how do u proceed deep on this flop?

cbet

bet 14 flop , c/f turn
there is no reason he call without an ace.

On January 10 2011 17:51 waga wrote: bet 14 flop , c/f turn there is no reason he call without an ace.

thats just silly. he can also have a set

check/call and re-evaluate is fine

but by using this line you should be balancing vs regulars by doing it with any Ax (AK and AQ included)

On January 10 2011 18:04 Fayth wrote: check/call and re-evaluate is fine but by using this line you should be balancing vs regulars by doing it with any Ax (AK and AQ included)

Is NL100 good enough for regs to recognize and remember balancing though?

Id prefer betting flop and most likely check/folding turn. I think you are going to get a lot of folds since you have 2 blockers to AK and the board has one to AQ. If hes calling the 3bet with AJ and below, then grats him.

what the hell, villain shud be calling a flop bet with any ace, you believe he should be folding???

also by checking flop and him betting we still get 1 street of value, and if he checks behind he either has nothing or he may have Qx which we can get 1 street of value later on anyway

On January 10 2011 18:35 Fayth wrote: what the hell, villain shud be calling a flop bet with any ace, you believe he should be folding??? also by checking flop and him betting we still get 1 street of value, and if he checks behind he either has nothing or he may have Qx which we can get 1 street of value later on anyway

Nah, I just hate giving the lead to the other person when we have a tough hand to play. I keep thinking about the hand and what the villain will do with the various lines taken, and there are a lot of variables. Personally, I prefer to take the aggressive route. Have him try to figure out what our hand is than us trying to figure out what his hand is.

On January 10 2011 18:27 Carthac wrote: Show nested quote + On January 10 2011 18:04 Fayth wrote: check/call and re-evaluate is fine but by using this line you should be balancing vs regulars by doing it with any Ax (AK and AQ included) Is NL100 good enough for regs to recognize and remember balancing though?

what do you mean by "remember balancing"?

it's kind of a misnomer when people say stuff like "balancing doesn't matter" at these stakes. i assume it started from microstakes players leveling themselves and overthinking in some spots, and someone came in and pointed out the obvious that in many spots you don't have to worry about balancing. but a lot of people now are getting obsessed with it and thinking balancing is never important which is just silly.

obviously there are at least some very basic situations where you should balance vs regs even at 100nl.

On January 10 2011 18:35 Fayth wrote: what the hell, villain shud be calling a flop bet with any ace, you believe he should be folding???

I meant flatting the 3bet. Of course hes going to be calling the flop cbet with an ace

On January 10 2011 18:54 bigredhoss wrote: Show nested quote + On January 10 2011 18:27 Carthac wrote:   On January 10 2011 18:04 Fayth wrote: check/call and re-evaluate is fine but by using this line you should be balancing vs regulars by doing it with any Ax (AK and AQ included) Is NL100 good enough for regs to recognize and remember balancing though? what do you mean by "remember balancing"? it's kind of a misnomer when people say stuff like "balancing doesn't matter" at these stakes. i assume it started from microstakes players leveling themselves and overthinking in some spots, and someone came in and pointed out the obvious that in many spots you don't have to worry about balancing. but a lot of people now are getting obsessed with it and thinking balancing is never important which is just silly. obviously there are at least some very basic situations where you should balance vs regs even at 100nl.

When I say they are looking for balancing, I mean are you playing the same group of people enough to where they will remember the way you played a certain hand. If you are playing a fairly new group of people every day, then balancing loses a lot of its effectiveness, as they do not know about how you chose to play a certain hand in an unconventional way the last time you played it.

You are most likely right though

On January 10 2011 19:05 Carthac wrote: Show nested quote + On January 10 2011 18:54 bigredhoss wrote:   On January 10 2011 18:27 Carthac wrote:   On January 10 2011 18:04 Fayth wrote: check/call and re-evaluate is fine but by using this line you should be balancing vs regulars by doing it with any Ax (AK and AQ included) Is NL100 good enough for regs to recognize and remember balancing though? what do you mean by "remember balancing"? it's kind of a misnomer when people say stuff like "balancing doesn't matter" at these stakes. i assume it started from microstakes players leveling themselves and overthinking in some spots, and someone came in and pointed out the obvious that in many spots you don't have to worry about balancing. but a lot of people now are getting obsessed with it and thinking balancing is never important which is just silly. obviously there are at least some very basic situations where you should balance vs regs even at 100nl. When I say they are looking for balancing, I mean are you playing the same group of people enough to where they will remember the way you played a certain hand. If you are playing a fairly new group of people every day, then balancing loses a lot of its effectiveness, as they do not know about how you chose to play a certain hand in an unconventional way the last time you played it. You are most likely right though

What you're saying is true but checking Ax and KK in this spot are both fine by default and are probably the best play regardless. Fayth isn't suggesting balancing for the sake of balancing.