15/30 sh

[Victor]

i think your line is fine if it were a heads up pot. however, with teammco likely drawing very live with a gutterball 3betting is superior on the turn. against some just calling down is fine too.

" I don't like check raising the river here because you get 3 bet by all kinds of crap a lot,"

im not sure we play poker on the same planet.

[ssmallz]

I'm also not in favor of the line but I think your river fold is correct. If you think you're ahead I'd much rather 3 bet the turn and go from there. On top of that, the river c/r is just a bad play b/c if he's drawing the 4c changes nothing. He can't call your c/r w/a missed draw so why checkraise? He'll just fold or 3 bet you which is bad either way.

If you think he's aggro enough to raise a draw I like 3betting the turn. If he caps you up, I think you check fold unimproved. I however, like to see showdowns so I prolly go into call down mode once he raises the turn.

Another line might be to donk the river in hopes he was trying for a free showdown on the turn w/a hand like AK, KJ or something else you beat. The nice thing about this line is that you can see a showdown for no more than 2 bets and don't have to worry about folding

[PokerBob]

why are you in this pot in the first place?

[Heir_Aparent]

ya, preflop is bad. im really bad about calling out of BB when i shouldnt.

one thing i overlooked was teammco because dutring the hand i wasnt concerned about him at all. i guess the reason i played it like this is because on the turn i was afraid to 3bet because i felt i was almost always beat. on the river i was like ill raise and if he 3bets its a very easy fold. this may be true but regardless the river value raise makes no sense if i think im behind on turn, obviously.

i think best play is probably 3bet/call and fold river UI.

[ropeadope]

IMO the whole notion of being able to "c/r and safely fold if three bet" is becoming less and less valid as online poker has evolved to be more and more ruled by the Lagtards. Where I play I have been bluff three bet and bluff capped on the river so many times (and I dont play high...5-10 to 20-40)by so many different players I have been forced to play these situations more cautiously, thus losing value..perhaps more importantly, if they sniff out that you can do this (and this is why you should never ever admit you did via chat or even this forum) the Lagtards will quickly adapt these moves as part of their arsenal against you...so for metagame considerations alone, this is no longer a viable option in my poker world.

You shouldn't have called pre in any case.

[Victor]

"Where I play I have been bluff three bet and bluff capped on the river so many times (and I dont play high...5-10 to 20-40)by so many different players I have been forced to play these situations more cautiously,"

i dont understand this. if ppl are madly throwing out 3bet bluffs on big streets shouldnt you absolutely be giving a lot of action in these situations.

[ropeadope]

My point is in the certitude I used to have that I was beat if raised/3 bet on the river is diminished by the "new ultra aggro style" that has evolved...thus diminishing my ability to confidently value bet...when you may equally likely be getting four bet by the nuts as by a pure bluff, you are forced to play your medium strength hands more cautiously.

[Heir_Aparent]

this is all fine and dandy, but i knew this player. he was not a lagtard, like i stated in OP, and was never, ever bluff 3 betting the river. why cant we get past this [censored]? people are just afraid to fold in limit i guess, bottom line.

I adjust my play accordingly to an obvious LAG who is capable of bluff raising. this was not the case in this hand.

[malorum]

I really don't like your line.
The preflop call is a little weak.

On the turn I think 3 betting is spew against two players.
Also your hand is just strong enough to want to get to showdown cheaply.

After the raise I go into call down mode.

[ropeadope]

"villain seems predictable and under average for the game. nontheless somewhat solid. how do u like my line?"

"i knew this player. he was not a lagtard, like i stated in OP, and was never, ever bluff 3 betting the river."

Your statement in the OP was nothing like that..if you knew with certaintly or near certaintly he would never, ever bluff three bet the riv, or three bet a worse two pair (admitedly very unlikely given how the hand was played unless he is a complete spazz)then yes folding there is correct. Looking at the hand again, it does appear certain you were beat, but what your are essentially making is an information theory type bet, i.e. that you can quantify the value of the information you receive from your river raise. The purer the signal from his three bet (i.e. the more certain you are he is not betting a worse hand), the more accurately you can work out the equation in favor of folding