$5/10 Razz--Three Pair

[LandonM]

There is indeed a chance that villain is on the steal in this situation. Whether it's a "good chance" or not has a lot more to do with very specific game-play indices that Andy hasn't elaborated upon, so it isn't a presumption any of us can make (as you just did). No matter, the steal is an undeniable consideration of this particular situation where villain had a strong up and only has to overcome one other up-low and the bring.

The fact that he is walking off a cliff into A/2/3 is just gravy.

In the event villain is trying to steal by raising Andys up-ace, the RR might accomplish nothing more than a fold, leaving you with a hand full of wasted potential. A/2/3 is a hand I would MUCH rather play through than accept the consolation prize of a couple bets by catching an opponent in a bluff and taking it down on 3rd.

"Defending against the steal" is probably the very worst possible reason to raise A/2/3 in this situation, seeing as you are far, far from being in a "defensive" position with A/2/3. All it does is serve to end the action early in the event you're right.

When facing a steal (or what I believe to be a steal), I would usually raise with a decent low or even a half-assed low with a strong low upcard if the opponent is known to be capable of folding his bluffs. Monstrous lows, I call. Every time, 100% of the time, if there is even the slightest chance I can elicit another customer into the pot.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]

2) You don't seem to understand that calling 3rd in this situation isn't a gesture of "passivity" (since you keep calling it "tight passive"). It is a trap, meant to mask a monster hand and to elicit more action.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Not re-raising means you like to play small pots, and have small returns on your investment. I bet your also the guy who cold calls after 3 limpers and a raiser on the button with AA in Hold'em - incredibly weak passive but I LOVE to have guys like you in my games because you keep it cheep for me.

2) The only person you are trapping is yourself. Hello 4th street fold if the villain catches a good card! Hello bring in with a 9 fold on 3rd street 85% of the time! Howdy no concept of the Fundamental Therm of Poker!

3) re-raising has immense meta value, cold calling has no meta value at all.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Andy B]

Elaborating on "very specific game-play indices" would involve paying attention, which I'm not very good about online. Also looking up "indices."

I don't mind taking down $10 uncontested with A23.

[LandonM]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Not re-raising means you like to play small pots, and have small returns on your investment.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, actually, that isn't what it means. At all. Stupid assumption. I've been pretty clear on the thinking, and no where in what I've said would it suggest that i'm calling because "I'm a guy who likes to play small pots and have small returns on my investment."
Your retort to my thinking is levying charges based on nothing more than your own dumb assumptions.


[ QUOTE ]
I bet your also the guy who cold calls after 3 limpers and a raiser on the button with AA in Hold'em - incredibly weak passive but I LOVE to have guys like you in my games because you keep it cheep for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no. That's a field I would definitely want to cull.
Stop making these stupid (and incorrect) assumptions.
Here's a good way to help yourself. Whenever you feel someone is wrong about something, make your case without using phrases like "I bet you..." or citing anecdotes.

[ QUOTE ]
2) The only person you are trapping is yourself. Hello 4th street fold if the villain catches a good card! Hello bring in with a 9 fold on 3rd street 85% of the time! Howdy no concept of the Fundamental Therm of Poker!

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't understand about 40% of what you just wrote there, what with the disorienting hellos, therms and howdies.

[ QUOTE ]
3) re-raising has immense meta value, cold calling has no meta value at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL @ "immense" meta value.