Confused on certain flops

Originally posted by Rihard4a

EXAMPLE2: He has something that didn't connect the board in any way, so let's say 72o. You bet flop he folds without thinking about doing anything fancy. If you check the flop, you give him the chance of being Tom Dwan and try to bluff you on the turn at least. So instead of making 0bb of the hand you suddenly make 4bb, and in the long-run this will be some extra money from spots where you would never make. Think about it.

Rihard

But this is the main problem here, mate. He is NL2 player who is passive and is not likely to bet against us with weaker. They can call with plenty of trash, but they won't stabb us with weaker. Maybe Ax can bet, but hands like Th9s will just keep on check/folding. Even hands like Tc9c are just most likely in NL2 players x/call range on turn.

Originally posted by CPallo
I accept your thought process on higher limits, lets say from NL25 to higher. But here even regs are calling down with Ax like 97 %, and they can call with draws and even mid-pairs given the positions.

I rest my case here and say, that it is way better to bet/bet/check or even bet/bet/bet depending on run-out. Draws can call F and T, but never river. Ax can call 2-3 streets, mid-pairs can call 2 streets for sure.

And that's versus reg. Against a fish we can have value from any GSSD, even some weaker sc's, Ax, Jx..

You just list so many reasons why x/b/b is better than b/b/b but you can't spot the diamond in it.

Originally posted by CPallo

Originally posted by Rihard4a

EXAMPLE2: He has something that didn't connect the board in any way, so let's say 72o. You bet flop he folds without thinking about doing anything fancy. If you check the flop, you give him the chance of being Tom Dwan and try to bluff you on the turn at least. So instead of making 0bb of the hand you suddenly make 4bb, and in the long-run this will be some extra money from spots where you would never make. Think about it.

Rihard

But this is the main problem here, mate. He is NL2 player who is passive and is not likely to bet against us with weaker. They can call with plenty of trash, but they won't stabb us with weaker. Maybe Ax can bet, but hands like Th9s will just keep on check/folding. Even hands like Tc9c are just most likely in NL2 players x/call range on turn.

Pretty much sums up my thought process. Value lost v Ax/weak pairs/fds/gs by not betting >>>>>> value gained by the odd time villain might stab with air.

Count how many Ax combos there are that you beat and how many other combos there are that you extract value from when check flop.

Originally posted by Rihard4a
Count how many Ax combos there are that you beat and how many other combos there are that you extract value from when check flop.

But are you assuming he'll bet once we check? I just don't think nl2 is aggressive enough... Like CPallo said I really like your play on nl25, just not on nl2.