Taking advantage of their mistakes

[YoureToast]

[ QUOTE ]

case 1. Blind steal. Someone raises and it's folded to me in the big blind. I know that if I call and check the flop, they will always bet. Because I know this, calling and check-raising is always superior to 3-betting and leading, since my hand is less clearly defined for my opponent, and he's more likely to make big postflop mistakes. That's right, I'm saying you should just call with aces, kings, AK, everything you'd normally 3-bet and lead, instead call and check-raise any time you're heads up.


-Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with not 3 betting with AK or AQ is that it makes it less likely that you can take the pot away without hitting the flop. If you 3 bet and lead with overcards on the flop, and possibly lead again on the turn, you can win unimproved. If you fail to 3 bet, then your checkraise is more likely to be called on the flop -- thus leaving you vulnerable to more draws and leaving you spinning as far as what to do on the turn if unimproved.

For this reason, I like to 3 bet with the A, high kicker hands, and call the big pairs.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with not 3 betting with AK or AQ is that it makes it less likely that you can take the pot away without hitting the flop. If you 3 bet and lead with overcards on the flop, and possibly lead again on the turn, you can win unimproved.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see this. If your opponent does not have a pair, check-raising and leading the turn is just as likely to win the pot. And if he'll call down with hands worse than AK, that may be an argument for calling and check-raising, since he'll be paying me off incorrectly.