3 pair hand from wcoop

[pete fabrizio]

i'm pretty sure i usually play it like this -- and i think it's profitable -- but i have lingering doubt about whether there's a better way:

http://www.pokerhand.org/?1486947

also, does anyone fold to the last raise?

[RoundTower]

I don't really like it, I think you end up overplaying your hand. I might do this if the guy was aggro to the point of spewy. Normally I prefer to lead the flop. As played I definitely don't fold for the last 8k.

Slightly off topic, are there any situations where you should prefer to have top two pair to top three pair? I can construct a hypothetical situation but I can't find a spot in practice.

[blumpkin]

nh pete. i love the flop c/c wait for safe turn here.

[pete fabrizio]

well if you know your opponent is drawing with one card to come you would rather have a blocker than a third pair. but that's just one of many ways that another card could have more value, so it's not that interesting. you could be bluffing in a spot where you would prefer the person had some kind of set or two pair hand rather than the straight or flush showing, so not having the third pair card would make it slightly more likely that they had a pair or set of that rank. or conversely, if you're playing someone who will pay you off light, you might prefer to only have top two so that it's more likely they have top and bottom, allowing you to bet for value. are those the kinds of spots you're thinking of?

generally i could care less about the 3rd pair. although it makes it slightly less likely that someone has bottom set, and it gives you redraws if someone hits a made hand, it's kind of redundant and usually i'd rather have a card that gives me a gutshot or something. also it depends somewhat on rank, e.g. a third pair of deuces is not particularly useful since the person is unlikely to have a set of them anyway.

as for the hand i posted, i'm not so sure about it. it feels like maybe i'm overplaying it, especially when i run into a weirdly played top set, but looking over my hand histories i c/c, c/r with much worse and it works pretty well. people fold a large amount of the time, and frequently when they call i'm ahead anyway. in this particular hand i'd rather it were stacks were shorter or the pot were raised so that i wouldn't be leaving that awkward 8k to call, since op is in control of that money. but i'm pretty sure it's my standard line, and in a cash game i probably wouldn't have given it much thought.

[wazz]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really like it, I think you end up overplaying your hand. I might do this if the guy was aggro to the point of spewy. Normally I prefer to lead the flop. As played I definitely don't fold for the last 8k.

Slightly off topic, are there any situations where you should prefer to have top two pair to top three pair? I can construct a hypothetical situation but I can't find a spot in practice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind this line, but I really think I like a check-call is in order on the river. You might even be up against a hand like top set, which is never folding.

Re: top two rather than top three. You'd rather have top two and an overpair against the same top two than top three against top two, as you have more redraw outs.

[alavet]

if i play with top two and dont see villian going to fold i would probably never get it all in if i may c/c it to the river

[SparkMan]

I would prefer leading at some point, probably the flop, possibly turn depending how aggr opponent is, and then making a decision if raised. The way you played it you stand to lose 100 BB in an unraised pot where you have 4 opponents. Villain could easily have a weak KKxx and limp.
I wouldn't recommend it but some players limp a lot of hands UTG.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
I would prefer leading at some point, probably the flop, possibly turn depending how aggr opponent is, and then making a decision if raised. The way you played it you stand to lose 100 BB in an unraised pot where you have 4 opponents. Villain could easily have a weak KKxx and limp.
I wouldn't recommend it but some players limp a lot of hands UTG.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't really believe in the "don't go broke in an unraised pot" maxim per se. the question to me is just, "is this situation worth investing 3 pot sized bets, and if so how should they go in?" generally, i think it is. if there's anything that bothers me about the hand, it's the extra 8k that i'll have to call off on top of the third bet when raised, since i'll usually be doing pretty poorly on that money. i'd prefer if the turn check-raise were closer to all-in.

and i did discount KK on account of villain limping on the button rather than from EP.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
if i play with top two and dont see villian going to fold i would probably never get it all in if i may c/c it to the river

[/ QUOTE ]

if i thought my opponent was aggressive enough to bet the river no matter what came and whether he hit or not, i might check-call all the way, since i'd have extra value that may outweigh the danger of giving him a free card or a free showdown. but against most opponents, the river is not going to be a particularly profitable street unless i hit, since it's either going to be checked through in a spot where i would have rather raised the turn, or i'm going to be facing a bet with zero to marginally positive ev. so i'd usually rather fold than call.

[cts]

i'd def lead the flop

if you check though i like how you played it sucks he had the cooler