If I'm in position and it's been checked to me, I'll almost always bet.

I am talking NL here..................

You could have been called by Ax or another PP, or many other hands that some idiots will play. In position you need to lead out with a bet and try to define where you stand. If you get raised you are done with the hand. A call and I may or may not fire again on turn depending on the player. The caller may be drawing (depending on board) or slowplaying a set, the re-raiser probably just hit his ace.

A lot depends on the reads you have on people. A super aggressive player prob would have fired into you if he missed so I am afraid of his check, but i have to bet out.

A rock is checking here most likely because he missed the flop.

either way you are at least betting out and figuring it out from there.

In a sng in a early stage I would check. or go allin preflop.

I was thinking more from a statistical point of view.

How profitable can a bet out on a raise call be regardless of the read on the player.

On a 10 man table for instance there should be an ace dealt in someones pocket cards and a further 50% chance that there will be two aces dealt.

Based on the call to a hefty raise then it would be fair to assume that an A on the flop would hit an A in the callers hand would it not?

Taking this further there is a 20% chance that the player could be calling with a pocket pair or an A and the now innocent looking cards on the flop could offer a set.

To this would you assume that in reality there could be a 20% chance you are beaten?

Therefore for every 5 bets you make post flop you may be ahead 4 times with the best hand and behind once, sounds like a good bet.

However what about the times that the preflop raise wins before the flop (i.e. folds A# and small pairs would it not now be right to assume that you are up against a premium hand when you do get a caller?

I'm coming at this from a simplistic point of view ....

I don't think you should bet KK on an A showing flop ... I think in all situations a check is the best ploy.

If its a chancer then is he likely to bet the A on the flop with rainbow nothing cards backing it, the check also opens you to the posibility of the check raise to an opponent you may feel is weak.

If someone bets strong then you have an easy fold costing you no more chips, take them next time when they fold pre flop or an A doesn't hit.

I just wanted some discussion on how people might think it a possitive bet to come out firing on this sort of hand.

Some plays are not just judgement calls ... is this one where only judgement counts?

Originally Posted by G_The_Jester

I'm coming at this from a simplistic point of view ....

I don't think you should bet KK on an A showing flop ... I think in all situations a check is the best ploy.

What if he has QQ or JJ? If you check to him, he's going to bet and you're going to have to fold the best hand. He might be more afraid of that A than you are but if you show him your fear, he's going to exploit it.....I know I would. I would put in a decent sized bet (half pot-ish) and then check/fold if I get too much action.

I was just in a hand where I had QQ in the SB. I raised, got 1 caller and the flop came AAx.....pretty scary board for Qs. But I bet out half the pot and won the pot when my opponent folded.