532... 432... 542...

Do you Cbet these super low boards vs the big blind HU as the preflop raiser
assuming only overcards as equity (no flush draws or no A4 type hands basically the AJ, KQ, T9s.

I'm new to solvers, but can someone tell me what a solver says.

I feel like 975, 765,, these middle boards hit the big blinds range too hard
and must be checked back. But the 532, there is still alot of hands that we can fold out, plus we prevent the big from bluffing us on the turn on rag cards.

I imagine too that solvers might have different answers based on whether the hand contains an Ace or not, as opposed to KQ, QJ.

Anyways do y'all Cbet these super low boards vs the big HU

Don't know what solvers do, but if you're playing against a thinking LAGTAG in a limit game then I'd cbet any holding with high card strength or marginal made hands for value. I'd also check back weak draws, monster made hands and middling high cards because I hate getting check raised there.

Checking back flops in these situations against aggressive opponents can become important if you think they'll c/r you back lightly. I know I'd check raise this flop with air often after defending my blind.

I would definitely c-bet. According to my very quick and not super accurate calculations on Equilab BB vs BTN is going to fold to a c-bet around 60% of the time which is just printing money at live poker. Of course it looks different at high stakes where regulars will fight for the pot but we're not playing a balanced strategy here.

Plenty of overcards are just going to insta-muck, BB's range is very, very wide here. And your regular low-stakes opponent won't play back at you on these boards.

EDIT: Sorry I thought this question was posted in "low-stakes live poker". Against a very balanced, strong opponent I would probably check here much more often.

What's our opening position?

How many players total at the table (if our opening position isn't button)?

What size is our open?

What's the effective stack size?

In general yes probably cbetting these boards especially vs bad players. But the answers to the above questions could shift that strategy quite a bit.

I personally feel a flop like 234 is a great cbet flop if you have a strong (ish) hand, but pretty much the worst flop to cbet as a pure bluff with eg. a hand like T9.

The reasoning is:

- It's practically impossible to make ANY pocket pair fold
- It's difficult to make ace high fold
- Obviously impossible to make 56 fold
- Even if the opponent happens to have a hand like JT he could still have a flush draw or a made flush, and won't fold
- The opponent might bluff raise you

So yeah you can make a hand like JT fold (maybe) but then again you usually beat JT (even if it's just with a Q8 or something) anyway, so it's not much of an accomplishment.

So a great situation to be in when your hand is strong, not so great when you're weak. While I cbet HU most of the time, I think a flop like that is a prime candidate for giving up if you don't have even a strong ace (which can often be cbet as a combined semibluff against pp's and value bet against worse aces).

What hands you should cbet exactly depends on the opponent too of course. But generally I think 432-like flop is a worse cbet bluff flop than a flop like 975. On 975 you can make most hands containing an ace fold, you can make small pocket pairs fold and often you can cbet eg. AK with decent equity against a straight draw or a gutshot and even if the opponent has a pair you're not hopelessly behind (unless he has a pair with A or K kicker).

Dunno if my advice is outdated though, I had a long break from poker, just recently started playing again...