Quote:
Originally Posted by RobA
Is it worse to potentially lay AK good odds to continue, or is it worse to overplay your hand and let AA, KK or TT make the max against you?
The general principle is,
when the pot gets big, you should worry about saving the pot, not bets.
Here the mental math would seem to be close (I can post mine). But what makes aggressive play correct here is that we can sometimes get AK to fold when it "should" call because we're slightly overrepresenting our hand.
We should XR CO on the flop because AK UTG+1 probably will fold here and should against our range and not closing the betting, but actually has odds against our actual hand.
We're probably a little behind his capping range but not far behind that being behind is a marginal, not a suicidal "waste" of bets. Getting hands to fold substantial equity is worth a large portion of this 6 big bet pot, at least 1.5 bets if AK is 25%. Getting caught with a worse hand is worth at most 1.35 big bets (90% of 1.5 because we sometimes spike a Q). We won't always get AK to fold (they may not even have AK), but we won't always be behind the bettor either.
Exception is if CO is likely to decline the cbet here. If we're best then getting checked through is a disaster so leading is worth considering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongidig
The problem with this play is that you are not always going to be called down on every street with worse. Donking gives both players free information and therefore allows them to play more appropriately. You're not donking here with AQ or AK are you!
If you're against observant players and think betting out with JJ-QQ is correct in a vacuum, then you should probably lead with a few other hands too. AKs of
,
,
or sometimes the suited AQ
,
,
seems like enough range with enough equity to provide some deception.
Last edited by AKQJ10; 05-23-2018 at 09:33 PM.