nl 200 - 22

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why lol ? i'm OOP so it is better than cold calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing big pots OOP w/ marginal hands is a great way to bleed money at the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing medium pots without initiative OOP bleeds way more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Are you saying that reraising is way better than calling? I can promise you that calling>folding>RRing in this spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I can guarantee you folding>raising>calling.

[RUDIKULOUS]

Im very sure preflop and flop are both fine. His raising range pf is probably pretty wide from the cutoff and he will fold much of it to a 3bet. Even if he calls, a cbet will take it down on sooooooooooooo many flops. As long as you dont do this every time this hand is fine, eff the haters.

[Milwaukee2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how all of you are saying you like his 3 bet pf with 22. This 3 bet is a pure bluff imo. If you are going to RR with 22 you might as well do it with any other random hand. Sure sometimes you are going to take down the $10 already in the pot, but you could do this with 72 off just as well. The value you get from small s and hitting sets, not bloating the pot oop with a very weak hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

22 improves to a MONSTER 12.5% of the time.

72o improves to a monster with a much lower frequency, and it is a lot more obvious to villain (and a 72x flop has someone with AA drawing with much greater equity when we have 72 than when we have 22, because the X can pair).

This is a semi-bluff, not a pure bluff, and a way better semi-bluff than with 72o or some other random hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, 22 will improve to a monster 12.5% of the time. That doesnt change the fact that we will be putting in 30-35% of our stack by reraising and cbetting the flop. The only reason I can see for reraising here is to take down the dead money, which is most certainly a bluff.

[Hince]

I don't get it... OP doesn't have enough of a read to 3-bet this pf, or enough of a read post flop to know how to continue in the hand. The fact that he posted this hand is proof of that.

Therefore, for OP I think calling PF is better than 3 betting. Never mind that he goes to showdown 40% of the time he calls.

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how all of you are saying you like his 3 bet pf with 22. This 3 bet is a pure bluff imo. If you are going to RR with 22 you might as well do it with any other random hand. Sure sometimes you are going to take down the $10 already in the pot, but you could do this with 72 off just as well. The value you get from small s and hitting sets, not bloating the pot oop with a very weak hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

22 improves to a MONSTER 12.5% of the time.

72o improves to a monster with a much lower frequency, and it is a lot more obvious to villain (and a 72x flop has someone with AA drawing with much greater equity when we have 72 than when we have 22, because the X can pair).

This is a semi-bluff, not a pure bluff, and a way better semi-bluff than with 72o or some other random hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, 22 will improve to a monster 12.5% of the time. That doesnt change the fact that we will be putting in 30-35% of our stack by reraising and cbetting the flop. The only reason I can see for reraising here is to take down the dead money, which is most certainly a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're both right, you're just thinking about the situation definitely.

When you repop 22 OOP it's a bluff that has a chance to turn into a monster. If villain will constantly fold to 3 bets preflop it's immediately +EV. If he will call PF 3 bets a lot and fold to flop cbets it's +EV, etc. I'd rather do it with a midpair, but w/e cuz sometimes you have to bet/call flop.

[Milwaukee2]

Fonkey I'd like to know why you think dropping this hand pf is the best move. Do you think the raiser isn't going to pay off often enough when we hit? Do you think there is too great of a chance we get squeezed by the BB?

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
Never mind that he goes to showdown 40% of the time he calls.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is why i didn't like it. i don't see how a villain w/a "wts" stat that high is prime for light 3betting

[NoahSD]

This is totally fine. I usually call preflop, but 3-betting to mix it up is fine.

Not betting this flop is a huge mistake.

[RUDIKULOUS]

Milwaukee, the pfr's raising range from the CO is pretty wide and he will miss the flop very often so I doubt you have the correct implied odds for when you hit your set. However if it was raised from UTG that might be different.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
Not betting this flop is a huge mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

if the flop is 864r, is checking still a huge mistake?