We have position on the limper. And seems like with wide ranges, betting could be reasonable, and if the IP player folds, we could barrel vs the limp caller. If you are checking, are you just folding to a bet? I think the cold caller will have a wide range certainly containing things like KJo, and even things like AK. Because people can have things like AK here, it seems like we could think about betting. A lot of PP and A high that fold flop, and vs the oop player, we can probably barrel against a very wide range that contains things like J8o

Ive gotten very mixed responses in this spot tho. My friends who play live for a living are more on the cbet flop side, and seems like my friends with more online experience are tending to check fold.

It’s hard for me to see why check folding is a good idea. Even if we don’t bet flop, it seems like we are ahead parts of the IP range and can also bluff some Run outs

I'm basing my decision to check on the fact that in theory when you get called IP, you're generally supposed to mostly check instead of bet, because IP coldcaller (outside of BvB) is going to have a very tight and defined range unlike you who has all the hands you open with, so that results to us being forced to check more often than bet, and then there's the obvious fact that we're OOP so we're less incentivized to put money in voluntarily. I haven't done any solver work regarding multiway situations, but what I'm assuming to be true is that once you get another call and it's 3way to the flop, our checking frequency is supposed to go up even more. Since I already check almost automatically when I get called by the IP in a heads-up situation, I'm even more prone to do that 3way.

I think the most common hesitation towards checking comes from the fact that it is often considered to be "giving up", especially when you can imagine hands that you win againts by betting and so on. I would like to just point out that IP player is not going to be betting everytime when we check, so we get to see the turn fair amount and start betting if we want to. And if IP player is going to bet everytime, check/raising and check/calling become profitable. There's also the fact that betting doesn't win you the pot as often as you might think, it's fairly likely that we're going to lose the pot againts worse draws like QJ/KJ when we bet and now the pot is bigger, unless we triple barrel obviously.

All that said, I'm not necessarily opposed to betting as much as I am opposed to insistence on betting, if that makes sense.

Samu Patronen

I get that in an online or competitive environment, the IP cold calling range is going to typically be very strong. But this is Live 1-2 we are talking about. The cold caller could straight up be calling with hands like A8o, 22+, 76o, K2s+, Q2s+ etc. Obviously this will vary quite a bit, but I think in general a live players calling range is obnoxiously wider than what you'd typically see online. Addtionally, the limp caller probably has all those mentioned hands, and more.

I can see that a flop bet might not have a high success frequency, but we do have 2 overs, a gutshot, and the opportunity to barrel against the OOP player at a high frequency. I can see checking being reasonable as well, but im not sold that I'd want to check fold. Maybe facing a a large bet soley because bigger bets will be unbalanced towards value, but against anything close to half pot or smaller it becomes tempting to continue for the sake of showdown/being able to bluff on particular runouts.

If we check I think its difficult to bluff later streets as alot of top pair is going to be bet on the flop in a recreationals eyes, so I would expect to get looked up quite light on later streets.

against a tight cold call IP range, I can see the merit in check folding. Maybe the way to approach it is, given the probable width of both players ranges, betting becomes reasonable, and checking to evaluate their bet size becomes reasonable as well. Facing a large bet we just pitch, facing a weaker sizing we can consider a float to either bluff favorable runouts, or check down if we think we have showdown.

Samu Patronen

I just did some plugging in flopzilla, and maybe you are right about checking the flop. Even against a very wide range, we barely meet the fold threshold assuming we use a 50% flop sizing, and we do have the player behind to consider.

When I estimated a betting range for him, the equity of our hand against his range (not even considering the OOP player) was just around 20%. I guess some issues that arise from check calling are tainted outs, and the very real possibility that not all hands get bluffed in his shoes. I can finally see the merit in checking and folding here. Thanks! :)