Quote:
Originally Posted by jack4you
If you disagree then I would like to know why, let’s say the button has none of this flop.
If I check, they may make a bet to represent an ace when they don’t have an ace and get me to fold the winning hand whereas if I bet and they don’t have anything they may fold.
I see betting as an action to deny the button from being able to rep an Ace without actually having one.
If you feel that is not a correct idea I would like to know why.
It’s not that it’s “incorrect” per se. It’s just that betting to avoid being bluffed is way down the priority list of reasons for betting:
- value (getting a worse hand to call)
- bluff (getting a better hand to fold)
- protection/equity denial
Yes our hand may be somewhat face up if we check but that’s how it goes sometimes when we get an unfavourable flop and we have 3 opponents. Having KK does not entitle us to the pot and we don’t have to win every hand.
Also, it’s simply incredibly likely that one of your opponents has an ace. Why are you only worried about the button? Bb and UTG will naturally check to the preflop raiser even if they have an ace (or a set for that matter).
Lastly, we can balance our checking range here with some check calls with draws and some Ax and some check/raises with sets. We don’t always have a “scared of the ace “ hand when we check. Here we do and I would simply check fold 4-handed.