Checking the flop with AA on the button

[Schmed]

This came up the other day in the SS forum and I really don't understand this concept.

In HEFAP in the loose game section it is suggested that you check the flop with AA if your oppents will call the flop bet anyway. This is done to manipulate the pot so that they will be making a mathematical error on the turn when you bet.

I understand the part about manipulating the pot odds but I don't understand why you would even want to mess with this in a typical loose game. I see a lot of people in these games who would call the bet on the flop chasing something like a runner runner flush or runner runner str8 and fold to any action on the turn if they don't catch that draw. Heck I was playing 10-20 the other night and some guy called a flop bet with a 89 because there was a 7 on the board along with a K and a Q. He caught open ended on the turn with a 6 and when he folded on the river he flashed me his cards. I had to ask him why he called the flop and he said, "I had a str8 draw with the 7". There was another guy in the same game that would play any two suited cards and if one of the suit hit the flop he was seeing the turn.

In games where people will chase such long shots shouldn't you get in as many bets as possible?? Isn't this more of a play that you may try with thinking opponents that you find at the higher levels and not so much at even the 6-12/10-20 level??

Could someone please explain to me when and why this play should be made I really didn't understand it.

[Dov]

IMO, the reason for this play is that you will make more money in the long run when your opponents make mistakes in chasing the draws. The opponents you mentioned make these mistakes anyway, but if they continue to the river after they pick up their draw, they may not be making a mistake if you had already bet the flop. In addition, most free cards won't hurt you and I think that you need to take the texture of the flop under consideration. What you really want is for TPTK to chase you, not the big draws b/c you are a much bigger favorite over them.

Another principle here may be that if the draw completes on the turn, you can get away from your AA without too much regret. If there is a bet and a raise in front of you in a game with calling stations on a coordinated board, you can be pretty sure that you're beaten.

[Louie Landale]

I haven't read HEFAP for a few years. But if the authors suggest that you should check your AA in dead last position just to manipulate the size of the pot such that the inevitable loose-players turn call is a "mistake"; then the authors are dead wrong.

And its easy to prove. If the loose player is GOING to call as a 7:1 underdog (regardless of the size of the pot) then that call nets you 6/8ths of a bet regardless of the size of the pot; specifically regardless of whether the pot is larger or smaller than 7 bets. If you fail to bet the flop as a 5:1 favorite then you are giving up 4/6ths of a bet. So the difference between checking your best hand figuring to bet the turn, and betting your best hand figuring to bet the turn is ONLY the cost of not betting.

Notice the above adds up the same if the pot is currently 3bb (the opponent will make two calling "mistakes"), the pot is 6bb (the opponent will correctly call the flop but "incorrectly" call the turn if you check), or the pot is 9bb and the opponent will "correctly" call.

Your win %age is constant and your actual win is win%age time size of pot + equity of flop bet +equity of turn bet. Whether the opponent is making a "mistake" or not doesn't add any weight here at all.

Hero makes a "Mistake" by not betting the best hand. This can only be justified if that action can CAUSE the opponent into making an even MORE aggregious mistake later, such as drawing dead or folding a winner. This may happen if the opponent THINKS he's not getting the right odds to chase on the turn because the pot is small, but he really IS getting the right odds.

Now I will say that checking AA, hehehe, can have some merit for other reasons; such as you are almost SURE to get to RAISE the turn if you DO check. But that's not "manipulating the size of the pot to turn the ineveitable opponent action into a mistake" BS.

- Louie

[tpir90036]

the "loose" opponents described in that section of the book are not nearly as bad as the loose low-limit players you probably encounter day in and day out. most players are also too passive for this play to work as someone would have to actually *gasp* bet and not check-call the whole way.....

it isn't about manipulating the pot sos much as it is letting someone else take the lead on the turn so that you can raise them and knock people out when they have to face two *big bets* instead of one small bet on the flop and one small bet on the turn since they will all just check-call. kind of like a check-raise that you can pull off in late position becasue you set it up on the previous round. make sense?

however, as you have poitned out, horrible players will call any amount of bets cold at any point in a hand so you would not be wrong to simply bet while you are still ahead. save a play like this as a way to mix up your flop play once in a blue moon against somewhat decent players who might try to test the waters when it's checked through but know that when you raise on the turn that they are in deep s**t.

[cnfuzzd]

i have been scanning the section and cant seem to find that specific piece of advice. Could you give us a page number. The closest i have found is the section on not allowing your opponents to accidently make the correct play. For example, if you have QQ, and still have top pair post-flop, *raising* on the flop and then betting the turn will allow your opponents to have the correct pot odds to chase their draws. This means they would actually be profiting from their play instead of you. Note, this situation only applies in certain scenarios, with opponents who will almost always call all bets. At least, thats my understanding.

peace

john nickle

[Analyst]

20-40 B&M, currently 8-handed. The last orbit before I have to leave, I get AA on the button - and it gets better. UTG+2, a tight prop, open raises. Folded to fairly tight CO who 3-bets - yahoo! I resist the temptation to lay back (haven't seen UTG+2 cap), and I cap it. Extremely loose BB calls, as do UTG+2 and CO, so there's already 8+ BB in the pot.

Flop is A84, with 84 being suited.
Checked to me, and I check. I was very tempted to bet, and possibly should have. If they had a pocket pair, the other players would have been getting close to enough pot odds (and almost certainly enought implied odds) to call and try and spike a set. I was concerned, though, that with an A on the board they'd just muck to even a small bet after I'd capped PF. More importantly, I thought that they might read my flop check/turn bet as KK-TT and bet or raise the turn if they had that beat, say by AK-AJ or a high pocket pair.

Turn was a blank.
Folded to CO who bets, I raise and unfortunately BB and UTG+2 do in fact fold. CO can only call all-in for $30, flipping over KK and saying that he has put me on QQ. Not a happy camper, then, when I show AA and he's drawing dead.

So, I may have gotten another $40 if I'd bet the flop, or maybe I'd have gotten less if CO put me on an ace. Can't really say, but next time it happens [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I'll probably play it the same.

[Whistler]

I believe it basically boils down to the fact, that if your opponents make mistakes you profit in the long run. If you have 6 callers when you are on the button and in a loose game and raise, there is 6 big bets in the pot, because more than likely no one is going to fld. they are getting 12:1 on the flop theres not much that will make "wrong" to call your bet on the flop. But if you dont raise, they are only getting 6:1 to call a bet, which makes a lot more calls the wrong thing to do.