check the flop if you think you're gonna need pot control

this result is terrible and there are basically no other results ever when you bet the flop (except that he folds, in which case checking behind would be great too)

every draw missed and neither an ace nor queen landed. you figured you were bluffing on the flop then?

eh, yeah thats what i thought i should do, seems like he probably has something crazy good like AA since he flatted a RR oop

i'm not trying to sound condescending or like a total douchebag, so if i am coming off like that, i really apologize. i think the way i word things really rubs people the wrong way a lot and i hope that's not the case here...just trying to help!

i dunno he is really either really strong or is blufffing

no way! I wish i could chat with guys like you so much more i love the feedback thanks so much

yeah like...if you think that his flop check/call is always either way ahead or a float, then just check behind on the flop

On a King high board it usually is if our 3 betting range is small and Rob's is, however i thik he should c-bet these flops sometimes because otherwise he becomes transparent against a regular like LuckHan

I dont think he is bluffing, he would probably shove a draw there out of position and why would he turn a lower PP into a bluff for no reason, i mean there is a chance he is but its not big enough to justify a call here.

basically your train of thought on the flop should be

"ok, if i bet, do i want him to fold? not particularly, no reason to feel like i want him to fold here, i have jacks with position and he just flatted a 3bet. do i want him to call? maybe, but if he does call then i think he's WA/WB and won't pay me off much later anyway, so getting a call out of him right now isn't much better than trying to get a call out of him later instead. do i want him to raise? prob not, i don't think he check/shove bluffs in a 3bet pot on this board very much, and he's certainly not doing it for value with TT or worse. so, all the results that might follow my bet are either bad or mediocre.

so then what if i check? we might just get to a showdown, in which case i'll almost certainly win. or we might check two streets but i'll get one street of value, either on the turn or river. and every now and then he'll lead out or something and i'll have either a clear fold or a clear call*. or i'll make a misplaced value bet and get check-shoved on and have to fold. so, the results following my check behind are mostly fine or good, sometimes bad.

looks like a check then"



* since nobody mixes up their oop leads on king high boards in 3bet pots very well

yes Baal i think u got my thinking on the button, but I think myth is right or i am just being results oriented?

betting the flop is like, totally standard here

On December 05 2007 22:57 Baal wrote: On a King high board it usually is if our 3 betting range is small and Rob's is, however i thik he should c-bet these flops sometimes because otherwise he becomes transparent against a regular like LuckHan I dont think he is bluffing, he would probably shove a draw there out of position and why would he turn a lower PP into a bluff for no reason, i mean there is a chance he is but its not big enough to justify a call here.

i really don't think he'll become transparent. nobody takes notes that well at this level. plus, nobody has a good enough sample size or a strong enough memory for this to be a problem. i seriously don't think he should be worrying at all about whether his check makes him transparent.

furthermore, he should know that he needs to be checking draws, KX, AA, KK, and the other sets here sometimes as well. the fact that his check could mean a number of traps OR pot control hands is gonna be fine for balance. and he doesn't need to be betting JJ here just so that people will say "well, i know he could be betting JJ, so i'll respond by ____"

shove the turn for value yo

On December 05 2007 23:00 MezmerizePLZ wrote: betting the flop is like, totally standard here

if we have to completely shut down every time he puts money into the pot as a response to our bet, then why should betting be our standard? i mean, betting is obv 100% standard if we are calling a good deal of flop check-shoves or river open shoves such as this one. but when his check/call or check/raise means that our hand sucks, then why bet?

On December 05 2007 23:02 Daut wrote: shove the turn for value yo

yeah once again, if we shove the turn for value then we should call the river shove.

