|
For my 5000th post I'll describe why I think its a 95% c/c:
Speaking generally about your gameplan, this flop sucks to lead.
The reason for this is that its a flop that he's very likely to cbet. On flops like 994, or flops like K95, my number one objective is to capitalize on my opponent's overly zealous continuation betting and barreling strategy. I'll do so by check raise bluffing flops, check raising thinly for value, or check calling to induce barrels which I will then call.
On wetter flop textures, leading becomes a powerful and viable strategy, because there's a much higher likelihood that the flop will be checked through if I check. This is almost universally bad for me because if we both missed the flop he gets a free shot to hit and my ability to bluff is curtailed, and if I hit the flop he gets a free shot to beat me and I lose a potential street of value.
So that said, I'd never lead here because I don't want to shut down his cbet. The two remaining decisions are c/r and c/c.
C/r is however bad, because even though we have a pretty big hand, we aren't super stoked to get it in. Often times when we get it all in, he has a 9 and we are drawing just to our flush draw, and also sometimes we are completely dominated by the NFD. Essentially check raising is risking 100 big blinds to win like 14. Thats pretty poor risk/reward.
C/cing has some benefits though. It allows villain to barrel us when we turn a ten or a king. We get to profitably play multiple streets vs a pretty weak range, keeping the pot small while we don't have anything. Its also much lower variance. Also I actually think that we get less credit when we hit a flush, just because our passive line reeks of so many weak hands like pairs and ace high.
|