WA/WB concept when first to act

I have some questions. Sometimes i'll pick up a big hand like KK/QQ/JJ in early position and raise but only manage to knock out everyone except someone in late position. So what happens if an overcard to my pair appears on the board? For example I have KK on a A 10 4 rainbow flop.

Usually using the WA/WB concept we'd check the flop in late position, call the turn bet(if there is one) and see what happens on the river. If we are OOP do we make a c-bet or still check?

C-bet everytime with one opponent in the hand IMO!

Very opponent dependent imo. Really tight players generally aren't calling many EP raises with too many Ax hands and they're not calling if you bet without an Ace (or a set) for the most part, so betting the flop accomplishes little.

Against some really loose-passive opponents betting is fine because they'll call with worse and if they raise you can throw your hand away without thinking twice.

Against the vast majority of everyone else these spots just suck.

+1

i definitely think you should be more likely to c-bet OOP than you would in position, not only in a WA/WB spot but in most situations in general. a) it makes the hand much easier to play, and b) it balances your c-betting range a bit, which is more important to do when you're out of position.

in position with KK on an A-high board you have the option to turn it into a 2 street game (letting the flop check through). out of position you don't have that option, which means your opponent can put a lot more pressure on you

there's no definitive answer. it's probably one of the tougher spots in poker that comes up a lot, and it shows why being OOP sucks. if i don't think there's any value in a bet i will usually check and just try to make good decisions based on what i know about them, their value-betting tendencies, bluffing tendencies, etc.. otherwise you're kind of just paying to avoid having to make a difficult decision (sort of like "betting for information"... the information is almost never worth what you're paying for it). but if you think they can call with worse -- namely draws, second pair -- betting has enough upside that it's usually best to do OOP

Golden archive thread...def worth reading The WA/WB concept

i really i'm not sure. i would think here checking is probably better for a few reasons. if you bet and they fold you probably had a better hand than they had. pretty much turning your hand into a bluff. if you bet and get called your probably faceing an ace. another reason i would check the flop is for pot control. you only got a pair and dont really want to built a big pot. so i would most likely check the flop and bet 1/2 to 2/3 the pot on the turn. if he does bet the flop i may go for a check/raise or just call and lead oout on the turn. but this is a good question. its really not too easy to play OOP.

Talk about turning your hand into a bluff and a much more expensive one that simply cbetting the flop.

Sometimes getting a worse hand to fold when you're OOP isn't so bad, especially if you think playing it any other way might allow your opponent to make you fold the best hand.

yes you are correct but i also think this line may get better hands to fold eg weak aces. i'm not saying i would do this all the time just when i feel as though i can get away with it. it also get more money in my stack when it works especially against weaker hands that would fold to a cbet. i know this probably isnt that best way to play but i feel it makes more money off hands you got beat and even gets some off better hands. what happens if you cbet the flop the the turn goes check check? do you fire at the river? wouldnt the check raise put the same amount of chips in the pot?