AKo in Squeezed pot on lowcards

I think that this board hits him and prefer to xc.

U dont have much fold equity in this board, imo. Most of pairs has either a set, gutshot or overpair. And many combos of unpaired hands can still find a reason to call (hit a pair, pair+draw, draw).

But if the board hits villain, why do you want to call here?

I m actually x/folding in this board.

Originally posted by zoty79
But if the board hits villain, why do you want to call here?

Cause we have a hand that can still catch up. 44% equity is not to be thrown like that, imo.

I think it can go either way and that you should not play it the same all the time. I would prefer to cbet the AKs combos that have BDFD more and barril some cards like Q, J, as a bluf. I think that on this stake i would cbet that AKo too. Check/call is player dependent but a good option too. Some players give up so much on the turn after stabing flop. That are the ones you whant to check/call against.

I prefer check-folding. The choice between check-calling and bet-folding with a pair-draw (this is all you have here) should be clear. You bet to get some fold equity. Especially versus a LAG. That you have 44% equity matters little if he is likely to fire twice or more. Position rules. Even if he checks back if you check, you are in a terrible position to make money on the turn.

If we x and villain xb on flop can we fire every turn on overcard to the board?

Originally posted by nitrol
If we x and villain xb on flop can we fire every turn on overcard to the board?

Maybe, but this villain (loose (OP confirms) and (I suppose, it usually comes along with loose reg) aggressive) would bother me. Why did a LAG check back?

It really depends on the villain. Vs. a reg this should be more of a x/f than vs. a very loose player who can have more broadway type hands in his range. There I'd rater cbet or x/c the flop intending to fold many turns because I don't see players bluffing enough in 3bet pots.

Btw, if you are assigning him a range in which hands are that can fold to your cbet but that you are beating, why not x/c'ing and letting him bluff those?

Because villain is a loose one I think xc has its merits.

Originally posted by MisterSnS
It really depends on the villain. Vs. a reg this should be more of a x/f than vs. a very loose player who can have more broadway type hands in his range. There I'd rater cbet or x/c the flop intending to fold many turns because I don't see players bluffing enough in 3bet pots.

Btw, if you are assigning him a range in which hands are that can fold to your cbet but that you are beating, why not x/c'ing and letting him bluff those?

Because he is (I suppose) aggressive and has position on me. This is a game where you have to let your hand go, even if you think you have marginally the best hand. It is called the threat of future bets. A good lag is the worst possible opponent. True, we don't know that this one is good, but it is enough that I think he is aggressive.

I'd say that its fine to sometimes cbet on this flop and sometimes check. Vs a player with high fold to cb I'm more inclined to cbet and against good regs I'll sometimes check and sometimes bet.

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by MisterSnS
It really depends on the villain. Vs. a reg this should be more of a x/f than vs. a very loose player who can have more broadway type hands in his range. There I'd rater cbet or x/c the flop intending to fold many turns because I don't see players bluffing enough in 3bet pots.

Btw, if you are assigning him a range in which hands are that can fold to your cbet but that you are beating, why not x/c'ing and letting him bluff those?

Because he is (I suppose) aggressive and has position on me. This is a game where you have to let your hand go, even if you think you have marginally the best hand. It is called the threat of future bets. A good lag is the worst possible opponent. True, we don't know that this one is good, but it is enough that I think he is aggressive.

Not disagreeing

Wooohoooo,

thanks guys, what a nice discussion here. So against agressive opponents this should be a clear c/f. What about loose fishes, like 50/15 ? Check call or c/f. I think it depends on how aggressive the fish is, or?

Vs fishes this is flop is always check imo. If the fish bets really small like they do sometimes then you can call and try to hit your 6 outs (if you get the right price for calling + you have showdown value with A high). If the loose and passive fish bets bigger then I'm always check folding.

If flop goes check/check I'm betting any card higher than Jack(J,Q,K,A) on the turn. Those cards hit your range and should have fold equity.

Originally posted by zoty79
Wooohoooo,

thanks guys, what a nice discussion here. So against agressive opponents this should be a clear c/f. What about loose fishes, like 50/15 ? Check call or c/f. I think it depends on how aggressive the fish is, or?

Mmmm, vs passive villains( 50/10), when you check and they bet - you are gone.
vs aggro villains( 40/30) when you check and they bet - you can call.

I like this discussion as well

I don't know, against a LAG I might have opt in for a c-bet. The board hits his range but a lot of them not. Don't know, maybe I am not far enough to understand flop textures and expectancies.

Originally posted by Hesticus
The board hits his range but a lot of them not.

This board doesn't really hit heros 3bet range.