Button is 37.5/15 thru 35 hands


Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (5 handed) Full Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)

SB ($10)
BB ($22.30)
UTG ($8.25)
Hero ($27.30)
Button ($27.70)

Preflop: Hero is MP with K , K . UTG posts a blind of $0.25.
Hero raises to $0.85, Button raises to $2, 2 folds, Hero raises to $7, Button calls $5.

Flop: ($13.5) 4 , A , T (3 players)
Hero?

I'll lead out for $8,5. If he calls, I'll shut down.

check/fold

lol no.

I think there's an error in the OP though. I think it's HU to the flop, not 3-ways. Looks like a converter error. Amirite?

I agree with this, check/folding just seems so weak esp. for a 6 max table.

yep, heads up on the flop

Bet $8.5, if he calls, you can shut down. Check folding is retarded.

I bet whatever your standard c-bet is. This looks a lot like 10s-QQ or AK. You'll know where you're at after your first bet.

I think a $7 bet accomplishes what you need to do here.

yup

For those advocating bet $8.5 then giving up, what is the point of this bet? Are we trying to just take the pot down, get value out of a worse hand, what?

We should be trying to get value out of a worse hand, but how to we do that. If we bet an ace high flop after 4 betting preflop, what worse hands call us? Unless the villian sucks at poker, probably none. JJ-QQ are probably going away, 99 and lower are folding. I don't see two big face cards making it to the flop, but even if they did they sure aren't calling a bet. Lastly, the board has no flush draw. If we bet the flop its safe to say most of the time we are getting called/raised by hands we are behind and folding everything we are ahead of. Meaning, there is no value in betting except to protect against the 3-5 outs the villian has if he is behind.

Since there is no value in betting, the other option would be to check and see what the villian does. This does possibly put us in a tough spot against an unknown but it also gives us the greatest chance of getting value from a worse hand. Giving the villian a chance to bluff is the only way we are going to make money on this flop.

Since everyone seems to think check/folding is weak, I guess call when the villian bets then. I'm not totally sure what I do when the villian bets but I'm leaning towards check fold to most players. If this was just a 3-bet pot I would probably check/call one bet, but with it being a 4-bet pot it changes things. First off the pot is larger so calling any bet just about commits us to the pot. Also, I think the odds we get bluffed go way down, most weak players are going to be afraid we are slow playing top set. With the texture of this flop and the limited range in which most people call a 4 bet preflop it would actually be a good play trying to represent KK or QQ. Then of course there are always the players who I know like to bluff, in which case I'd probably just call them down. Regardless of what you do afterwards, checking the flop is going to be the best play the majority of the time.

The bet would be partially for value, with a nice side benefit of getting a lot of information. The problem is, if we bet, and he calls, we're assuming we're beat, so it's really not a value bet, per se, unless he's passive enough to check down his smaller pair or whatever he'd call with that we beat. I do agree with you that it's probably not ideal.

It's a difficult spot, really. The easy way out is to bet and shut down.

The way to maximize value, is probably to check and call, check the turn, and reevaluate whether you think he'd fire again without an ace.

Basically, the moral of the story, is that position is the tits.

Isn't that the point of all bets?



Pretty much.



Essentially, we're betting to avoid a hand like QQ or JJ betting this flop when we check, which puts us in a really awful spot because we're never calling a flop bet. Betting on the other hand, keeps up with our line. We are probably not ever getting call by a worse hand, but a better hand may fold to bet. Villain might fold AQ, or AJ, and heck, he might make a hero fold of AK (doubtful, but possible). Aggressive > Passive play.



The problem with that is, that then we're potentially calling a bigger bet than we are willing to make, which doesn't really define his hand at all. If we call, and he's bluffing, what if he two barrels? What if he has the hand he's representing? Are you saying we should call him all the way down? You have to remember, the hand is far from over.



Calling a bet here will get us in some righteous trouble.



1) Weak players are not afraid of getting slow played, weak players don't think about what their opponent has.

2) This is 25nl, people 4-bet garbage at low stakes, and they especially will call a 4 bet with garbage.

3) If you're checking this flop a lot, you're playing wayyy too passive to be playing NLHE effectively.

"there's an ace on the flop, you have kk. you should check/fold. because you don't have an ace in your hand, there's an extra ace to be had. he's got two cards in his hands and at least one is probably an ace, maybe two!"

Before I get to anything else, no hand with an ace in it is folding this flop, EVER EVER EVER. Thinking so is just dumb, if AQ/AK called our 4 bet they are stacking off every single time.

