Im not posting much anywhere anymore. I guess Ill give strat another try. I just jumped limits, and there's actually a difference in play this time.


Villian is 55/18/.90 in about 120 hands.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is CO with [Kc], [Ac].
2 folds, SB calls, BB calls.

Flop: (6 SB) [3d], [7c], [Ad] (3 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, SB folds, BB calls.

Turn: (4 BB) [4s] (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 11 BB


drawing dead?.

Why not call down after he c/r's the turn? I think we have enough info at that point to know that he's pretty freakin strong.

ahh the old 3-bet/fold . . .

must. see. showdown.

in 10/20 6 they c/r 2 d's and A9 all the time the only thing that made me know he was very stron was his cap. This guy might be a little stronger than just a draw. But he can still have only TPGK.. I think not 3 betting here is probably losing value. You might be right though, I havent been here long enough to know EXACTLY what gets the most value.

I think call down after he c/r the turn is the right line. We could very well be drawing dead, but we could also be up against an overplayed AQ or AJ given some of the plays I've seen on Party. No reason to 3-bet IMO.

drawing dead?.


Sometimes.

Enough not to find out at 2 to 1?

Probably not.

Oh wait, is that an AF of .90 in 6 max??

Yeah maybe drawing dead.

good luck.

i dont have much experience with 6 max but I would just call down here after the check/raise on the turn. the .9 is def a scare

so then do you think its call/check/call or is 3 bet fold good?

I figure 3 betting I could find out If im good or not, while getting value when he calls w/ AQ-A10.

I think that whole "show it down" theory doesnt apply here.

i think the idea that 3-betting and then folding to a cap gets more value than calling down (from the point where villain check/raises) to the river is ridiculous

after the villain raises the turn, the pot has 7BB. the two lines we are considering are:
1)calling the turn check/raise and check/calling the river.
or
2)3-betting the turn and folding to a cap or leading the river if the villain just calls our turn bet

both of these linese cost 2BB (maybe the 2nd line costs less, if villain folds the turn, althought then it doesn't get any more value, or maybe it costs more if he raises the river, but will you call?). anyway, we expect to spend 2BB on both lines most of the time.

you are arguing for the 2nd because it has more value. it is true that if villain has a medium Ace, your line will get an extra BB from him as opposed to calling down. but if he ever caps with hands that you are behind, you lose the whole pot. that is 7BB that you are potentially losing vs. an extra BB you extract when you are ahead.

also consider that when you are behind, the second line doesn't extract any additional value (there is no value to be extracted), but it does allow you to see the river and possibly catch an out to win the hand.

this is an easy call down.

I understand what you're saying. And part of me agrees with it, Im still kinda 50/50 on it though.

I just dont see the point of calling down (call the c/r and ch/c) if I'm drawing dead. Sure, at that point I may very well have the best hand, infact I often do. But if I often do have the best hand why not get an extra bet in there when Im certain any A calls me down in that spot (hell, Ive even been called down by JJ w/ players w/ similar stats).

I dunno, not 3 betting seems incredibly weak tight to me.

I guess what Im saying is that when a calling station, calls the flop and caps the turn, Im dead most of the time. So I dont think calling down is that profitable. At the same time I think Im losing a bet vs Ax

Im still open to more comments, Im not sure where I stand.

i think the idea that 3-betting and then folding to a cap gets more value than calling down to the river is ridiculous

No, it's not.

It's read dpendent though.

Paying another two bets drawing completely dead is more likely here than that you're ahead with an AF that low.

That's a bad thing to do.

good luck.

But aren't we paying two bets to 3-bet/fold as well? And there is still the possibility he has 2 pair with Ax and will call down the 3-bet, then call if we bet on the river as well allowing us to waste 3 bets.

Calling down after his c/r costs us 2 bets, we get a showdown. 3-bet/fold costs us 2 bets, we may be behind if he calls, we may be ahead if he caps and we fold. Last one is unlikely with an AF of .90, but it is still possible.

But aren't we paying two bets to 3-bet/fold as well? And there is still the possibility he has 2 pair with Ax and will call down the 3-bet, then call if we bet on the river as well allowing us to waste 3 bets.


Yes. If the point is three-betting is worse than showing down, yeah obviously. I read Tim's post to mean calling the cap and showing down was better than folding.

I may have not understood it.

good luck.

I was comparing calling the turn c/r vs. 3-betting, and concluded that calling down was better than 3-betting. My post might well be confusing, because I didn't take time to organize it, and the argument uses a little backwards induction.

To be clear, if your choice is between bet/fold or getting to show down and the two choices require putting the same amount of money in the pot, it is almost always correct to go to showdown.

BTW, you may have missed it since it was moved from general, but I now know you are JT Leroy.