On December 05 2007 23:01 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 22:57 Baal wrote: On a King high board it usually is if our 3 betting range is small and Rob's is, however i thik he should c-bet these flops sometimes because otherwise he becomes transparent against a regular like LuckHan I dont think he is bluffing, he would probably shove a draw there out of position and why would he turn a lower PP into a bluff for no reason, i mean there is a chance he is but its not big enough to justify a call here. i really don't think he'll become transparent. nobody takes notes that well at this level. plus, nobody has a good enough sample size or a strong enough memory for this to be a problem. i seriously don't think he should be worrying at all about whether his check makes him transparent. furthermore, he should know that he needs to be checking draws, KX, AA, KK, and the other sets here sometimes as well. the fact that his check could mean a number of traps OR pot control hands is gonna be fine for balance. and he doesn't need to be betting JJ here just so that people will say "well, i know he could be betting JJ, so i'll respond by ____"

maybe im overvaluing villian's skill, given the fact i would INSTA take note on such a check behind situation to later fire turn shove river with any 2 if he does again, and the fact that i usually play a stake for a long time withouth moving up/down i focus on image a lot... maybe too much o_o

Rob wont ever get a call from villian from a hand he beats on turn ever.


PS: im convinced Myth has double personality, a PoorUser and a Doomer fighting inside of him :D

u bet to protect ur hand get value from worse hands.. y else u nit

maybe i should read what u write, but thats why i'd bet the JJ on the flop personally

i don't mind c-betting to get rid of hands like AQ, but don't c-bet this large, you are never getting played back at on this flop texture, save yourself 3-4bb

frinkx agrees, if you're gonna bet this flop then shove turn for value is best, but if you don't shove turn then at least call river

On December 05 2007 23:09 MezmerizePLZ wrote: u bet to protect ur hand get value from worse hands.. y else u nit maybe i should read what u write, but thats why i'd bet the JJ on the flop personally

agh god damnit lol

read what i wrote! what i'm saying is...obv we bet for value/protection on the flop. but if we are value/protection betting the flop, then we are value/protection shoving the turn as well, or we're at the very least calling the river shove when every draw missed and no Q/A landed...right?

can we like, put this guy on a flatting oop range pf? that would help a LOT

On December 05 2007 23:07 Baal wrote: Rob wont ever get a call from villian from a hand he beats on turn ever. PS: im convinced Myth has double personality, a PoorUser and a Doomer fighting inside of him :D

if rob never gets called by a worse hand when he shoves the turn, then i think checking behind on the flop for pot control is best. AND i think he should 3bet/bet/shove every single hand in position on a texture like this against this opponent if that's true. i mean, this guy puts in like 40% of his stack and folds on blank turns without at least a king here? then why aren't we winning every single pot we play against him?

umm bet flop. prob fold river. is he floating us on flop. checking turn then shoving river on us with a bluff? lol

On December 05 2007 23:12 Big_Rob_48 wrote: can we like, put this guy on a flatting oop range pf? that would help a LOT

only you can do that -.- depends how you play, how you've been playing now, etc.

On December 05 2007 23:15 DooMeR wrote: umm bet flop. prob fold river. is he floating us on flop. checking turn then shoving river on us with a bluff? lol

i know i would, whether i floated the flop or actually called with any kind of pair to snap off a cbet. fuck your turn check behind for pot control, if you seem like you want to play a small pot then i am going to win this with a river shove 100% of the time

i dont get what hand he would turn into a blfuf here besides some flsuhdraw or something. is he saying on flop i have 99 im gonna call cuz my hand is prob good...now its the river im gonna shove cuz i get valuez? no. :O

If his PF calling range is like any PP and AK I see why Myth saying checking flop is better and it makes sense.
But if his PF calling range when OOP gets to as low as AT/QJ/SC I think betting flop is WAY better for protecting.

Btw I have NO IDEA why you are saying to shove turn if he calls flop. I mean what do you think he might call that flop OOP with?
I have no IDEA why u keep sayin to shove turn after he calls the flop. Can you explain that a little?

I think Myth is pointing out how you can play this hand most profitably but cbetting the flop is the "safe" way to go that makes the hand easier to play no? The flop cbet commits you to playing for stacks is basically what you are saying right Myth?

i'm not saying that i think lucky69han is capable of check/floating just to stomp on your pot control lines, nor that he's capable of turning a hand like 99 into a bluff. i'm just saying i think it's consistent to call here (or value shove the turn) if the flop bet is good. if we can't call here (or value shove the turn), i don't think the flop bet is good.

