($2000) L1, AK TPTK facing minraise

[citanul]

i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm skeptical.

so you fold the flop?

[bigt439]

[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. Come on, this looks like two pair or a set just as much as AQ - AT.

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. Come on, this looks like two pair or a set just as much as AQ - AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, it doesn't.

c

[bigt439]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. Come on, this looks like two pair or a set just as much as AQ - AT.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, it doesn't.

c

[/ QUOTE ]

A limp utg with A4 or A8 would be just as donkish as the check minraise with a worse A. I think the pf action makes this hand more interesting than it otherwise would be.

[Munkster]

[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

so do you suggest we fold flop here?
If that's the case, can't this be easily exploited? If you are folding AK on an Ahigh flop to a minraise, your range of calling after you raised pf on a Ahigh board is very small (AA) and it would be hugely +EV to take a shot at you at such flops. I understand obviously you would change the way you play this hand if you've seen such plays from the villain before but I still find it hard to believe folding 100% can be the correct play here against an unknown.

f

[ZeroPointMachine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i believe the villain doesn't have you beat on the flop here about 10% of the time. nice suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

so do you suggest we fold flop here?
If that's the case, can't this be easily exploited? If you are folding AK on an Ahigh flop to a minraise, your range of calling after you raised pf on a Ahigh board is very small (AA) and it would be hugely +EV to take a shot at you at such flops. I understand obviously you would change the way you play this hand if you've seen such plays from the villain before but I still find it hard to believe folding 100% can be the correct play here against an unknown.

f

[/ QUOTE ]

This particular situation is very exploitable and I do it quite often. I believe it is a high varience, but +EV, move.

OOP against a weak-tight pre-flop raiser early levels.

What is his range?

Flop comes specifically A-rag-rag or K-rag-rag with no flush draw.

I check. Villian bets 1/2-3/4 pot.

Which hands in his range does he bet?

What if any does he check?

I raise somewhere between min-raise and pot.

What percentage of his range does he fold?

I'm willing to make this move because I think the ~1300 stack gives me more flexibility to pickup small pots early and helps me more than a ~700 stack early hurts me.

Thoughts??

[microbet]

Against unknowns I never do something some percent of the time and something else some other percent. I do what I think is optimal given my read and my image. If I decided a fold is best here, I would fold and then take that into account in the future, possibly setting up a trap later. In a STT you are just too likely to never have a similar situation come up again to intentionally do something you think is second best.

[ QUOTE ]
Against unknowns I never do something some percent of the time and something else some other percent. I do what I think is optimal given my read and my image. If I decided a fold is best here, I would fold and then take that into account in the future, possibly setting up a trap later. In a STT you are just too likely to never have a similar situation come up again to intentionally do something you think is second best.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Microbet.... this was very good for me to hear. Something Harrington didn't mention in his books.

[Munkster]

Thank you for correcting my thinking here (the signs of me being a limit player).
Any insights on the specifics of the above situation?
f