2nd nut flush, easy river raise?

[wackjob]

i'm not here to argue with you, but your math & logic is terrible. reread what OP posted, the villain in this hand is not a retard, is not a lagtard, is not a moron. he is a solid player, solid stats, and tight. villain is not going to try to bluff here with 3rd or 4th best flush, villain has the best hand and he is not going to fold, and if you are going to raise the river, folding to THIS VILLAINS 3-bet is the CORRECT play. perhaps when you are playing .10/.20 not folding is right, but this ain't the peewee stake forum.

[MrBig30]

I have to agree with Buffsta here. Raising seems like +EV even if you do call the 3-bet, even IF he never bluff-3bets. And I am not at all convinced the last call is -EV. He only needs to be bluffing a little over 10% of the time he 3-bets for the call to be profitable for us. Someone with a postflop aggression of 3 could do it more often than that I think. Say he does it 15% of the time on air or a lower spade - then the raise/call line would be HUGELY profitable, much more so than any other.

[Scary_Tiger]

I'm all for raise/calling this river.

wackjob, a 3+ AF is rarely solid.

[Buffsta8]

Wackjob,

The numbers I used I just pulled from mid air to show that there are instances where raising with no intention to fold to a 3 bet even when we are definitely losing to that 3 bet are still +ev. While it would be better still and much more profitable to fold if we know we are beat it doesnt mean we must call to save ourselves this indignity(and in the above hand im still not convinced this is the best line). A more realistic number total might be 25-30% fold 55%-60% call 15% raise but whatever it still highlights the fact its a +ev play. My math seems just fine to me... and I think calling someones advice awful and then suggesting they play micro limits to insult them is pretty childish especially when you show a blatant misunderstanding of key poker concepts in this hand.

[latefordinner]

RESULTS:

I made a crying call (because I always make them, or miss the value bet or raise entirely. it is a major leak)

and Villain had Ah9s and said in the chat box:

"you were supposed to fold that ten"

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
RESULTS:

I made a crying call (because I always make them, or miss the value bet or raise entirely. it is a major leak)

and Villain had Ah9s and said in the chat box:

"you were supposed to fold that ten"

[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, this is why it's a bad 3-bet bluff, especially with the 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] in hand. You simply aren't going to actually fold the T [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] nearly enough in practice to justify the investment. You need the parlay of opponent having the Ts, raising your river bet, and then laying it down for one more bet when you 3bet to happen more than 10% of the time; I think that is wishful thinking in today's online games against a generic "TAG" opponent.

As for your river call, it depends on the situation but obviously (warning: results-oriented thinking ahead) this is an opponent who you have to call pretty light when facing river aggression.