Well, if you guys haven't read my latest overbetting idea, please don't until reading this post. Also, by the way, anyone else is welcome to answer, but I specifically direct my question to these guys because we've at least seen each other play a little bit.

Suppose this: We're at the same 2/5 table with something like $1,200 stacks. I raise in MP, a few callers. Pot of $100. Flop comes K65r. I push. What do you call with? 66? 55? AK?

I'll have to say that I would be VERY hard pressed not to call any of you guys with 66. I know for sure I'd call MVP with 66 (just because of the way he plays--well, I say that, but I think it would depend on how much he had had to drink, what he was doing otherwise, etc.). I'd probably grit my teeth and lay down to everyone else--and maybe to MVP, too, if the move was just completely out of character.

There's also absolutely no way on God's green earth I'd call any of you with AK here. And in point of fact, that's a bad laydown to my suggested strategy. If you hold AK, then I hold KK only once and the draws 3 times. You win against the draws 2/3 of the time, so basically you get 2/3 of my stack three times (plus the small dead pot) for a total of two stacks. And you lose essentially always vs. my KK the one time. That nets you one full stack over 4 tries.

So, making that fold given the strategy is a $300 mistake (stack divided by 4). But I'd have to know for an absolute fact that you're playing exactly the strategy I've outlined, and that's almost impossible to know.

AA+ and I snap call and beat you up after if you did that with a set AK isn't good enough because AA can make that play.

Isn't this the splrit rock flop push strategy out of the green book?

The only problems are (as you get a lot more draws than sets on the flop)

a) how are you playing the other 75% of draws (or whatever), and
b) is this really extracting maximum value for all your sets if you play them all this way?

It probably is. I haven't read the green book thoroughly, but it's definitely inspired by his comments on BOW's strategy.

Then, as to a), actually, I think, on a given board, there are only a very limited number of draws that fit the bill--roughly equal in number to the sets. If we take a double-draw board, like J85, where both 67 and 9T make the draw, I'd only be doing it on the top draw. I suppose if it's suited, you could do 67s and 9Ts both in the appropriate suit, but I think it's better then just to do 9Ts plus nut flush draws.

On other draws, which really usually presuppose offsuit cards, I'd just play them normally--probably making a normal-sized raise in most instances on rainbow boards. Similarly on the one straight draw that doesn't have runner-runner with it.

On b), I'm not doing it on all sets but only on top set and deep. This is certainly going to get a lot of folds, but I think other sets are going to have major trouble laying down--and since TP becomes unlikely, you generally do get a lot of laydowns anyway. Like on the K65 board where you have KK, the only hands that can give you real action are 78, AA, 65 and the two sets almost always. Of those about 1/3 are sets. Assuming the sets will call the huge overbet, I think folding out the other hands is probably worth it for that profit. It's difficult to get a double-stack even in a raised pot with just normal betting.

Of course, you COULD consider putting only half your stack in. But I think that makes the draws really difficult on various turns. And a set is then actually going to have odds to call you even if you do make the straight.