any kicker on a trash board, though i play better hands then TP by c/r-ing flop as earlier.

[turnipmonster]

peter, your post has got me thinking about a related topic which is checkraising frequency out of the big blind. you mention that it must be pretty high for opponent to not bet the flop every time, since he's getting 4.5:1 on a fold.

at the same time, in the BB we want to punish this autobet by checkraising most times we want to put money in the pot on the flop. so checking 100% of the time from BB can't be too far wrong.

what I'm interested in is what hand range we should checkraise out of the big blind in order for him not to profit by betting the flop. obviously we cannot just checkraise when we make a pair or better.

--turnipmonster