ISF (Danny), if you would read my posts more carefully you would see that several times i point out that:

1. These questions are too general because you should tailor your plays to your opponent.
2. I Emphasize that these are "thoughts" and the the word of God.

And i don't get why the logic of the post you just quoted is "appaulingly horrible." Against unknowns, i almost always cont bet in a 3-bet pot and the "A most likely didn't help his hand" was just a point about a normal opponents preflop range. The fact that i have KK or QQ in this situation shouldn't change my betting if i bet this flop almost every time without reads.


Edit i just realized that i just got confused by ISF's double negative. But nevertheless, can you make paragraphs and sentences please!


Onto other things. As ISF pointed out, my thoughts on pot control were debateable and after talking with many players about it i think i'll revise it.

First off, the main point i want to make is that checking behind a turn for "pot control" is a completely overused tactic by people who don't like to play big pots. A lot of the time, there is tremendous value in betting the turn especially if you are an aggressive player like me.

Now here is my arguement against the term "pot control." The reason i don't like the term is because most of the time, the reason you are checking or keeping the pot small is because it allows you to play your hand better, it is more +EV. In every situation you should do the move that has the best EV. You are not controlling the pot purely for the sake of keeping it small. I repeat, you are not controlling the pot purely for the sake of keeping it small.

That is what my point is. There are many reasons for doing a certain action, and it's more complicated then just keeping the pot small. It could be because your hand only has two streets of value against your opponents range, or because the opponent likes to call rivers when the turn is checked behind, it can be tons and tons of things. Pot control is a legitimate concept but it's only legitimate if you understand what people mean by it.

I'd also like to make the point that even though i don't like the term it's probably the best way to briefly describe in general why you are playing the hand the way you are. Again, i just think it's misunderstood.