Checking back when out of position after flop
Ever since being introduced to Marc Goone's material, I have been a fan of his as many of you are, but there are two strategies he uses that I deviate from that I'd like to get some thoughts on. I will be doing a post about c-betting in a minute, but this post has to do with his ritual of checking post-flop OOP even when he opens the betting pre. He has stated that he likes to do this because rec players will show the strength of their hand or "monkey stab" at it sometimes.
I understand that when you raise out of position, players can have a very wide range from later positions when the flop comes and this can be a way to potentially narrow that range, but let me tell you why I don't do that. Let's say I'm in MP with QsQc and I get two callers to my opening bet, one from the CO and the other from the BTN. Flop comes Jd 8d 5c, I'm looking good and I want to build the pot. To "check back my full range" as Mark often says would cost me a street of value. Not only that, but in the games I play in, 90% of the time if the player who opened the betting checks after the flop, everyone else checks as well so as to continue hiding the strength of their hand or to not fall victim to the person who is last to act. Sometimes whoever is last to act may go for it, but otherwise if you check when first to act, it becomes a street where everyone pretty much gets a free card. To give a free card in the hand I described would invite trouble IMO. Another diamond completes the flush draw and a number of other cards could open the door for a straight. Players can hit two pair or suddenly another 5 can bring in trips. So it seems to me that checking your range OOP position as a rule doesn't seem to accomplish all that much and instead it creates potential problems.
On the other hand, if I bet from OOP as the initial raiser, then I will thin out the crap-hands that could catch something on the turn and I build the pot with remaining hands that will typically be weaker.
What am I missing on this? Mark is phenomenal in his ability to titrate things down but I'm not understanding this line of thinking.
7 Replies
Checking oop is only used if opponents are more likely to stab at the pot.
If opponents are super passive, its better to bet it yourself for value.
Checking oop is only used if opponents are more likely to stab at the pot.
If opponents are super passive, its better to bet it yourself for value.
Is that what Marc is saying? When he plays in those 5/5 games, I can't believe that the players stab at it all that frequently. In almost all of his videos, he checks back his full range when OOP. I think one or maybe two times I have not seem him do that and he explained why he didn't (although I can't recollect exactly what the reason was). Otherwise it seemed like more of a rule than the exception, but maybe I missed something along the way.
Is that what Marc is saying? When he plays in those 5/5 games, I can't believe that the players stab at it all that frequently. In almost all of his videos, he checks back his full range when OOP. I think one or maybe two times I have not seem him do that and he explained why he didn't (although I can't recollect exactly what the reason was). Otherwise it seemed like more o
Yes that's what he was saying.
But he would also not check oop vs pros who already know his trick.
Checking oop is his default but he thinks pop tendencies overstab in general.
The assumption is the in-position players will stab too wide & telegraph their hand strength with the sizing. Also, since they stab so frequently & with some wrong hands, their check-back ranges become super weak & capped, often creating a money printing opportunity for us when flop checks through.
The exceptions to this theory come in on dry Ace/King high boards, which are under stabbed, along with paired boards. Also in low-SPR 3bet pots, typically stabbing frequencies fall off. Marc will typically deviate if he's out of position to only 1 opponent and he expects them to be passive. This is in both heads up and multiway pots.
In the case of the QQ hand, the draws you're worrying about are hands that you'll likely be worried about whether flop checks thru or your cbet gets called. I think your logic doesn't really come together. The draws to 2pair/trips are hands that Marc would expect to stab on this flop a lot, since they are vulnerable 1pair hands on a board loaded with draws. Jx/TT/99/8x would be considered super high frequency stabs, 77/66/5x would get in there every now & then, along with a few strong draws. If one of these guys bets like 2/3 pot or less, we hammer them with the big boy check raise. If they fire pot+ or close to it themselves, we prob just call with QQ.
With these assumptions, going for the check-raise is also, on average, the way to get as much money in the pot as possible, as early as possible, against a perceived weak/wide range.
I will say that I DO check back my full range when OOP position if I've called the initial raiser's bet. So if maybe I'm in the BB and cutoff raises, button flats, I would call with J 10s if the raise was pretty standard. In fact, I almost always check it dark which gives the raiser something else to think about :-)
I will say that I DO check back my full range when OOP position if I've called the initial raiser's bet. So if maybe I'm in the BB and cutoff raises, button flats, I would call with J 10s if the raise was pretty standard. In fact, I almost always check it dark which gives the raiser something else to think about :-)
Flatting preflop is very different than being the preflop raiser.
To put it simply, flatting preflop says you have a weak/marginal hand, raising preflop is announcing you have decent/good hand. Which is why cbetting is a very profitable strategy is the preflop raiser.
Calling out of position is very very hard to play profitably. Hence, most recommend 3bet/fold strategy.
Being out of position puts you at a disadvantage to begin with.
