$3 NLHE STT: Check this flop?

[tzuriel]

Hand History driven straight to this forum with DriveHUD Poker HUD and Database Software

Knew nothing about this V. I think PF I was okay with a 3bet. Hated the flop, obviously. Should I just check here and try to get to showdown?

NL Holdem $3+$0.30 (20.00BB)
SB ($1976)
BB ($1996)
UTG ($2173)
EP ($1931)
MP1 ($1931)
MP2 ($1776)
HJ ($1996)
CO ($2384)
HERO ($1837)

Dealt to Hero: Q♣ Q♥

UTG Folds, EP Folds, MP1 Folds, MP2 Folds, HJ Raises To $52, CO Folds, HERO Raises To $142, SB Folds, BB Calls $120, HJ Folds

Hero SPR on Flop: [4.73 effective]
Flop ($358): 7♣ 8♦ K♥
BB Checks, HERO Bets $179 (Rem. Stack: $1516), BB Raises To $895 (Rem. Stack: $959), HERO Folds

Spoiler

BB wins: $716

 

[fundiver199]

If he has a K or a small set, you are drawing to 2 outs, and if he has a worse hand like 99-JJ or AX, he is drawing to 2-3 outs as well, and he is not going to pay, if you go bet, bet, shove. There is no flushdraw on board, and its highly unlikely, he cold called your 3-bet with anything, that picked up a straightdraw on this board. So this is a way ahead way behind spot, and I would clearly prefer to check back for pot control. Get one step closer to showdown and keep his bluffing range alive. As played an easy fold when you get raised.

 

[magister1]

I don't hate the bet since AA, KK, AK are all in your 3-bet range. I think this would be a good spot to down-bet like 1/4 of pot instead of 1/2 since its a way ahead way behind situation.

As played, gotta fold to the x/r.

 

[puzzlefish]

In agreement with the rest, when you are not ahead of your opponent's range on the flop there's no shame in checking it back and finding a better spot elsewhere.

 

[tzuriel]

Thanks everyone. I appreciate the feedback

 

[300HPGOD]

I definitely see the point others make by checking but are we checking when we hit here as well such as with hands like KQ suited, AK, AA, etc. ? I know I am not checking so I would bet here and then play the turn as a check most of the time. I am in agreement that in these situations the flop or turn should be a check but balance wise (if thats even important in the micros) I like betting the flop here.

Imo you played the hand fine except I would 3 bet to a little larger sizing since most players at this level call 3 bets too often (even though this villain didnt). I then would bet the flop but smaller than you did. I think 99 and 1010 hands that villain could have could call a street if you make it small enough.

The other issue I have with checking the flop here is that if villain is on their toes then they can small bet the turn after we 3 bet check and then we have to be in a guessing game whether our hand is good or not. I prefer betting, getting some folds and then if we do get called we should get checked to on the turn where we can check behind and then play the river as best we can.

 

[fundiver199]

I definitely see the point others make by checking but are we checking when we hit here as well such as with hands like KQ suited, AK, AA, etc. ? I know I am not checking so I would bet here and then play the turn as a check most of the time. I am in agreement that in these situations the flop or turn should be a check but balance wise (if thats even important in the micros) I like betting the flop here.

For sure it caps our range, if we check back the flop. But how is it any different, if we bet tiny on the flop and then check back the turn? This is also not something, we would ever do with hands like AA or AK, so its just the same. Not saying that a small flop bet is bad, but I dont really see, how it change anything significantly. After checking back turn, we might still be facing a river bet, and we will still be playing the exact same kind of guessing game.

 

[zuker]

Well played! Standard c-bet on pretty dry flop and fold against agression.

 

[300HPGOD]

For sure it caps our range, if we check back the flop. But how is it any different, if we bet tiny on the flop and then check back the turn? This is also not something, we would ever do with hands like AA or AK, so its just the same. Not saying that a small flop bet is bad, but I dont really see, how it change anything significantly. After checking back turn, we might still be facing a river bet, and we will still be playing the exact same kind of guessing game.

It makes a difference in my mind since the villain will not potentially see weakness until after the turn action. Your point has validity especially if the villain is going to get to the river with us but betting the flop gets some folds so I prefer it and there are plenty of players that do like to bet flop and then check turn to induce on the river so certain players (depends on how much villain knows us) could check turn after betting flop with a big hand in this spot.

