AA line I've never taken before...

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
Check folding here sucks. I would bet here with any PP I called with PF if I was villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Andrew Fletcher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Check folding here sucks. I would bet here with any PP I called with PF if I was villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[Woolygimp]

[ QUOTE ]
Check folding here sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]


This advice sucks. Only an idiot would call that big of a PF raise with anything lower than QQ.
I see arguments for leading and check/folding... BUT saying check/folding sucks is just retarded.
And I know we play against idiots sometimes but thats not an excuse...

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Check folding here sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]


This advice sucks. Only an idiot would call that big of a PF raise with anything lower than QQ.
I see arguments for leading and check/folding... BUT saying check/folding sucks is just retarded.
And I know we play against idiots sometimes but thats not an excuse...

[/ QUOTE ]

Only an idiot would call with worse than QQ and only an idiot would bet it on this flop. Kinda ironic, isn't it, in that it makes my point.

Also, I'd like to point out that $52 isn't much more than what villain could calll any PP and play for set value.

[aggie]

To all those saying "nice hand sir" i have a question:

Are you insane?

Without alot more specific information on villian, i don't just think this is bad. It's terrible....Putting villian on AA - QQ based on the fact that he called your reraise and he's played tight over 300 hands is terrbile. And if he's that tight you should probably be reraising this guy with any 2.

Many people who play very tight preflop are not nearly as tight when it comes to calling raises and reraises. Many get attached to 'good' hands. They think, "I'm playing tight but i'm not going to get pushed around".....This guy could have as little as AK-AQ, or AA-77. And checking the flop is giving him a license to steal (just because he's tight doesn't mean he's not gonna bet his 10-10 to find out where he is).

Granted, this is not an ideal flop but sometimes you just gotta shove some chips in the pot. Close your eyes if necessary, bet the flop, and play poker from there!

[edit] one more comment: When you reraise preflop and get 2-way action you should be betting flop 100% of the time.

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
This guy could have as little as AK-AQ, or AA-77

[/ QUOTE ]

Words of a true loose-aggressive [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. You have some good arguments. My check-fold was very much player dependent and the first time I've ever done it. I would bet 1/2 pot or so most of the time. And if someone is calling a massive re-raise with AK-AQ, JJ->77 without deep enough stacks and proper implied odds, then I'm going to take his money later down the road.

Garland

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
one more comment: When you reraise preflop and get 2-way action you should be betting flop 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this sentiment. Even heads-up, there are times to check depending on the situation. I believe there are very few 100% plays in poker, and most of them revolve around the nuts and the river.

Garland

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe there are very few 100% plays in poker

[/ QUOTE ]

I see this all the time and understand where it comes from....But do Realize that it's wrong!!! We should muck 72o under the gun in a 10-handed limit holdem game 100% of the time. And there are infinite other situations that are just as automatic.

[Garland]

[ QUOTE ]
We should muck 72o under the gun in a 10-handed limit holdem game 100% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

*tsk* *tsk* using a limit poker example to counter a no-limit argument *tsk* *tsk*

Garland

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]

*tsk* *tsk* using a limit poker example to counter a no-limit argument *tsk* *tsk*


[/ QUOTE ]

Okay...We should muck it 100% of the time in no-limit as well....It's just clearer in limit and i was responding to where you said 'in poker, nothing is 100%'