At least I\'m getting the low.
 

Stack sizes:
UTG: $1.000.80
US: $406.40
SB: $390.00
BB: $400.00

Pre-flop: (4 players) US is Button with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
UTG calls, <font color="#cc0000">US raises to $18</font>, SB calls, BB folds, UTG calls.

Flop: 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] ($58, 3 players)
SB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#cc0000">US bets $40</font>, SB folds, UTG calls.

Turn: 9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] ($138, 2 players)
UTG checks, US checks.

River: 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($138, 2 players)
<font color="#cc0000">UTG bets $200</font>, US??


no reads on main villain, one of my 1st hands at the table. Other guy is taggish i think. Villain's limp/call would suggest he's at least somewhat donkish.

I don't think there's anything to discuss really, just want your general opinion. Here are the only reasons for your choice imo.


fold: he has a FH/better straight too often

call: he has an overplayed 3/other random hand (AA etc). some of the time, but we are still behind his range.

shove: same as call, but we are ahead of his range.


if you have anything to add to that, please do o/w just vote, thanks [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
call: he has an overplayed 3/other random hand (AA etc). some of the time, but we are still behind his range.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think we're behind his range for betting but that we are behind his range for calling a shove.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

im pretty sure his betting range = calling range except for a really small amount of the time where he's bluffing. which is pretty much never imo

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

two things are key here:
1) you say his betting range = calling range. i can agree with this
2) we need to be good 50% to raise while with the initial call we are looking at 1.7:1 or 42% equity to just call.

&lt;42% equity: fold
42%-50%: call
&gt;50%: shove

i think 3x is basically his threshold hand to make this play and i think we'll see the overbet more with the higher end of his range. thus i would probably fold 3x, call with A2, probably shove 67 and obv shove all boats+

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

If his betting range = his calling range, then we should either fold (when behind) or push (when ahead).

I think we're ahead of his betting range, so if your assumption about betting range=calling range is right, we have to push

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
If his betting range = his calling range, then we should either fold (when behind) or push (when ahead).

I think we're ahead of his betting range, so if your assumption about betting range=calling range is right, we have to push

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not that simple; see above

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If his betting range = his calling range, then we should either fold (when behind) or push (when ahead).

I think we're ahead of his betting range, so if your assumption about betting range=calling range is right, we have to push

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not that simple; see above

[/ QUOTE ]Good point [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]. I agree on your advice (folding 3x, calling A2, shoving 76 and boats).

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
two things are key here:
1) you say his betting range = calling range. i can agree with this
2) we need to be good 50% to raise while with the initial call we are looking at 1.7:1 or 42% equity to just call.

&lt;42% equity: fold
42%-50%: call
&gt;50%: shove

i think 3x is basically his threshold hand to make this play and i think we'll see the overbet more with the higher end of his range. thus i would probably fold 3x, call with A2, probably shove 67 and obv shove all boats+

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a very good post

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If his betting range = his calling range, then we should either fold (when behind) or push (when ahead).

I think we're ahead of his betting range, so if your assumption about betting range=calling range is right, we have to push

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not that simple; see above

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think it's slightly more complicated but don't think it's much more complicated at all unless I'm missing something:

Board: 3h 4c 3s 9s 5c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 59.917% 56.20% 03.72% 68 4.50 { As2d }
Hand 1: 40.083% 36.36% 03.72% 44 4.50 { 99, 55-33, A3s-A2s, K3s, Q3s, J3s, T3s, 93s, 83s, 76s, 73s, 63s, 53s, 43s, 32s, A3o-A2o, K3o, Q3o, J3o, T3o, 93o, 83o, 76o, 73o, 63o, 53o, 43o, 32o }

In this scenario, I'm giving him any 3 (along with any fh and any straight and we're way ahead and we should shove.

Take away just a few of the least likely combos with a three and we're looking at less than 30% equity here in which case we should fold. I'm pretty sure I shove or fold here.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

76 is pretty much the same hand as A2 here

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

I don't think we should shove (I agree with terp on why there's a difference between calling and shoving), it's close between call and fold, leaning slightly towards fold.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

[/ QUOTE ]


Folding is extremely weak and you'll get runover at 2/4 if you do that here.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
im pretty sure his betting range = calling range except for a really small amount of the time where he's bluffing. which is pretty much never imo

[/ QUOTE ]
If you think this is true it's a fold, 99/55/44/33&gt;&gt;&gt;3x imo. There's 2 combos of Axs, how many limp/call 3x utg? There's 10 combos of FHs/quads, all of them likely to play this way. He's def more likely to overbet a FH on the river.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

[/ QUOTE ]


Folding is extremely weak and you'll get runover at 2/4 if you do that here.

[/ QUOTE ]
This statement means nothing. As usual.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

[/ QUOTE ]


Folding is extremely weak and you'll get runover at 2/4 if you do that here.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT, once the highly advanced 2/4 limp/calling regs figure out that you're folding the 10th nuts to an overbet in reasonably small pots, they'll start doing it every time they read you for less than the 9th nuts.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
im pretty sure his betting range = calling range except for a really small amount of the time where he's bluffing. which is pretty much never imo

[/ QUOTE ]
Why can't he have some A3 hand, missed the turn c/r and now overbets/fold the river? Do you think he's not betting or not folding?

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

i dont think he expects you to fold, that said he prolly views your hand as a marginal 2 pair hand at best and could be doing this with worse. I dont think villain can have that many 3s and couple of those, maybe ~4 combos, also have a FH here. nor do i think he can have 99, but even 5s full is possible. agree with nick royale that the overbet is much more likely to be a FH than 67 and worse. it's only 4 handed so your range for calling should be a little wider. I would think it's about neutural EV to call here, maybe youll lose slightly, and I would never shove.

also, timing tells can be important, when donks insta bet big on river it's usually a missed turn c/r.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

I think its a fold, but I wouldnt fault you for calling.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

[/ QUOTE ]


Folding is extremely weak and you'll get runover at 2/4 if you do that here.

[/ QUOTE ]
This statement means nothing. As usual.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

I rule out shove immediately.

read less my default is to call. 67,44,99 are obviously beating us. but he could have 3x or an overpair. Def. is close.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

Fold. This is only a bluff so unless you have a read that it is forget about it. If he had AA or 3x he would not play it this way.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

I call but I dont like it at all.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he has a full house

44 or 99

i fold and its not close imo

[/ QUOTE ]


Folding is extremely weak and you'll get runover at 2/4 if you do that here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously, what is this supposed to mean? This is a terrible way to think. Just play situations, don't worry about being to "weak" for 2/4.

Re: At least I\'m getting the low.
 

ok a few mixed answers. If i told you i called and he showed 53o and scooped, and he is buttong here http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post13041777


does your answer change now?