10s in CO

[milesdyson]

what is the "anything else" you refer to?

would you guys care to expound on the "value vs. protection" argument? my advice to 3-bet the flop is simply based on the fact that the guy might choose to check behind a diamond, A/K/Q turn. my advice has nothing to do with "protecting" our top set because draws that can improve to beat my top set will never fold. so "protecting" is a nonfactor, correct?

[DrModern]

[ QUOTE ]
what is the "anything else" you refer to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously to the "protection" notion that the OP asked me about.

Keep your value vs. protection rants to your own thread, you tilt-monkey.

Edited to add that I am joking around and that I understand what you are getting at in the other thread. I brought up the Ed Miller quotes because I thought it was an interesting point of comparison. I wasn't trying to say, "OMG miles went against the bible!" or anything.

[ESKiMO-SiCKNE5S]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a 3-bet on the flop is definitely in order here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a matter of needing to protect the hand because of the draw heavyness of the board?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes.

on a drawless/less drawish board a call could be correct but chances are vil is raising a draw for free card a high % of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, you're aware we have top set, right?

A bet here is definitely more for value than anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]

lets give a slightly different board. lets call it K 9 2 rainbow and we have 99.

we bet the flop and get raised.

we have a monster so should we 3bet for value? there is no definitive answer here as if we think that our opponent will tilt of the max on every street with aces then obviously we should.

but, often (in fact usually imo) we will extract more by calling the flop raise and then check/raising the turn, which allows us to get an extra .5BB of a hand like say AK/KQ which would otherwise slowdown.

i know this is a tangent, but think about what will make us the most money over the whole hand... ramming the flop regardless of situation is missing value.

[btspider]

[ QUOTE ]
Play it straight up and 3bet the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

[00Snitch]

couldnt agree more eskimo.

on a more drawless board, i think this is a better play. however, i never make it because all i can think of is the responses i get when i post a hand doing something like that saying "OMGZ 3-BONG THE FLOP MANGS! VALUE! PROTECTION!"

but in all seriousness, you have made the distinction clear. in the OP, it is more likely than in your example that the villan is raising for a free card. as such you are better off 3-betting.

[Magellan]

I dunno man, this is 10c/20c and our villain called 3 cold PF, I'm finding it hard to give him credit for a gourmet play like raising for a free card. Once MP2 folds I'm calling and c/r'ing the turn. Obviously if MP2 sticks around then a flop 3-bet is a must.

[Gary Frates]

3 tens is a healthy offering on this flop--and turn. But since you're not going to be part of any flush action to go against it or a straight you have ten outs to a full house (or quads!) looks like.

I'd bet the turn or raise. You beat 9's or 4's.

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, a 3-bet on the flop is definitely in order here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a matter of needing to protect the hand because of the draw heavyness of the board?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes.

on a drawless/less drawish board a call could be correct but chances are vil is raising a draw for free card a high % of the time

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, you're aware we have top set, right?

A bet here is definitely more for value than anything else.

[/ QUOTE ]

lets give a slightly different board. lets call it K 9 2 rainbow and we have 99.

we bet the flop and get raised.

we have a monster so should we 3bet for value? there is no definitive answer here as if we think that our opponent will tilt of the max on every street with aces then obviously we should.

but, often (in fact usually imo) we will extract more by calling the flop raise and then check/raising the turn, which allows us to get an extra .5BB of a hand like say AK/KQ which would otherwise slowdown.

i know this is a tangent, but think about what will make us the most money over the whole hand... ramming the flop regardless of situation is missing value.

[/ QUOTE ]
if that board is rainbow, imo calling and check raising the turn is standard unless the guy is a tard and doesn't believe flop aggression (and will thus cap or raise later with just top pair). in that case the only "scare card" for him is an ace. in the op's hand, this isnt the case. you are thinking along the same line as i am. if i lose this hand, its not because of any betting or raising that i do - it's fate. however, i am going to win a vast majority of the time, and i want to win the most money. with a ten high board, i fear there are too many cards that will induce a turn check for me to give up the immediate value of 3-betting the flop.

[JerBear77]

*grunch*

To much FPS, get as much in on the flop w/ top set and action. Villian could be raising a FD but you have outs to the Boat if the flush hits.

TWIWP, lead turn and I would probably go into CD mode UI but i might be wrong here. The hand plays differently when we 3bet the flop.

[JerBear77]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what is the "anything else" you refer to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously to the "protection" notion that the OP asked me about.

Keep your value vs. protection rants to your own thread, you tilt-monkey.

Edited to add that I am joking around and that I understand what you are getting at in the other thread. I brought up the Ed Miller quotes because I thought it was an interesting point of comparison. I wasn't trying to say, "OMG miles went against the bible!" or anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you seriously get your kicks off of trying to overanalyze against PBs and the like?? There is one and only one Boz on the Micro's. All other's are imposters.