Secondly, I cannot emphasize this enough, I am not saying check because I am afraid of the ace! I am saying check because a worse hand never calls and a better one never folds. What this means is there is no value in betting. Its not weak passive, its understanding and maximizing your value in the hand. You want to make a bet that has no value attached to it so you don't get bluffed by a worse hand. WTF!?! That is how we get value on this flop.

Other things I have a problem with, "You have to remember, the hand is far from over." Umm, look at the stack sizes in relation to the pot, each player has about one and a half pot sized bets left, if we call anything we are commiting our self to the hand.

"Calling a bet here will get us in some righteous trouble." Not neccesarily, the key will be to use and past information with the villian and possibly a timing tell to make your decision to carry on. Usually just go with your first instincts, if you think he's bluffing push, if you think he has it fold. Its not weak passive its smart poker. Eventually you have to learn to make these difficult calls/folds that maximize your value if you want to get better. The best way to do it is just to put yourself in these spots.

And finally, in 35,000 hands starting at .05/.10 up to .25/.50 I have never seen a player who wasn't on tilt 4 bet without, QQ+ or AK. Saying people 4 bet garbage because this is a lower limit is simply not true. Get used to the concept of not making bets with no value attached to them simply because its the easy way to play.

It's a solid principle but it's not an iron rule.
Sometimes we bet for defensive purposes. In a roundabout way, it's still a "value bet" in the sense that we ensure we don't lose the dead $ in the pot. We can bet and fold everything worse, and lose a bit more to everything better. Or we can check, and sometimes fold to everything worse, sometimes fold to everything better, sometimes get stacked by everything better, but rarely stacking everything worse.

We can check here if we actually have tells (timing, betting pattern, or otherwise) on the villain.

At this point, we're going to be hard pressed to get value out of this flop. It is not our flop. You're a little too wrapped up in trying to get thin value in this hand I think. Our hand is now a bluff, essentially. Checking this flop is just stupid. We're not going to get a better hand to fold (usually) although occasionally they will. Betting defensively is a strategy. The only way you're going to get all the money in this hand is if you check call the guy down when he shoves and turns out to have a worse hand. That's pretty much what you're advocating, and it is utterly stupid. We're either, betting and folding, or betting and winning. Check/calling is just basically shoving this flop (which is a better play than c/c imo, at least you're being aggressive and attempting to get a better hand to fold). I don't get how you think check/calling is better, it just doesn't make sense to me.



Yes, if we call anything, we commit ourself, which I'm not keen on doing with second pair.



Putting yourself in these spots is the way to get better? Better at being aggressive. You're too preoccupied trying to get value out of this hand when you could basically turn our cards into 23os and we have the same play here. Our hand is a bluff. This flop is not our best, by far. But not betting after 4-betting just opens the door up to every hand we beat to bet, while every hand we don't beat is also betting. So basically, we're just blindly guessing whether or not the guy has it or not. That's not in any way smart poker. That's what idiots do. They just guess.

Past information? The Hero didn't give us any, so I don't know what that has to do with anything. If we had some reads, you could argue that, but there aren't any. Do you still advocate check/calling him all-in when the player is unknown? That's silly.



Who says he wasn't on tilt? See, I can make up reads too. And I have played quite a bit at those stakes, and I've seen people blow up and 4-bet anything. Hardly can you say that everyone at .05/.10 is there to play smart poker, the players suck. You act like I'm insulting you playing at .05/.10 or something. It might be a generalization, but players at lower stakes are inherently worse than players at higher levels, get used to it.

I'm sorry, but check/calling this just because you're looking to get a thin amount of value out of it is wrong. The only value left in this hand is trying to get the money that is in the pot right now. I guarantee you over the long run, check calling this instead of leading out is going to lose you more money than you make. It is not +EV. You're going to be stacking off to much better hands way too much for it be be +EV.

ok, it seems like check/calling > all in
opponents hand -- all-in -- check/call
ak -- -20.3 -- -20.3 or less
aa -- -20.3 -- -20.3
qq -- +13.5 -- +13.5 or more
jj -- +13.5 -- +13.5 or more
tt -- -20.3 -- -20.3
aq -- -20.3 -- -20.3 or less

with betting out against this range 4/6 times you lose 8.5. 2/6 you win 13.5
-34+27=-17

-17/6=-2.8
so if this was his range, looking at the hand in $ gained or lost after flop (when this decision is being made) you lose -2.8 every time you bet out. lose nothing if you check/fold. lose 9.03 if you go all in. and check/calling depends on persons bluffing range.

i would say check fold has greatest (neutral) ev

im not sure if this makes sense.