On December 05 2007 23:18 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:15 DooMeR wrote: umm bet flop. prob fold river. is he floating us on flop. checking turn then shoving river on us with a bluff? lol i know i would, whether i floated the flop or actually called with any kind of pair to snap off a cbet. fuck your turn check behind for pot control, if you seem like you want to play a small pot then i am going to win this with a river shove 100% of the time

then ur logic for calling the flop with a hand is pretty moot since u can do the samething without a hand and the same results will follow, furthermore if he doesn't want to play a smallpot then u have to fold ur hand. so i dont get it ;o

Isnt it possible he has a weak K and wasnt confident in its strength until the river?

On December 05 2007 23:20 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not saying that i think lucky69han is capable of check/floating just to stomp on your pot control lines, nor that he's capable of turning a hand like 99 into a bluff. i'm just saying i think it's consistent to call here (or value shove the turn) if the flop bet is good. if we can't call here (or value shove the turn), i don't think the flop bet is good.

against certain people this is a call but didn't u just state that he isn't lone of those guys? ;o therefore we have to foldZ!

either way i tihnk betting the flop is fine and we dont necesairly need to shove turn or call river, it really depends on the player

On December 05 2007 23:18 nomanirvana wrote: I think Myth is pointing out how you can play this hand most profitably but cbetting the flop is the "safe" way to go that makes the hand easier to play no? The flop cbet commits you to playing for stacks is basically what you are saying right Myth?

ehhhhhhh, checking behind is pretty safe and easy to play out also, imo. we have jacks in position and there's a king on the board in a 3bet pot against (apparently?) a tight player, and we have a tight image (right rob?), so there's seriously nothing tricky about it at all.

i'm just trying to establish logical consistency. with this hand on this board, in position as the 3bettor, we can't bet the flop and then fold later. we can either check the flop and maybe fold later, or we can bet the flop and never fold.

On December 05 2007 23:23 DooMeR wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:20 [vital]Myth wrote: i'm not saying that i think lucky69han is capable of check/floating just to stomp on your pot control lines, nor that he's capable of turning a hand like 99 into a bluff. i'm just saying i think it's consistent to call here (or value shove the turn) if the flop bet is good. if we can't call here (or value shove the turn), i don't think the flop bet is good. against certain people this is a call but didn't u just state that he isn't lone of those guys? ;o therefore we have to foldZ! either way i tihnk betting the flop is fine and we dont necesairly need to shove turn or call river, it really depends on the player

no, if the river is a fold then the flop is a check. that's all i'm saying. sure, maybe he's the type of player we have to check the flop against, which sounds reasonable but once again i think preflop is a flat if he's that tight against 3bets.

People say bet the flop for protection which to me seems like the 'safe' way to go since we are automatically assuming that our hand needs protection without knowing how much it might kill his range and/or how inclined he might be to bluff or bet with really marginal hands if we show an ounce of weakness. Yknow?

That and betting the flop gives us way more information about his hand doesn it? I dunno.

i'm playing 22/18/4 and I do have a decent image, but its not anything new for me to showdown crap so people know i can have a wide range at times, i'm no nit

On December 05 2007 23:20 DooMeR wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:18 [vital]Myth wrote:   On December 05 2007 23:15 DooMeR wrote: umm bet flop. prob fold river. is he floating us on flop. checking turn then shoving river on us with a bluff? lol i know i would, whether i floated the flop or actually called with any kind of pair to snap off a cbet. fuck your turn check behind for pot control, if you seem like you want to play a small pot then i am going to win this with a river shove 100% of the time then ur logic for calling the flop with a hand is pretty moot since u can do the samething without a hand and the same results will follow, furthermore if he doesn't want to play a smallpot then u have to fold ur hand. so i dont get it ;o

that's a bit off topic so msn me if you want to talk about it, but that logic is not moot

