Am I Playing this right?

[AMRN]

Why can"t a decent player check/fold a flop that hits a preflop cold caller"s range?

Don"t think c-betting this flop with ak would be 100% standard at all as the preflop raiser

Agree with your point in general, however having made such a huge opening raise, check/folding here feels spewy. If he had opened to a more standard raise, then I agree check/fold would be fine in this spot..... it"s his massive open raise that screws the hand up for him imo.

[AAroddersAA]

I can find the fold here on a good day (I would also have some days where I shove, these are bad days). I probably call far too often in this spot in real life.

I will have folded the best hand quite often but it is not that great of a spot (if the raise was 2.5 I change my opinion quite a lot). Certainly would not consider it overly nitty (it"s a bit nitty but not that bad). I have done it with JJ and AK at live APAT events in fact when I did not like the spots, yes to a single raise.

I think we are not giving him enough credit for the 3.5x raise as this normally means strength (unless we have seen him doing this before but I am assuming his previous raises have been normal size). It"s also an EP raise. It"s not profitable to set mine.

If you call what flop are you hoping to see? Why are we calling? We seem to be calling as we have a pair of tens do we think they are ahead of our opponents range? What is our opponents range when he raises more than normal?

I really don"t like this spot with TT. 100BB deep I am set mining all day long and expect to make money.

[AMRN]

100BB deep I am set mining all day long and expect to make money.

the number of BBs you have should be irrelevant when considering a set-mining call.....  what happens if someone re-raises to 12x before it gets to you.... you would only be getting 8/1 - not good enough to set-mine.

imo getting around 10/1 is borderline ok to set-mine. I prefer to be getting 15/1 or more, but with a chance to double up to a 70x stack in a tourney, I think getting 10/1 in this OP spot is reasonably ok..... but borderline.

[AAroddersAA]

100BB deep I am set mining all day long and expect to make money.

the number of BBs you have should be irrelevant when considering a set-mining call.....  what happens if someone re-raises to 12x before it gets to you.... you would only be getting 8/1 - not good enough to set-mine.

imo getting around 10/1 is borderline ok to set-mine. I prefer to be getting 15/1 or more, but with a chance to double up to a 70x stack in a tourney, I think getting 10/1 in this OP spot is reasonably ok..... but borderline.

If somebody raises it 12x you don"t call - the implied odds are not there

The number of BB (or the implied odds at least) is the most relevant point when considering set mining. My post is bad though I meant effective stacks (ie both myself and my opponent are 100bb deep). In which case if the raise is to 3.5BB it"s very profitable to set mine, although the whole issue with it being 3.5x rather than 2.5x probably does not exist that deep.

EDIT:- Some players have sizing tells 100BB deep when they raise 3xbb (with smaller hand) or 4xbb (with bigger hand)

[TheSnapper]

the number of BBs you have should be irrelevant when considering a set-mining call.....

I am really suprised to see you make this statement Steve, I would have thought that the decision to set mine or not is exclusively based on our implied odds and so stack size is critically important?

Furthermore, against a tight opening range its true to suggest we likely need lesser odds to set mine since the open raiser is more likely to hold a hand that can stack off when we hit our set. Even so, 10/1 is a little too short a price imho and think 15"s is about as short a price we should take.

[AMRN]

the number of BBs you have should be irrelevant when considering a set-mining call.....

I am really suprised to see you make this statement Steve, I would have thought that the decision to set mine or not is exclusively based on our implied odds and so stack size is critically important?

then you missed my point which was somewhat tongue in cheek - I was merely saying that stack size is not the be all and end all when considering implied odds - just because we are 100x deep does not mean we always have implied odds, which is the way the post I quoted might have read. I guess I was being a pedantic mofo

[Fatcatstu]

After we see the result it is obv much easier for us all to find reasons to fold pre, but in reality, don"t we all flat call and then get it in on the flop in that situation? I reckon most of us probably would.

excellent point

My life is complete