Hand vs Shaniac @ bellagio cup

[DeMaci]

How is everyone advocating a call? With the obvious leveling aside, this looks exactly like a king.

[stevepa]

I really don't think that beating other threes is a big deal at all. There are way more Kx hands that he limps behind than there are 3x hands, plus there's only one 3 left, plus there's a decent chance he bets smaller with a 3 hoping for a call from like Adxd. I'm a huge station so obviously I would never actually fold here, but I'd expect to get shown a K a lot.

Steve

[Todd Terry]

I don't think it's likely that Shane's bet is a bluff or a busted draw, because he has to think there's a reasonable possibility that you have a 3 or a K given the action on the flop, and that he's going to get called. From his perspective, a 3 is more likely than a K, I think you bet a K on the river. On the other hand, you've checked both the turn and the river, so he could put you on a busted flush draw, or a middle pair (which if you rarely limp I doubt he'd put you on given that you open limped). Your reputation is that of a crazy player, so people are always going to be less likely to give you credit for having a hand. (Which is why I think he would not fold a K on the flop to your C/R). Also, if you check twice to Shane, I think he's going to bet most of the time. My limited experience (10 hours or so of live play) with him is that he really thinks that a player is weak if they show strength earlier in the hand and then check the river.

FWIW, I think you should have bet/folded the river, which both gives you rather than him the ability to control the bet size and puts pressure on him, rather than the reverse. From Shane's perspective, your lack of a bet on the river may make it less likely that you have a 3, but a lot of people would check/call with a 3 here.

Giving some weight to the possibility that he's bluffing here, is he more likely to have a K or a 3? I don't think there's any way to answer this. He definitely checks behind on the turn with a K. He also probably checks behind on the turn with a 3, because he's probably worried you may have a K. If he has a 3, he's ready to call one more bet, but he doesn't want to get blown off the hand (especially by another 3).

Therefore, you can beat a 3, you can beat a bluff, you can't beat a K. There's no way to distinguish between a 3 and a K given the way he played the hand, but a 3 is much less likely than a K because it would be the case 3. Given his call on the flop, he has a 3, a K, or a busted flush draw. Notwithstanding the factors which could indicate a bluff above, I don't think he bets a busted flush draw because he'd have to put you on a busted flush draw as well (extremely unlikely) in order to have any confidence that he's not getting called. Extremely tough decision, I think I'd fold based on more K's than 3's being out there.

Edit: I left out that I believe Shane bets a 3 on the river here 100% of the time given your double check.

[Luisgallo]

Very interesting spot.
He knows you have a 3 and he is representing a K because he knows you would call with a 3 or

He knows you have a 3 and he is representing a K because he knows you would fold with a 3.

I call here, chances of a bluff are way more than a K.

[Luisgallo]

[ QUOTE ]


From his past TV plays...

[/ QUOTE ]

are u serious?

[NoahSD]

You have to call this.

It's a metagame call because your hand is basically at the top of your range, and it's a +EV call because shane probably bluffs and he may even valuetown a 3 hoping for a crazy light call since it seems really unlikely you have a 3 beat.

[NoahSD]

Should add that I have no idea how shane plays and the overbet may be very telling.

[IWEARGOGGLES]

Maybe it is a fold because all JC ever does is 3 barrel bluff. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]