About 900 effective. V1 is Asian lady open limping a lot from EP and usually calling our iso raises. She doesn't like to raise OOP unless she has a huge hand. Table has been tight passive for most part with most pots going heads up or 3 ways at most.
In this hand, V1 limps.
H raises to 25 with black 99
4 callers including V1.
Flop = Qh9h5h
H bets 80
One call
V1 min check raises to $160
Fold, H calls
Turn = blank
V bets 200 with about 500 behind.
If we call and board pairs we are stacking her. So we are basically calling 200 to win about 1k. So even if the other guy folded a Q we have about 18% equity.
So do we take the higher variance approach and call for the board pairing or fold? I have no doubt she flopped a big flush due to her check min raise. She is never doing this with just the Ah as a move - I don't think she is that tricky. She is basically very fishy.
ALSO - do we ever check a flop like this for pot control?
Think your math is wrong somewhere. You raised to $25 PF and got 4 callers, so pot is $125 going to the flop. Then $400 went in on the flop ($160 from you, $160 from V, and $80 from the guy who called your bet and folded to the raise). Pot is $525 going to the turn, and now V bets $200, so if she has another $500 behind, you're calling $200 to win $1225. This is a call getting ~6:1 implied if you're pretty sure that you're stacking her most of the time that you boat up.
Flop is definitely a bet for value against Qx and hands like AhX, KhX, JT.
I don't think it's terrible to check this flop. An AhXx will most likely bet themselves, where we can call and take a low variance play. Also, when we do boat up, our hand is disguised which will allow us to realize equity.
It is hard to flop a flush. But going 5 ways to a flop makes this true a priori. Once we bet flop and get raised, it is actually not that unlikely that someone has a flush they want to protect. For these reasons, I would consider checking here some percentage of the time. Checking allows us to show up with boats some percentage of the time when the board pairs, giving villains some rope to hang themselves with a possible flush, or a missed flushdraw that decides to barrel. Furthermore, we are likely unwilling to play for stacks if the board does not pair up, and getting three streets of value versus a Qx is unlikely, but obviously very player dependant. In other words, I see pot control as another reason to sometimes check this flop.
The above is for a general approach. In this case, at a "tight passive" table, I would probably increase my bet % a bit, but still keep a bit of balance with checking sometimes.
I don't think it's terrible to check this flop. An AhXx will most likely bet themselves, where we can call and take a low variance play. Also, when we do boat up, our hand is disguised which will allow us to realize equity.
It is hard to flop a flush. But going 5 ways to a flop makes this true a priori. Once we bet flop and get raised, it is actually not that unlikely that someone has a flush they want to protect. For these reasons, I would consider checking here some percentage of the time. Checking allows us to show up with boats some percentage of the time when the board pairs, giving villains some rope to hang themselves with a possible flush, or a missed flushdraw that decides to barrel. Furthermore, we are likely unwilling to play for stacks if the board does not pair up, and getting three streets of value versus a Qx is unlikely, but obviously very player dependant. In other words, I see pot control as another reason to sometimes check this flop.
The above is for a general approach. In this case, at a "tight passive" table, I would probably increase my bet % a bit, but still keep a bit of balance with checking sometimes.
no - checking does nothing but make us play guessing games in what Villain can have - and we miss a ton of value vs hands that will call a bet but won't bet themselves.
