KK on paired QxxQ turn OOP line?

I'd prefer to bet the turn rather than give a free card to hands like 76cc or T9s.

People often dislike folding their 8x/TT here when the board pairs as they know it's not likely for us to have Qx.

I doubt many villains flat 76s or T9s MPvMP, so I think this line is fine. I think bet flop, check turn OOP often provokes a bluff, because so many players will bluff cbet that flop then give up when called.

Originally posted by Lathdari
I doubt many villains flat 76s or T9s MPvMP, so I think this line is fine. I think bet flop, check turn OOP often provokes a bluff, because so many players will bluff cbet that flop then give up when called.

We're facing an unknown at NL5. You're giving them a lot of credit if you think they're folding suited connectors to a single raise.

Originally posted by MJPerry
I'd prefer to bet the turn rather than give a free card to hands like 76cc or T9s.

...

Giving free cards to unlikely holdings like the ones you mention is something you have to do when he also holds a bundle of hands that hit that Q.

This pot should be played as small as possible because we aren't really in the drivers seat whether we bet or not. Position >> Initiative

Yeah it's so unlikely someone would see a flop with a suited connector and then call a bet with a straight draw or second pair.

He doesn't hold "a bundle of hands that hit that Q" because there's two Qs on the board. It's also obviously very hard for him to have KQ which is the most likely Qx hand he can hold.

The problem is we can be slightly ahead or massively behind.
I like keeping the pot small.

Originally posted by nitrol
The problem is we can be slightly ahead or massively behind.
I like keeping the pot small.

TBF I think it's "massively ahead or massively behind". I'm also fairly convinced we could get a thin three streets out of 8x or TT or something if the river blanks. NL5 player isn't folding "top two pair" on Q85Q3.

If villain has stronger than KK he'll almost certainly raise at some stage and we can easily fold, but I think a check isn't as +EV as a bet.

Originally posted by MJPerry
Yeah it's so unlikely someone would see a flop with a suited connector and then call a bet with a straight draw or second pair.

He doesn't hold "a bundle of hands that hit that Q" because there's two Qs on the board. It's also obviously very hard for him to have KQ which is the most likely Qx hand he can hold.

Touché!

I got confused and started babbling about another hand (or another board) I had in my confused mind. I stand corrected.

Still, on balance, I find his drawing holdings too few to target for protection. His semi-value hands (JJ/TT/99/A8s) aren't certain enough to call to warrant a bet.

Originally posted by YohanN7
Still, on balance, I find his drawing holdings too few to target for protection. His semi-value hands (JJ/TT/99) aren't certain enough to call to warrant a bet.

Replied addressing this above. I'm not saying it isn't thin, but I think that a lot of players will struggle to fold second pair here when we rep so thin ourselves, AND if he has better than KK we'll find out about it soon anyway.

Even in a ahead / behind situation we should keep the pot small.

The argument I have is that villain has three categories of hands here:

Monsters: AQ, 88, etc.
Draws: 76s, T9, J9cc, whatever.
Mediocre hands: 98s, JJ, etc.

If we check, mediocre hands that will definitely call one bet (and might call another, smaller bet on a non-scary river) check back. Some draws check back and some bet. Depends on villain. Monsters usually bet (88/55 may check back because NL5 players love to slowplay).

So if we check and face a bet, THEN we're in a way ahead/way behind situation - plus we're OOP and not sure if we have to call another river bet.

If we bet, medium-strength hands and draws call, which is good. Sure, we're up against AQ or 55 sometimes but I think the times we have to bet/fold are worth the times we can get a bit more value out of his more common medium-strength hands/draws.

I agree with YohanN7 that position trumps initiative, but that's no argument to give up initiative!

If he bets the river - you are gone.

All in all a good discussion. Arguments for and against both hold qualitatively. Probably the particular opponent type should be decisive for the best line. Check and call once, check and call twice, or bet.