I posted this initially in the check back thread but realized it did not belong and I just want to level set where I am at. This hand was my last hand of the night. I got disconnected after my flop bet and the site folded me. To me this is an auto c-bet purely from a value standpoint correct? Probably super standard but I am questioning everything right now.

[converted_hand][hand_history]IPoker, $0.25/$0.50 Limit Hold'em Cash, 4 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

Preflop: Hero is BTN with 7 A
CO folds, Hero raises, SB calls, BB calls

Flop: (6 SB) Q 4 T (3 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets

Standard.

I'd probably check this back. Where do you see "value" in betting this?

Cbet. You are have a big draw to the nuts and if the turn is ugly you can take a free river. Also, better hands could fold.

I'd have to stove his range, but I think we have an equity advantage here and are not doing to poorly if behind.

That's pretty much what I was thinking, but like I said in another thread I am scrutinizing my cbet decisions since I suspect that I cbet too frequently.

We can get small pairs to fold and we can get worse flush draws as well as straight draws to call. Why would we ever check here?

I do not hate being check raised here and worse hands could fold and you could buy yourself two A outs. I bet.

My only concern is my check back range probably won't be very balanced. *Shrug* I think that's minor because check back is so infrequent anyways. Someone is going to have to give me a clear story. I'm much less concerned about it multiway than heads up against BB.

Heads up, I'm very doubtful we would have an equity advantage. I welcome some sort of simulation that would show this is a HU edge against any reasonable range.

If this remains 3-way (two callers), I would still be skeptical that you have an equity advantage. But I would be less surprised to find that I'm wrong.

Sure, we might sometimes do that. But how often is sometimes and how sometimes is enough times?

We check here because we don't have to bet. I'm less inclined to bluff into defenders when there are two paint cards on the board because I think it hits their (collective) range better than it hits ours. I don't feel compelled to bet every single time it's checked to me. (And I'll note that I like to bet when it's checked to me.) The QTx board gives me enough pause to think about checking behind.

I would probably have to do the stove work on that one. I think we have a nut advantage on this flop in general. We have the best draws, all the sets, and all the two pairs except maybe 104.

I guess what you are saying is that it's balanced by all the misses that we would have.

Yeah...if I get some time this is one I want to stove. I bet the equity is super close and should be easy to realize being in position.

I gave it a shot, but SB should not even have a cc range here, so based on his stats I gave him a really wide fishy range. His range could be anywhere imo. I am sure tightening his range would affect this against us but......

http://www.pokerstrategy.com
Board: Td4dQh
Equity Win Tie
BU 44.25% 41.83% 2.42% { Ad7d }
SB 31.34% 28.86% 2.48% { TT-55, AJs-A2s, KTs+, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, AQo-A6o, KJo+, QJo, JTo }
BB 24.41% 23.56% 0.85% { 88-22, A9s-A2s, KJs, K9s-K2s, Q6s+, J7s+, T7s+, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 65s, 54s, ATo-A7o, K9o+, Q8o+, J9o+, T8o+, 97o+, 87o, 76o, 65o }

I'm not sure Aaron realizes that you flopped nut flush draw

I'm aware. I could well be overestimating the number of Qs and Ts in their ranges. But that's the thing that's dominating my thought process.

Edit: Secondary in my thought process is that getting check-raised here feels like it happens a lot, and that's not really a good thing to have happen to us. But that could be overestimating the level of aggression of the opponents in this 4-handed game.

At worst we have 35% equity (chance to hit nut flush by river) minus the times the board pairs making a villain a full house. So at worst the bet is even equity so being check raised is somewhere near costless to us! Plus worse drawing hands do call and some better made hands do fold.

Pot was raised before the flop too so we could do some math to see how much the fold equity is, but I'm guessing it's enough to make this bet worth it.

This shouldn't even be a question, tbh. If you don't c-bet in this spot you need an MRI of your head.

This is a misreading of the concept of equity. You only get this *IF* both players remain involved in the pot. You're at a 15% equity deficit if it's heads up.

Only if you assume you didn't gain any equity from the player leaving, so you have to weigh the bet at 35% equity against pot size * equity gained if a villain folds

Okay... but "gaining equity" and "even equity" are not the same thing. And you're not really talking about equity (a percent), you're instead talking about your share of the pot (a quantity). I maintain that your statement is a misreading of the concept of equity.

I'm not sure how much equity you think you gain when you're check-raised, but I'd suspect it's just a couple percent. You have less to gain from players folding out even if they fold out better hands. Let's say that Q9 check-raises and folds out JT. JT is a better hand, but all that equity goes to Q9 because the hands that you draw to that beat Q9 will also beat JT. There are only a couple hands (like AT) where you actually gain outs.

And just so it's clear, I don't think betting is bad or anything. I just think that a board where calls/raises are likely that you may stand to do better by using position to your advantage and checking behind when you likely don't have the best hand and you don't stand to gain too much immediately from betting. At some level, I'd much rather let everyone see the turn for free if someone holds an unsuited K than bet to try to make that hand fold.

I'd bet the flop.

It's true that as (opponent check raise frequency) increases, (the profitability of betting draws) decreases. However, some draws are so strong that it would take a very high opponent check raise frequency to make checking have an ev higher than betting.

If we change our hand to KJ, it would likely take an unrealistically high opponent check raise frequency to make checking here have an ev higher than betting.

If we look at the list of available draws in our button range:

straight+flush combo draws

Naked Ace high flush draws (like A7dd)

Naked King high flush draws

etc etc down the line(this is a long list of draws)

We reach a point (undefined) where ev check = ev bet. We should bet every draw that is stronger than this, and check every draw that is weaker than this, naturally. Yes this implies that I don't use mixed strategies in multiway pots as default.

Considering that we have relatively many strong hands in our flop betting range(we are on the button, after all), I would think that our betting range should have relatively many draws in it as these draws are supported by strong hands, if compared with other situations vs both blinds.

If you're not betting A7dd here, what draws are you betting? A8dd? A9dd? Surely the combo broadway + flush draw hands are bets(I would bet these hands from any position vs both blinds). I would think that (utg draw betting range) differs from (btn draw betting range) quite drastically given such preflop action. In other words, if Jd9d is a ldo bet, then I believe that the next best draws (A9dd, A8dd, A7dd) must be quite profitable as well provided that we have a logically structured preflop range that provides us with many available draws.