3bp: AK bricks vs rec OOP
Posted by footlong
Posted by
footlong
posted in
Low Stakes
3bp: AK bricks vs rec OOP
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (6 Players)
BN: $49.64
SB: $26.09
BB: $27.12 (Hero)
UTG: $42.87
MP: $25.00
CO: $25.80
SB: $26.09
BB: $27.12 (Hero)
UTG: $42.87
MP: $25.00
CO: $25.80
villain unknown, looked him up and he was 1-tabling
Preflop
($0.35)
Hero is BB with
A
K
, , , , , , ,
Flop
($6.60)
6
4
6
,
As a default I like betting small vs a rec here, simply for value, protection and often a free/cheap SD. Could probably even bet bigger like $2.20-$2.50ish
Turn
($10.40)
6
4
6
5
,
Turn is usually a fold for me as we didn't improve and this turn hits his range quite well but he bets enticingly small. Still a fold or should we peel one off and hope for a free SD? Are there any cards you'd x/c his bet on?
Loading 5 Comments...
My default play versus a one-tabler (rec) would be to check. Whether or not your small bet yields higher EV, I don't know. Intuitively, I feel like you take away his opportunity to bluf and end up in a weird guessing game, not knowing how wide he peels the flop. Therefore, my guess is that this hurts you more than it benefits you in terms of value/protection or whatever. For me, checking prevails, since it allows opponent to make more mistakes that I can punish. It seems harder for opponent to make equivalently significant mistakes versus the small betsize. But again, I could be convinced otherwise.
What happens OTT is exactly what I'm worried about. Was he peeling flop wide and now bluffing liberally? Was he overfolding flop and therefore now too valueheavy to continue? You end up in a weird guessing game because you don't know how villains react to such small sizings, while they often play way more predictBle and transparant faced by a check or "normal" betsizing. Since you exercise this betsize frequently, you probably have gathered more data to support your Reading ability in these spots.
I can see your point. I still think betting flop has some advantages. Firstly I do need a lot of protection vs hands like JT and with that sizing I can straight out valuebet vs quite some hands. At least bunch of A highs are gonna call here I think. Another good thing is that I can dictate the bet sizing. If he has 77 I don't run the risk of having to x/c 1/2p and up but can see a turn very cheaply and maybe even get a free river if the turn is a T and villain isn't comfortable valuebetting anymore.
Yes, I take away his opportunity to bluff, but I don't think it's such a big loss since his bluffs have decent equity and it will be tough getting to SD and winning with AK high vs his overall range. I.e. is the turn spot any different if I x/c'd the flop for 1/2p and he keeps betting?
I like x/c way more vs comfirmed laggy/aggressive recs but since my default assumption is overpassivity I can see a lot of merits in betting.
Given your assumptions it seems common sensical indeed. Interesting.
I just don't get why you would call turn though in that case. Hes either too passive and the small flopbet is Great because of it and you can comfortably fold turn, OR the flopbet isn't Great and you rather check. Right?
I see little fold eq, along with few, possible dirty outs. Just x/fold turn.
Be the first to add a comment