If this wasn’t a 3! Pot I would probably check back a large percentage of my range. Since it’s a 3! Pot I would bet 90-95% of my range. Maybe check back Axs with no back door draws.

Perfect flop texture to bet small and get value from pairs and Qx type hands.

As played it feels like your beat but with spazz out facotor in play I’m calling it down and expecting to lose a decent percentage of the time.

Argument is. Taking a small percentage of your value hands and check them back. In this spot we are likely not even losing any value. But rather possibly gaining value. On this hand and in future. Making ourselves a lot harder to play against.

Checking 6combos of your value range does not make you passive. I don't care if it does make me passive if it is more +EV

Look further into your 3bet range in this spot.

Mine would be rather wide with small open, dead money in pot, and position on the field

Our opponent is heavily weighted to pairs (think you agree with that). So cbetting for value is very profitable. But cbet ting with air is going to be -EV. Also very few cards on turn will kill our action. Risk/reward is more than acceptable.

As to checking 10-10, JJ....I prefer betting them on flop than AA. As our opponents have many more overcards (we dont block as many Ax combos that may call pre) and denying their equity becomes more important.

This is just ridiculous. Maybe I am not only one with reading disability in this debate.

I have not advocated running value line through sick trap. In fact checking flop is not intended to be a trap. Also stated I would be betting majority of my value hands, twice already.

Roughly 50+ combos of value hands I would bet. Checking back 6 combos of AA.

You likely have never checked in 3 bet pot. So have no idea how it helps.

Don't overthink this. Always bet this flop texture with AA. We are way ahead or way behind and this board is not threatening to us or villain. Start shoveling money in now. You are getting floated minimum 1x by mid pairs and Qx. You can start getting tricky on turn vs. some Vs, but mostly I'm betting the whole way. If you are at all aggro villain will payoff another bet on dry turns. He will most likely stack off w/ KQ, Q9 etc.

I still have no idea how checking is supposed to be helpful. If it's not a trap, then what is it?

This is more than apparent.

We have 3bet from the button. V is probably calling wider than normal just for that reason. Bet flop all day long, no reason to get cute here. A check "to let V catch up" likely means we go from way ahead to way behind when he improves given his PF range.

This is a flop we should be trying to play for stacks on. Not gonna happen if we check back one of the few nutted hands in our range, unless we're beat. Just bet and let V level themself.

What is your flop sizing?

Your preflop squeeze range in this spot?

Still easily playing for stacks given SPR in this hand is 3

It's why I'm hoping at some point you'll explain it.

55-70

TT+, AQs + and some hands I don't want to call, but don't feel like folding.

Yeah there's barely a PSB left whenever you bet, but I just don't see the point in giving a free card vs Villains range. For the most part any hand that's calling flop is also calling turn, but we give a free card for no reason if we check, allowing a potential 2 outer when the pair hands are likely calling flop anyway

Your guys best argument is charging vs a 2 outer?

No, our best argument is that you bet when you have a better hand than Villain and he will pay off your bet

Chris and Johnny are completely on point in this thread, per their usual. The people saying check back flop still haven't articulated any coherent reasoning why. The best they've come up with is "we can't get three streets of value here" which (1) is utter nonsense and (2) even if true would mean we should be triple barreling bluffs like crazy.

The corollary to (2) is: (3) if we can bluff like crazy then we also need to value bet triple barrel with the top of our range, which we have here.

No it's that most hands that do have 2 outs will call flop knowing we are likely not super strong here. Wasting a potential street of value by checking, when there are basically no cards that can scare us off of playing a big pot on the turn.

If a Jx falls on the turn is V more or less likely to float 88?

Your raising 5% of time. Only have 16 combos that miss this flop.

Bomb away, you can bet/bet whole range 100% of time.

Your range is actually super strong. Most likely solid players will know that and make exploitable fold's either preflop or postflop.

In which case, a check on flop would likely help induce calls.

While your logic is true I don't think most players are thinking this way at these stakes. I posted a hand a week or so ago when I checked T85r with AA in a 3bet pot. I still think checking there was correct and betting here is also correct.

Q33 is a very non threatening board. Majority of V's are peeling at least 1 with a mid pair, no matter your image

What is your 3 bet range? 5% would seem to be on the high side in my experience at these stakes.

I do not think 88ish hands are ever folding on this flop texture

Here is the argument the best I can lay it out:

- While it probably doesn't matter what we do vs 99, not all pairs are identical. Is the opponent calling with 22? I don't think they should be. Their equity is awful. They are like 59% there vs AK. There's just no upside to allowing the two outer there and as I detailed upthread, it costs about $20 every time you allow it.

- Moving strong hands out of our betting range makes us less able to bluff. It's easy to heap scorn on this by saying "well it's only 6 combos" or whatever. It's like at first glance it's easy to agree with the argument that increasing the price of a TV by a dollar will not change the number of people willing to buy it. It's only when you apply this argument iteratively 50,000 times that it becomes easy to see that the argument "a small number is functionally identical to zero" is unsound.

