#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $50-$100, standard hand?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] standard. can you fold to a 3-bet on the river? [/ QUOTE ] I think you should. You're not beating much and he wasn't described as a LAG. [/ QUOTE ] I think you absolutely cannot fold to a 3 bet in a 50/100 online game vs a flop donker on that board. -DeathDonkey [/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure what exactly you're putting him on that plays like this. Most people capable of bet-3betting the river as a busted draw bluff wouldn't play diamonds like this on the first two streets, yes? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $50-$100, standard hand?
I agree with a fold to 3bet.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $50-$100, standard hand?
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with a fold to 3bet. [/ QUOTE ] |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $50-$100, standard hand?
Wow, I definitely have seen too many whacko 3bets to consider letting this one go against a player described as donkish, especially considering the turn went check, check.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $50-$100, standard hand?
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, I definitely have seen too many whacko 3bets to consider letting this one go against a player described as donkish, especially considering the turn went check, check. [/ QUOTE ] This is my argument. The hand is too murky for both our hands to be well-defined enough that a donkish player couldn't misread us and 3 bet here with something we beat. -DeathDonkey |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Results
I dont get it. Hero´s range is very different here than if he bet the turn. Villian really should worry about 88 now, but shouldn´t consider it much otherwise.
|
|
|