 

[fundiver199]

It makes a difference in my mind since the villain will not potentially see weakness until after the turn action. Your point has validity especially if the villain is going to get to the river with us but betting the flop gets some folds so I prefer it and there are plenty of players that do like to bet flop and then check turn to induce on the river so certain players (depends on how much villain knows us) could check turn after betting flop with a big hand in this spot.

I think, checking back the flop or making a small bet is very close in EV. So its mostly a matter of stylistic preference. If we want to be truly balanced and use only one sizing on the flop, then the theory behind "downbetting" is, it allow us to bet more hands like in this case QQ. Whereas if we pick a larger sizing, like Hero did, QQ is to in between to bet and should be checked back.

With that being said your above statement does sound a little bit like, you prefer the opponent to fold his junk, because you dont want to face a bluff catching situation later. And that is maybe not the best way to think about poker. Sure bluff catching is always a little bit uncomfortable, but comfortable does not always equal profitable.

Also I will say, that if we are ever going to take the line of checking back the flop with a marginal made hand, its difficult to find a more perfect situation for it than this, given that there are so fews ways for the opponent to draw out on us, if he is not ahead already. So if you dont check back QQ here, then you are basically saying, that you always bet any marginal made hand on the flop.

Which again maybe thats fine, but you are not really mixing up your game at all then, which probably make you somewhat easy to play against. Or to put it another way, what does your range look like, when you occationally check back the flop? Is it only complete junk, that you are giving up with? Or do you have a C-bet percentage of 100? Again not saying, that its bad to put out a small bet here, but these are some points to at least consider.

 

[300HPGOD]

I think, checking back the flop or making a small bet is very close in EV. So its mostly a matter of stylistic preference. If we want to be truly balanced and use only one sizing on the flop, then the theory behind "downbetting" is, it allow us to bet more hands like in this case QQ. Whereas if we pick a larger sizing, like Hero did, QQ is to in between to bet and should be checked back.

With that being said your above statement does sound a little bit like, you prefer the opponent to fold his junk, because you dont want to face a bluff catching situation later. And that is maybe not the best way to think about poker. Sure bluff catching is always a little bit uncomfortable, but comfortable does not always equal profitable.

Also I will say, that if we are ever going to take the line of checking back the flop with a marginal made hand, its difficult to find a more perfect situation for it than this, given that there are so fews ways for the opponent to draw out on us, if he is not ahead already. So if you dont check back QQ here, then you are basically saying, that you always bet any marginal made hand on the flop.

Which again maybe thats fine, but you are not really mixing up your game at all then, which probably make you somewhat easy to play against. Or to put it another way, what does your range look like, when you occationally check back the flop? Is it only complete junk, that you are giving up with? Or do you have a C-bet percentage of 100? Again not saying, that its bad to put out a small bet here, but these are some points to at least consider.

In a 3 bet pot where I am the 3 bettor yes my c bet % is probably very close to 100% whether or not that is right or not I am not sure, Im not an expert lol but I do feel when I 3 bet that I should either continue a story or extract value depending on what hand I have.

As far as the bluff catching statement, you are right that in this situation I dont want to bluff catch since we are deep and if we check the flop I expect to have to bluff catch for TWO streets and not just one. I would not mind at all getting to the river cheaply and then bluff catching but lets say we check flop and face a decent size bet on the turn and call to bluff catch. Then river comes absolute blank low card and we face a hefty 75-80% bet or more. Nothing in the hand changed on the river so if we thought we were good on turn then we are good now but we put ourselves in a spot where we are really flat out guessing since its a double barrel where villain could easily have Kx. So in potential two street bluff catching spots yes personally I like betting as a bluff blocker bet and if they fold their junk then that is fine since some % of the time I would not get anything from then anyway and they would not bluff. They can have marginal hands too where they would check it down with you but call you if you made a bet. I know in the long run its probably less profitable but its also less variance as well and if you trust your short stack game you dont have to take a higher variance approach when you are deep unless you want to. Just the way Im seeing it but I dont claim to be better than anyone so my approach could be flawed obviously.

 

[tzuriel]

This has been a very educational thread. Thanks everyone!