- As IRAZERIVER just pointed out, a free card is more likely to hurt our chances for value than help it. If you check vs the opponent's 99 and the turn is an A, or a K, or a J, you just screwed yourself over. Part of the problem here is that checking back does not look weak in this spot, it just looks like you have a bluffcatcher.

These are small advantages. The majority of the time it simply won't matter what you do. I'd be quite willing to ditch these advantages if anyone could provide me with any plausible reason why checking would be helpful.

When your two options in a spot are a) get a free $1,000 and b) get a free $1,001, "lol the best argument you have for b) is an extra one measly dollar?!" isn't the slam dunk argument you seem to think it is.

Also, you literally argued in consecutive posts both that we were idiots for looking for three streets of value and that we also couldn't run three street bluffs because people would call too much.

Anadotal evidence which I hate to give but helps visualize a concept.

Hero is laggard
V1: Is likely top 5 player in player pool (small pool). Mostly Tag but starting to play more balanced and pain in ass. Truly hates to fold vs hero though.

V1 opens. Hero 3x. 3bets in Co with AA

Flop 744

Check check

Turn 3

V1 bets..hero calls. (1/2 pot bet)

River Jd

V1 checks....Hero slightly over bet ships

V1 calls with J10s

Never getting a penny out of a flop value bet vs this hand. Likely lose value if A or K hits turn vs his range. So we gain value from portions of range and lose value vs other parts.

What it does do is allow me to realize equity more often vs his 3 bet calling range. Which 10Js is stone cold bottom. And my 3 bet range is likely weaker than his calling range or very close.

When I 3bets him. I have no plans to barrel 100% of time on 100% boards like many people do.

Even on 744 board, or Q33 board. I am checking and giving up a decent percentage of time. By checking a few value hands. It protects my checking range to degree where guys think twice before bluffing their whole range.

Realizing my equity with hands like KQ, or QJ Axs, AJo plays huge roll in overall winrate. Especially when you can do it in spot's where you can save a cbet.

Not suggesting doing it alot. Or even close to balanced. But if I can save 1 cbet every 3 hours. That is massive addition to my overall winrate.

Doing it in spots like this. Where we are never really losing much value. And not compromising our equity. There is just way to much upside with very little downside.

2 to 3 times that size. It is really nice spot to to 3bet.

Weak open (likely pot builder), with calls behind from weak holdings.

88+
A10s+, A2-A5s, K10s+ KQo, AJo+, 67s+ plus likely few 1 gappers, also


Your range is on par with what I expect majority of player pool to squeeze with.

You stopped debating and started trolling. So I did same

That hand is a much better spot to check for a host of reasons:

- The notion of allowing V to "catch up" makes sense on that board where it doesn't on Q33

- Vs range is probably weaker than in the hand ITT

- V has history with you and presumably knows that your check can just be weak

- You don't really have any "natural" checks, with bluffcatchers. What I mean by that is that on Q33 there's TT/JJ and QJs at least that are in my check range already, so I don't need to artificially add value hands like AA. It's fair to ask why checking TT/JJ is better than AA. Mostly it's that one of the things I'm hoping to do when betting small is occasionally get bluff checkraised, and I would really like to have AA then and not TT.

I'm not against sometimes checking AA in general, just on Q33.

You are miles out of line with your threebet range and the PFR can just 4bet shove on you with his entire range, but if nobody ever figures that out then cool, I guess. I find I run into too many calling stations to be that loose.

-Actually he knows my checkin range can have a lot of value. Would not bother bluffing except I think I caught what he felt was bottom of his range.

-Still don't understand what your accomplishing checking 10's, JJ, and QJ. You plan to fold those hands at some point? Don't they play better as bluff catchers using bet-check-call line? Rather than a check-call-call line? For 1 we can bet smaller than the likely 50%-70% bet we will face on turn. Also running risk of losing value to hands we beat and paying max when we are beat. Also thought we where afraid of giving 22 a free card. All 3 of those hands are way more susceptible to over cards.

-You may feel my 3 bet range is OOL. I feel it is printing money. Expect folds a huge majority of time and be in great shape equity wise when called. Getting folds 80% of time even with my Laggy image.

So you're betting TT, JJ, QJ on this board, but checking AA? That makes no sense to me.

Check TT, JJ, QJ because they are likely good, but vulnerable both to board as is and potential turn cards. Bet AA because the only turn card that concerns even remotely is a Q, and V is calling basically any pair on the flop.

Your argument for betting TT, JJ, QJ is polar opposite of betting AA. In both scenarios you are getting called by most pairs and all Q's, somehow betting the vulnerable hands is superior to betting the hand that isn't afraid of any turn?

You add balance to your checking range by checking TT, JJ, and QJ imo.

Your main argument. Is I am losing value by checking AA. Which is 6 combos.

Now both of you are arguing to check 6 combos of 1010, and JJ and 3 combos of QJ. That is 15 combos of lost value.

You likely are losing max and winning minimum with those hands. While giving free cards, which you seemed to be super afraid of.

By betting those hands, still getting value from all hands we are ahead and deny equity to a portion of his range.

Not a fan of turning large chunks of my value range into bluff catchers. When it has already been stated we doubt he will be turning 66 into a bluff.