100/200 8 -- peeling 4th - Page 2

Beavis68 · #11 10-30-2006, 11:40 PM

why did you call 3rd?

HOWMANY · #12 10-30-2006, 11:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
why did you call 3rd?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the game is 3 handed then folding 3rd would be pretty horrible.

Alchemist · #13 10-31-2006, 12:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
easy fold IMO, you hand is pretty crappy

[/ QUOTE ]

Especially with the 74 calling. Insta-folding is your only play.

FishySayBANG! · #14 10-31-2006, 12:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why did you call 3rd?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the game is 3 handed then folding 3rd would be pretty horrible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite. If this was HU then sure...we could call it horrible.

If it is three handed then this is very close. You basically have to play pretty well on the later streets and have to have two bad players to really make this a profitable call.

And if this is full ring or more than 4 handed then its probably a muck.

The ante is also a consideration here.

Andy B · #15 10-31-2006, 03:07 AM

Do you routinely fold three-flushes with two babies for one bet on third street?

FWIW, I'd take one off on fourth.

mmcd · #16 10-31-2006, 04:20 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you routinely fold three-flushes with two babies for one bet on third street?

FWIW, I'd take one off on fourth.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's close on 4th. The cut-off for me is whether my 3-low appears to be smoother than the other guy's low draw. Here, it doesn't.

Edit: It may sway this to a call if the other guy going low is likely to fold 5th if you catch low and he bricks (but still has a good draw against your board).

Beavis68 · #17 10-31-2006, 10:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Do you routinely fold three-flushes with two babies for one bet on third street?

FWIW, I'd take one off on fourth.

[/ QUOTE ]

they way it was formatted confused me, I thought it was only two to a flush. I would not fold a 3 flush.