|
|
#41
10-21-2007, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: nl200 weird 3bet pot spot
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Q: how do you balance a c/f on this flop? obv if he really turn out to be loose passive thats unnecessary but the question still holds. check AK? c/r a heart draw? [/ QUOTE ] why is everyone so worried about balancing their play? do you really play with the same people enough to worry about it? if so, your table selection suuuuuuuuuucks. [/ QUOTE ] You are right it doesn't matter a whole lot. Nonetheless it's a valid question. 
|
|
#42
10-21-2007, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: nl200 weird 3bet pot spot
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm going to suggest C/R all in it lets him bluff at the pot if he wants to, and then it lets us do some protection of our hand and avoid seeing an Ace or a heart (or a Jack is possibly bad too), i think its better than bet fold because if we bet and he shoves i think we still have about the odds we need to call against his range [/ QUOTE ] This is really bad advice... ---- Q: how do you balance a c/f on this flop? obv if he really turn out to be loose passive thats unnecessary but the question still holds. check AK? c/r a heart draw? [/ QUOTE ] why is everyone so worried about balancing their play? do you really play with the same people enough to worry about it? if so, your table selection suuuuuuuuuucks. [/ QUOTE ] You don't need to play the same ppl for balancing to matter.
|
|
#43
10-21-2007, 09:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: nl200 weird 3bet pot spot
We can as somebody has already stated include lower pocket pairs like 99 or 88 in villain's range because he has called 2 preflop raises, but I don't think in a 3 bet pot many villain's will call a flop bet with these. Neither is it likely that we see a villain calling with any sort of drawing hand here. Therefore it looks like betting achieves little. However if we check than I don't think we face a bluff that we can call, usually in a 3 bet pot like this it will end up just getting checked down. This means that we have to decide whether to bet our hand purely for protection and not for value, bearing in mind that villain may often have overcards. Whether or not we should bet comes down to how often we are ahead, so if we think that kk,Ak,TT are likely holdings for villain then check, if we think that he would have reraised with these then bet to win the pot there.
|
|
#44
10-21-2007, 10:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: nl200 weird 3bet pot spot
No worse hands are calling, so the arguments for betting lie with metagame and protection, and they are both pretty small.
I will balance checking out by doing this often with AK, and a little with AA and KK, depending on the aggression of villain and history. I do not mind c/r AK here sometimes as we are only likely to get one bet out of hands we beat, and checking does give hands such as this (qq) the opportunity to bet.
|
|
#45
10-21-2007, 10:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: nl200 weird 3bet pot spot
I think the range of this villain is pretty narrow. Does a multi-table players really call this with AJ AQ(Even more unlikely since OP holds 2 Qs)? Since the villain doesn't 3 bet at the first place, and smooth calls the squeeze. I put him on AKo, 99~JJ. I think AK TT are about the most possible holding to call 2 raises without reraise himself (Hence he must be pretty passive to call raises twice). The best line is probably C/C on the flop and C/F on turn or bet 2/3 on turn if he checks behind on the flop. Blocking bet on the river if you turn bet gets called. However, checking makes it even tougher if say, a Jh falls on turn
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
