[Closed] 1/2 SH - AKo

What a rivercard. You are beaten by any hand he would raise. Call me weak I either check/call or bet/fold here.

I would like to raise there, mostly you owns best cards

I couldn't stand not seeing the SD with a pot this big, so I'd play c/c

Something else: donk flop to let BU protect for you?

I prefer check/call more also but it looks so damn weak. :/

The check/raise on the flop is nice because the value is more than the benefit of protecting here of course you have bigger swings if you do so.

Originally posted by ciRith
The check/raise on the flop is nice because the value is more than the benefit of protecting here.

Ok, interesting. How do you quantify when protection is more important and when value?

I would also check this river.

We only beat AJ and maybe we get lucky and the BTN bets and the SB raises, so we can fold without any investment. If we had good reads about both players we could even fold to a bet and a call, but without any reads a crying call is necessary because of the pot size.

Why should a bet protect more than a check raise?

Protection means giving wrong or reduced pot odds. So our goal is to confront our opponents with as many bets as possible and because preflop is capped, it is very likely that the capper is leading the flop especially on this board and only against 2 opponents.

The only exception when it might be better to bet into a preflop raiser is if he is likely to raise with a weaker hand.

Originally posted by kombi
Why should a bet protect more than a check raise?

Protection means giving wrong or reduced pot odds. So our goal is to confront our opponents with as many bets as possible and because preflop is capped, it is very likely that the capper is leading the flop especially on this board and only against 2 opponents.

The only exception when it might be better to bet into a preflop raiser is if he is likely to raise with a weaker hand.

That is exactly what a donk would do here. It would confront SB with 2 SB wich gives him only 7,5:1 instead of 10:1 or more. And that is protection. Not very effetive here anyway.

It doens't matter if the SB has to pay 2 bets at once or if the bets come sucessive. The only import thing is how much he had paid when the betting is closed.

I am not sure if I understand you correctly. In my opinion it is better to check raise the flop, because if we do so the SB will often call with insufficient odds and therefore we can trap him to pay 2 bets on the flop. Is this what you mean? But this does not conflict with the concept of protection. There is more value in trapping villain to make incorrect calls as to force him to fold correctly. This statement is always true heads-up and often mutliway too with the exception of Mortons Law.

I think we mean the same.

What I meant was that with a donkbet and a raise we might get SB off a hand with which he has the odds to call if we check/raise. Of course this doesn't change the amout which SB has to call.

The hand above is not a good sample to explain what I mean because every hand gets proper odds to call in either way.

Let's take a more clear sample:

Hero: T 9

BU raises, SB calls, Hero calls.

Flop (6 SB): T 6 2 :diamond:.

If SB has 65 he probably will call (if he is passive) a bet by BU which isn't the worst move. If we now raise he will call again.
If we would donkbet and BU raises his overcards SB probably folds with 2nd pair.

No question. On this dry flop a check/raise is again better but it would increase our variance.

This is what I meant with my 2nd post.

EDIT: Yes I think so too.