Lol you said we can c/r some flops. It's up to you to tell me what you meant by that.
My original statement that you responded to was, "Plus nothing says you can't x/r some flops. If you think his range is wide enough to 4bet/stack-off, then it is certainly wide enough to take some pots down post-flop or even x/c with A high."
I think that's pretty clear what I meant. In fact, what I meant is explicitly stated. It's pretty obvious that I was referring to x/r'ing vs. the type of range you are assuming he has (i.e. wide enough to 4bet/stack against), not against the tight range that I think is more accurate, especially considering that way back in this thread I said I would just fold vs. an unknown. And especially considering that I actually said explicitly in the above statement, "If you think his range is wide enough to 4bet/stack-off," thus making it completely obvious that I wasn't referring to x/r bluffing a tight range.
But your statement, "On the flip side of the coin, if you think his range is too narrow to 4bet, then CR bluffing most flops is gonna be spew," suggests that I was recommended x/r'ing vs. a range that is too narrow to 4bet against (i.e. a tight range), which I obviously wasn't at all, thus making your statement irrelevant.
Ya see, I don't like the assumptions you are making about what he does preflop...if those were true then it's quite obvious 4betting would be a mistake but that doesn't mean your assumptions are true.
That's fine, and it's true I haven't played 50nl in a while but my experience on 50nl Merge a few months back was that people in general don't mess around with UTG raisers that much, and so folding AK with no information in this spot was pretty clearly correct. I just doubt it's really changed THAT much to make 4bet/stack off so obviously correct as you purport. And if it has changed that much, then calling is still +EV, so saying to 4bet and it's not even close is still wrong, which was my point in the first place.
I think you need to know a lot about his range to make these kinds of assertions, that is the main reason calling oop is so bad. We know nothing...NOTHING about his range, nor NOTHING about what he does postflop with it. That is why i advocate playing aggressively here (or folding). It makes our postflop decisions way easier and arguably more +ev.
We have to know something about his range or else you wouldn't be able to say that 4betting is so obviously the right play. We don't know anything about this guy in particular, but we know about player population tendencies (i.e. averages), which is the best available information to use to approximate his range in this situation. If we really knew NOTHING about his range, then we would not be able to say that any one play was the right play "and it's not even close," which was my point in the first place (again, note that I never said calling is definitely the play. I just said that it's a lot closer than you say it is and that your logic for approximating EV was incorrect).
I would make the contention that we rarely ever get more than a postflop cbet out of him when we are ahead. Again, this comes from the fact that we know nothing about his postflop tendencies or his preflop range.
If that's the case, then we can be super confident about folding turns vs. him since he is never bluffing. This makes calling even more attractive because he is unbalanced on the turn, and we therefore do not experience as high reverse implied odds.