kk against one opponent

[iggymcfly 0]

This is kind of a general situation rather than a specific one, although I did just have the situation happen to me,Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?I think the standard line is bet/fold, but it seems like check/calling has some merit as well. It's WA/WB, as if you're in the lead, your opponent will likely be drawing to two outs or runner-runner, and if you're behind, you will be drawing to two outs as well.Do you think that at least check/calling against aggressive players is a good idea? It seems like against aggressive players, you'll gain as many extra bets when you're ahead as you'll lose when you're behind.Of course someone just hit a two-outer on me, and that's what inspired me to make the thread, but I just wanted to see people's general opinions on the situation.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

This is kind of a general situation rather than a specific one, although I did just have the situation happen to me,Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?I think the standard line is bet/fold, but it seems like check/calling has some merit as well. It's WA/WB, as if you're in the lead, your opponent will likely be drawing to two outs or runner-runner, and if you're behind, you will be drawing to two outs as well.Do you think that at least check/calling against aggressive players is a good idea? It seems like against aggressive players, you'll gain as many extra bets when you're ahead as you'll lose when you're behind.Of course someone just hit a two-outer on me, and that's what inspired me to make the thread, but I just wanted to see people's general opinions on the situation.

It's actually pretty standard to take a WA/WB line in this situation....Wang

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

WA/WB bet fold, unless you have a very aggressive villian. If that is the case, I check call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to me with a mid pair or something.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

WA/WB bet fold, unless you have a very aggressive villian. If that is the case, I check call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to me with a mid pair or something.

What? No!NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!ARGH!!!!PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN WHAT THE FUCK WA/WB MEANS!!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

WA/WB bet fold, unless you have a very aggressive villian. If that is the case, I check call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to me with a mid pair or something.

What? No!NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!ARGH!!!!PEOPLE NEED TO LEARN WHAT THE FUCK WA/WB MEANS!!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

*EDIT - nevermind

[Shimmering Wang 1]

I know exactly what it means. I said take the line unless it is a very aggressive villian. I should have said a very aggressive maniac.

The standard WA/WB line is to CHECK/CALL DOWN, not Bet/Fold. If you're ahead, you want to let him continue spewing off chips, and if you're behind you lose the minimum. Folding when there's a good chance you're way ahead is silly. If you say something like, "Well if we bet and heraises then we're probably Way Behind" I might stab you. This is like the second or third egregious WA/WB error I've seen today.Wang

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

Losst my mind on the last post. Fixed it:WA/WB. Don't bet fold, call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to you with a mid pair or something.A long time ago I did know what WA/WB meant. I much playing, not enough posting/browing I guess.*EDIT - I noticed my mistake before I saw you post.

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

If you say something like, "Well if we bet and heraises then we're probably Way Behind" I might stab you.

Im not sure why the hell I posted that WA/WB was bet fold when I've read all sorts of posts explaining what it was. Like I said, I lost my mind in that post. Continue on.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

Losst my mind on the last post. Fixed it:WA/WB. Don't bet fold, call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to you with a mid pair or something.A long time ago I did know what WA/WB meant. I much playing, not enough posting/browing I guess.*EDIT - I noticed my mistake before I saw you post.

Haha, sorry... This has become one of my biggest pet-peeves. Didn't mean to get on your ass.Wang

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

Losst my mind on the last post. Fixed it:WA/WB. Don't bet fold, call down, hoping to let him pee his chips over to you with a mid pair or something.A long time ago I did know what WA/WB meant. I much playing, not enough posting/browing I guess.*EDIT - I noticed my mistake before I saw you post.

Haha, sorry... This has become one of my biggest pet-peeves. Didn't mean to get on your ass.Wang

Nothing wrong with clearing up a misunderstanding. When most people who briefly wander over to strategy (from general or wherever) refuse to admit when they are WAY off on a concept, getting rude is justifiable.

[Canada 0]

Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?

I always bet the flop.Its not a WA/WB situation.

[HoosierAlum 0]

Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?

I always bet the flop.Its not a WA/WB situation.

This is usually a Way ahead/Way ahead/Way ahead/Maybe way behind situation.

[Shimmering Wang 1]

Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?

I always bet the flop.Its not a WA/WB situation.

Assuming your opponent would raise with an ace, and fold middle-pair, but bet middle pair or QQ or JJ or TT if checked to, this is about as standard a WA/WB as there is.Wang

[Canada 0]

Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?

I always bet the flop.Its not a WA/WB situation.

Assuming your opponent would raise with an ace, and fold middle-pair, but bet middle pair or QQ or JJ or TT if checked to, this is about as standard a WA/WB as there is.Wang

A standard WA/WB line involves previous aggression from both players indicating that there will very likely be action. You go into the line to minimise your loses if you are behind and maximise your winnings when aheadChecking here is only acheiving the first half of the 'mission statement'Here all the villain has done is call a preflop raise. There is no indication that the villain will bet if checked to and to suggest that they only have an Ace or pocket pair at this point is giving them too narrow a range.Giving a free card to a 'random hand' is never a good idea.If the villain has called with 67s and the flop is AT9, not betting here is a terrible mistake - moreso if the villain is passive.If we knew that the villain would only call with a PP or A-high hand and was very aggressive, then there would be a better argument for jumping to a WA/WB line now

[Shimmering Wang 1]

Let's say you have KK and raise from early or middle position. A late position player calls and both blinds fold. Then the flop comes A-x-x. What's your line?

I always bet the flop.Its not a WA/WB situation.

Assuming your opponent would raise with an ace, and fold middle-pair, but bet middle pair or QQ or JJ or TT if checked to, this is about as standard a WA/WB as there is.Wang

A standard WA/WB line involves previous aggression from both players indicating that there will very likely be action. You go into the line to minimise your loses if you are behind and maximise your winnings when aheadChecking here is only acheiving the first half of the 'mission statement'Here all the villain has done is call a preflop raise. There is no indication that the villain will bet if checked to and to suggest that they only have an Ace or pocket pair at this point is giving them too narrow a range.Giving a free card to a 'random hand' is never a good idea.If the villain has called with 67s and the flop is AT9, not betting here is a terrible mistake - moreso if the villain is passive.If we knew that the villain would only call with a PP or A-high hand and was very aggressive, then there would be a better argument for jumping to a WA/WB line now

I probably wasn't clear. I mostly just railed in the early parts of this thread about correct WA/WB linesMy line would be to bet the flop, and go into WA/WB mode if raised by an opponent capable of raising often with hands worse than Ax. If my opponent is on the tightish and passiveish side, we're beaten significantly more often than not when popped on a drawless flop, so it's not WA/WB.If our opponent is laggy, we're ahead significantly more often than not when raised, so it's not WA/WB.A good time to go into WA/WB mode is when the board pairs, and you think your overpair is either getting smashed by trips, or smashing somebody's middle pair, and he's going to bet it through the river, but is capable of folding to reasonable aggression.Wang