Another basic

[Crimson]

When people CC and raise a raggedy board it screams pocket pair, especially vs a weak-tight like this. I'd say that 80% of the time your opponent (based on his stats) will have something like 77 or 88, and another 10% of the time he will have a weak ace with the gut shot draw and two over cards. Either way we are behind at the moment.

3 betting for fold equity is bad in this position, if he is going to fold to a turn scare card like an A K or Q than he is doing so without the 3 bet.

The turn you can check raise a ten or any heart as they are unlikely to scare him out of betting, and your chances of pulling it off increase. With a K, you risk it being checked through, so a bet out seems in order. If you think he is capable of folding to a turn bet, consider semi-bluffing an Ace or a Queen as well, but only occasionaly. If a brick falls, I check call, and bet out anything I hit on the river, or check fold.

[Lurker4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against a weak-tight player with those stats i think this frequently a mid pair. I'd call and checkraise a turn T, heart, and maybe a A/Q (if he can fold), and bet a K.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you please explain why you would c/r a T but donk a K.

And: Aren`t we better off just betting out when a scare card falls? We put a lot of money in by bluff c/raising the turn relatuve to the pot size.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really depends on whether the weak-tight villain can fold. If he can, then I'd just bet a K, since he'll either bet/fold the turn or check with the intention of calling a river bet. These turn donkbets look more suspicious and less like a strong hand and are more likely to get called down, even by a weak tight. Thus a turn bet gains us an extra BB. A T is not as much of a scarecard so he may be more willing to calldown a checkraise, if not, then maybe betting a turn T is better than checkraising.

Similarly, this is why I'd checkraise a turn A instead of betting. That shows a lot more strength and will get a fold much more often out of the villain than betting out IMO. And if villain checks the turn since he is afraid of getting checkraised, then that's not a bad situation either getting a free card to hit one of our many outs. If we bet the turn A, we lose both advantages of fold equity, and a possible free card that checking would give us.

Of course if Villain is the type to just bet any turn and always go to SD (this is rare for a weak-tight though), I'd be check/calling any turn I miss and check/raising when I hit.

[DrSavage]

Easy 3bet, you are favorite against hands like Ax and 77 and it disguises your hand somewhat.

[DrSavage]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


It just looks and smelss like a mid pair, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does. So why we want to put more money in on the flop as an underdog?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not an underdog to mid pair.

[DrSavage]

Actually, I've changed my mind. While you are a likely favorite on the flop, 3betting takes away the opportunity to get multiple big bets on later streets and probably reduces folding equity as well. I think the best plan is to call the flop, donk an ace, king or a five and check/raise a flush and a ten.

[Trix]

Call mostly and sometimes 3bet.

[The Bryce]

Taking the lead against this guy here seems silly. You won't run over anything and if he should happen to have a big hand you lose the most when you miss the big streets and I think you will win the less overall when you hit them. I would only take the lead against a guy who I thought might fastplay ace-high here. With position I 3 bet here almost always (unless he's so weak that I think I can push him off a mid-pair if the Q/A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] falls or something).