mono flop facing raise

definitely fold vs a r, no potential in the the eq realization at all. way better to continue w any hand that has a club instead. hard t be overfolding too much for u anyways

cbeting like u did is ok, but vs agro plrs u might want to check this board almost always and develop some xr range instead, which will make u realize a lot more of ur range eq overall (ur xr should be mostly of 2categories: flushes and AcX, vs overagros u can mix in some KcX and sets vs notoric floaters too.

I don't play these limits (still at 2nl) but is there an argument for not c eating this flop at all ? I mean its coordinated and monotone and multiway..thoughts ?

Originally posted by zednik44
I don't play these limits (still at 2nl) but is there an argument for not c eating this flop at all ? I mean its coordinated and monotone and multiway..thoughts ?

Yes. This is a board where we should be checking most of our range. We could be betting some nut flushes and maybe top set and then balance our betting range with some A♣:X bluffs.
AA without A♣: should be a check here imo.

Bet/fold this flop. Pretty much always. Eventually you want to ask yourself: What am I beating from his flop raising range, and what is my equity against this range?
In this case the best you can pretty much hope for is him raising any A

Btw, I disagree with checking this flop. Why do we want to give free-cards? Isn't there an argument for betting ~35% pot? When nobody raises we can comfortably bet the turn unless there are still 2 or 3 guys more involved

Yeaaa well betting small is an option but I think in this spot we don't want to play for a big pot. We might very well be behind already and if we are not villain might get there by the river. We are out of position and our hand retain its equity very poorly. So basically if we choose to bet we are just hoping villain folds. Also if we have a flush here we probably check it too. I think checking will keep villains range wider, induce some bluffs and make our turn&river play easier. If we bet small here we will face some bluff raises and then we have to fold.

I just ran this throuhg Snowie and a GTO solver and both tell me to check the flop and say it is higher EV play.

About giving free cards, the counter-argument would be that if we bet we are donating money to better hands. If we bet here, villain will probably just call with better hands and give us some rope to hang ourselves. Are we then going to bet the turn again in order to not give free cards? And when no more clubs come, we check the river and face a bet? Is he now bluffing or not? So betting this board with no A♣: has some problems and we will face tough decisions.

Put it this way: You have (roughly, to make the argument simple) 70% equity versus his bluffing range and 0% equity versus his made hands. As you can see, in order for you to call he must bluff considerably more than raise for value.

The presence of the third guy is important. This draws down the number of bluffs. Why should he even try to chase off his two customers with a draw? Sure, it might cut down on value raises too (the nut flush only), but weaker flushes should definitely raise and sets should probably (definitely if you ask me) raise.

Lassies point about free cards is important. Not giving free cards is vital in fixed limit. In no limit you simply have to give free cards, because it is too expensive to "protect" a second best hand.

Thanks, I see. makes all total sense.