2-pair and FD turn play.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
so i agree with hero's flop and turn bets. however, i don't agree with the turn 3-bet. you might say, "well the other guy has T9 so we want him out." well, you only care about him if your hand is the best hand in the first place. on Q983, top and bottom isn't very strong facing a raise in a protected pot. Q9, Q8, JT, and 88 make up a lot of better hands against which your raise does nothing for you and a lot for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stoving it, we have around 25-28% equity against the range of better hands you mentioned. If we can be confident that UTG will call our 3bet (and a subsequent cap when it comes) with worse hands, then we don't have to add too many worse holdings to MP3's range to make the 3bet +EV. At the point of the first turn raise, I don't think a hand like AQ/KQ is at all out of the question (having waited for the "safe" turn to raise), nor even a hand like QT or QJ raising his top pair + gutshot. 98 is also certainly possible (especially if it's suited to spades), and...well, you get the point.

I think we're giving MP3 way too much credit here, or perhaps being influenced by the fact that he eventually capped Hero's 3bet. Either way, it really hinges on UTG & what (if anything) we know about him.

[bellatrix]

[ QUOTE ]

Stoving it, we have around 25-28% equity against the range of better hands you mentioned. If we can be confident that UTG will call our 3bet (and a subsequent cap when it comes) with worse hands, then we don't have to add too many worse holdings to MP3's range to make the 3bet +EV. At the point of the first turn raise, I don't think a hand like AQ/KQ is at all out of the question (having waited for the "safe" turn to raise), nor even a hand like QT or QJ raising his top pair + gutshot. 98 is also certainly possible (especially if it's suited to spades), and...well, you get the point.

I think we're giving MP3 way too much credit here, or perhaps being influenced by the fact that he eventually capped Hero's 3bet. Either way, it really hinges on UTG & what (if anything) we know about him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just want to say that I [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] this explanation and I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but the 3-bet did not seem wrong to me. It's not just about the percentages, but the fold equity of the villain has to be taken into account. Our hand is perfect for a FSD (we have a flush draw, but have a hand that is definetly worth of a showdown).

Unfortunately villain capped, which sucks and changes our whole game plan. But I agree that people are biased on the cap to pointing out the 3-bet was wrong. I don't think it's wrong.

[milesdyson]

i guarantee i would tell OP not to 3-bet the turn even if he had cut off the action before the cap. the problem with these AQ/KQ/QJ/QT hands is that they should be heavily discounted, whereas people routinely slowplay good hands like it's their job.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
i guarantee i would tell OP not to 3-bet the turn even if he had cut off the action before the cap. the problem with these AQ/KQ/QJ/QT hands is that they should be heavily discounted, whereas people routinely slowplay good hands like it's their job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Add just AQ to his range and our equity jumps from 27 to 38% in a heads up pot. Take AQ back out & add just 98 and our HU equity stands at 41%. Put 'em both in there & we're almost at a coinflip, 48-52.

Now, factoring in the third player...

Assuming that he will call two more cold with any flush draw or any top pair hand, and giving him a starting range of any ace or king suited to [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]s, suited connectors T9-32, and suited 1-gappers J9-64 (also suited to diamonds), here's what we end up with:

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

658,652 games 22.453 secs 29,334 games/sec

Board: 9d Qs 8d 3s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.507% 39.85% 00.71% 262498 4657.83 { Qd3d }
Hand 1: 51.683% 51.22% 00.54% 337341 3532.33 { 88, AQs, Q9s-Q8s, JTs, 98s, AQo, Q9o-Q8o, JTo, 98o }
Hand 2: 07.810% 06.94% 00.88% 45699 5810.83 { AdKd, AQs, AdJd, AdTd, Ad7d, Ad6d, Ad5d, Ad4d, Ad2d, KQs, KdJd, KdTd, Kd7d, Kd6d, Kd5d, Kd4d, Kd3d, Kd2d, QTs+, Q7s-Q2s, Jd9d, Td9d, Td8d, 9d8d, 9d7d, 8d7d, 8d6d, 7d6d, 7d5d, 6d5d, 6d4d, 5d4d, 4d3d, 3d2d, AQo, KQo, Q9o+, Q7o-Q2o }

This again leaves AQ & 98 in MP's range, and assumes that UTG does not currently have a better hand than our queens up (but might be chopping). That also of course ignores the possibility that he made it to the turn with two cards suited to spades, which he's also obviously calling with. You can nitpick the starting hand selection for UTG, especially where the weaker Q & suited K hands are concerned, but I think it fairly well evens out when balanced against the random nutjob that's calling with any pair or draw all the way to showdown.

So what we end up with is a 4% equity deficit vs. just MP when we assume that the only worse hands he'll ever raise the turn with are AQ & 98. When we presume that UTG will come along with any top pair or diamond flush draw (and that he does not currently have us beat), we enjoy an equity edge of around 7%.

I really, really think that the 3bet is correct.

[tyler_cracker]

[ QUOTE ]
Our hand is perfect for a FSD (we have a flush draw, but have a hand that is definetly worth of a showdown).

[/ QUOTE ]

good luck with this OOP.


also bumping this thread because i like listening when miles and harv talk.