How about this one...T4 in SB

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
if you are going to complete with this hand (?) you need to lead on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

This makes little sense to me.

Leading the flop does little. This is a definite "check-and-see" situation. We have a bad reverse implied odds hand, and really just want to see a turn for one bet and see what happens.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get this complete.

[/ QUOTE ]

He clicked call. He should not have.

[TheHammer24]

[ QUOTE ]
if you are going to complete with this hand (?) you need to lead on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't follow, how does calling pf force me to lead after the flop? This is like when people say if you call the turn you have to call the river. No! If calling the turn was incorrect, how must you follow it up with another incorrect play?

[SNOWBALL138]

This is not always a check and see situation. Without reads, I'm going to lead here, because the bets that might come behind you don't tell you anything, but calls and raises do. Also, more hands will call than will bet. The only reason to check and see is if you don't plan on seeing the turn.
I'm not really happy about having top pair in this spot, but it could easily be the best hand, and playing this passively isn't going to clarify your situation or get you value in the average 2/4 game.

[TheHammer24]

I checked with the intention of raising the flop, but since everyone came along, calling is then the correct play, correct?

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not always a check and see situation. Without reads, I'm going to lead here, because the bets that might come behind you don't tell you anything, but calls and raises do.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are a lot of hands currenlty worse than Hero's that would be completely justified in raising, calling 2 cold, or even 3-betting this flop if Hero leads out. There are also better hands that would flat call.

This is the perfect example of a hand where I flop top pair & don't really care; if I check and it comes back two to me, I fold without a second thought. If I check and it comes back 1 bet with no callers, I check/raise. If you get the kind of flop action that Hero got here, it's a good check/call getting odds to draw to his 5-ish outer, plus the possibility that Hero is already best.

Fold preflop. Fold this flop. A connected-suited flop with no kicker is a definate fold. You can even make a case for folding QT here. The turn donk looks good. I'm hoping BB raises and protects my hand for me. Looks like a slim value bet on the river. I would check.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you are going to complete with this hand (?) you need to lead on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't follow, how does calling pf force me to lead after the flop? This is like when people say if you call the turn you have to call the river. No! If calling the turn was incorrect, how must you follow it up with another incorrect play?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very hard to fold any made hand on the river in small stakes. Sometimes people call turns with practically no outs. On the river they need to be half as likely to be the winner. They aren't getting the reverse implied odds that they had on the turn. Did that make sense?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
I checked with the intention of raising the flop, but since everyone came along, calling is then the correct play, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. My play is usually to check and:

1. Raise a late position bet.

2. Call an early position bet, often with the intent of donking a safe turn card.

3. Folding to a bet and a raise.

The idea is simply that the action behind you gives you a ton of valuable information that will allow you to play the hand much more optimally than you would simply betting blindly into a large field. Checking is not that dangerous here because the pot is small, and, in a large field, it's very unlikely to get checked through anyway.

[SNOWBALL138]

What top pair would you lead with here? JT? QT? How small should the field be before you lead with T4?