On December 05 2007 23:24 [vital]Myth wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:18 nomanirvana wrote: I think Myth is pointing out how you can play this hand most profitably but cbetting the flop is the "safe" way to go that makes the hand easier to play no? The flop cbet commits you to playing for stacks is basically what you are saying right Myth? ehhhhhhh, checking behind is pretty safe and easy to play out also, imo. we have jacks in position and there's a king on the board in a 3bet pot against (apparently?) a tight player, and we have a tight image (right rob?), so there's seriously nothing tricky about it at all. i'm just trying to establish logical consistency. with this hand on this board, in position as the 3bettor, we can't bet the flop and then fold later. we can either check the flop and maybe fold later, or we can bet the flop and never fold.

If he is calling 3 bet with AJ+/SC/ANYPP/AK why you shouldn't bet flop to protect?

myth is right stfu

On December 05 2007 23:28 capaneo wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:24 [vital]Myth wrote:   On December 05 2007 23:18 nomanirvana wrote: I think Myth is pointing out how you can play this hand most profitably but cbetting the flop is the "safe" way to go that makes the hand easier to play no? The flop cbet commits you to playing for stacks is basically what you are saying right Myth? ehhhhhhh, checking behind is pretty safe and easy to play out also, imo. we have jacks in position and there's a king on the board in a 3bet pot against (apparently?) a tight player, and we have a tight image (right rob?), so there's seriously nothing tricky about it at all. i'm just trying to establish logical consistency. with this hand on this board, in position as the 3bettor, we can't bet the flop and then fold later. we can either check the flop and maybe fold later, or we can bet the flop and never fold. If he is calling 3 bet with AJ+/SC/ANYPP/AK why you shouldn't bet flop to protect?

fsdahjfsdahkjfsdahkja i'm not saying we shouldn't bet the flop, i'm just saying that if we bet the flop then we call the river shove (but, preferably, we shove the turn for value)

On December 05 2007 23:30 FrinkX wrote: myth is right stfu

On December 05 2007 23:30 FrinkX wrote: myth is right stfu

what da fuck??

I mean many times I see in reraised pots retards at 400nl and lower either put you on AK or they have AK. Btw Im only talking about the times that the vilans PF calling range is a little wide.

We only have like 100 invested in the pot. why should we call another $300/ shove turn for $300 more when he only calls with AA/KK/AK/KQ/KJ/KT and shits like that? I mean how do you think he would play KQ/KT on that flop at 400nl?

On December 05 2007 23:30 FrinkX wrote: myth is right stfu

lol

OH YEAH i forgot to say, one BIG reason I bet these flops with JJ is so that when i DO RR LIGHT people give me more respect and won't start trying to make thin call downs with like TT here. I usually play very tight until I know people stop paying me off with light call downs then I start doing more light RR'ing because I got the respect for it.

But wait.... I guess that has nothing to do with checking the flop and betting the turn or river for value : / nvm still makes sense to check here

On December 05 2007 23:37 capaneo wrote: Show nested quote + On December 05 2007 23:30 FrinkX wrote: myth is right stfu what da fuck?? I mean many times I see in reraised pots retards at 400nl and lower either put you on AK or they have AK. Btw Im only talking about the times that the vilans PF calling range is a little wide. We only have like 100 invested in the pot. why should we call another $300/ shove turn for $300 more when he only calls with AA/KK/AK/KQ/KJ/KT and shits like that? I mean how do you think he would play KQ/KT on that flop at 400nl?

bottom line is that we have two alternatives:

1. slowplay/be trappy in position, not usually wanting to get all-in. keep the pot under control, but get your opponent to put a medium amount of money in very often (profit around 25-35 BBs when we win the showdown).
2. 3bet preflop, bet flop, bloat pot, trying to get the money in so that our opponent is committed to stacking off. force the pot out of control and get our money in good almost always with a monster.

we can't take plan #2 if we are going to change our plans when an overcard flops, because an overcard flops 43% of the time.

so we are either flatting preflop or going to war on this board. bottom line.