bellagio 80-160

[pacecar]

full-game. folded to LAG in MP who raises, I'm right after him and three-bet with AKc. folded to the bb who calls.

flop comes
T 6 2 rainbow (one club)

bb leads out and LAG raises

what do others do in this spot?

[mike l.]

some things to think about are:

bb may have you reverse dominated with some T hand he shouldve folded like AT or KT.

bb may have a set of 6s or Ts and be looking to get action.

cutoff may have the AT or KT. or a nice pair.

even if youre A or K are clean one or both of them may be sharing outs with you lowering your outs.

if you call the flop you may have to face two more bets on that street if bb 3 bets to get you out.

or you may 3 bet and have bb 4 bet, or have cutoff 4 bet. putting in a lot of bets with such a marginal hand sucks.

cutoff is fearless so he may put you to the test later in the hand.

basically it's a big can of worms and you should fold.

[TStoneMBD]

agreed. i dont see a CO in this hand however.

[CardSharpCook]

I like this raise. You're probably losing to JJ, but you'll get to see the next two cards for that raise.

CSC

[elysium]

hi pace

you must 3-bet.

[BabyJesus]

Thanks for a useless post. Please explain your reasoning.

[Vince Lepore]

Fold. But calling is close.

Vince

[mike l.]

youre right no CO. i meant this guy: "LAG in MP who raises".

[sthief09]

I hate these spots. if the BB is a thinking player, it becomes a lot closer to a 3-bet. if he's not then it's an easy fold. if he's a thinking player, he knows you're raising light there, and he knows the LAG is going to raise the flop for him, so I can see him playing middle pair or an underpair this way. if he's capable of folding that, then 3-betting is a great play, since you very well might still dominate the LAG, and there's a lot of money in the pot, and you've represented your hand strongly enough to possibly earn yourself a free showdown.

if he's not a thinking opponent, then he probably has a good hand. afterall, he just bet into a raiser and a 3-bettor.

I run into these problems all the time. having to deal with a LAG can be such a pain

[random]

Calling is the worst option. He could possibly fold KT or AT in the BB and also could get a free card on the turn.

[TStoneMBD]

you guys are crazy. you want to 3bet this flop? if all is perfect as you hope it is, bb will fold and utg will call giving you 13:3 or 4:1 odds. you can then hope that you get a free card, and are behind on the flop here by utg nearly all the time. your outs may not even be clean. theres no shame in folding the worst hand with incorrect odds to chase.

[random]

I guess I should have said I would fold. I was just saying calling is the worst.

[TStoneMBD]

i wasnt directing my comment to you random. i agreed with your post.

[chio]

[ QUOTE ]
I like this raise. You're probably losing to JJ, but you'll get to see the next two cards for that raise.


[/ QUOTE ]

i don't get how paying 3 small bets to see 2 cards with no sure outs to the winner and no implied odds is good here

the only way you should 3bet is if you think you have the best hand and/or can make the best hand fold (if the lag is capable of really crazy raises and the BB is capable of big folds), certainly NOT to get free cards

[Vince Lepore]

I would fold. I think if you consider calling then it's close given that you are getting 6 to 1 to call. What makes calling difficult is determining your outs with any degree of certainty.

Vince

[partygirluk]

There was a very similar post by David S. in the archives.

[pacecar]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't get how paying 3 small bets to see 2 cards with no sure outs to the winner and no implied odds is good here

[/ QUOTE ]

this was part of my thinking. if the sb can bet into a pre-flop raiser or re-raiser with that board i figure him for either a big hand or he put both of us on big cards but no pair and was betting his AT or small pocket-pair to see where he was

since i had only been at the table 2-3 orbits and really couldn't tell this guy from quinn the eskimo i folded figuring even if i was ahead it was only marginally and it could possibly come back to me for 4-bets or a cap

the turn was a rag and they checked it around. the river was another rag checked around. sb tabled his 55 and took it down. maybe a 3-bet would have worked after all.

[elysium]

hi b

worthless post....hmmmm. well, i....wait;.....explain my reasoning?! do you know how long this post would be? actually i already handled this hold em issue queried over a year or so ago,....which one was that?....'elenor roosevelt'.....right, right. it's my elenor post.

b., why wouldn't you want to 3-bet?

elenor was a very fine lady, wee wee.

[Nate tha' Great]

It's fairly easy to come up with rationalizations for doing something other than the obvious here, which is folding. I make those sorts of rationalizations all the time, and I suspect that they take somewhere between .10 and .25 BB off my win rate.

The flop is not at all draw heavy, so it looks you are up against two made hands, either a T that may or may not share your kicker, or a middle pair, though, as mike has pointed out, stronger hands are possible, especially from the BB.

It does not look to me that you are getting the correct immediate odds to call two bets given something like five or five and a half effective outs, and that's before considering that you are not closing the action. The implied odds situation does not seem to be particularly favorable; in fact it might be unfavorable if you have reverse domination problems.

Three-betting certainly feels sexier, but I'm not sure what it accomplishes. The best permutation is if the BB has say KTs and is betting out hoping that the LAG will raise, and the LAG has 88, and you 3-bet and the BB folds, thereby cleaning up some outs. That permutation won't come up all that often, particularly because BB has to be aware that he might face this sort of action when he determines to bet out, and it's not worth all that much when it does. Sure, you might get a free card ... but it seems more likely that you're going to be facing a four-bet or even a five-bet (Vegas!!) on the flop when the action to you has been bet-raise.

The times when you can make a play like this are when you have some folding equity, most notably when a player may be overplaying a draw or some other third-best hand and your bet can force out a middling made hand that beats yours. I don't think you have that situation here. If the LAG is so LAG that he's capable of playing something like AQo unimproved in this fashion ... well, you'll have plenty of opportunities to take advantage of him in the future.

[fsuplayer]

yeah, i remember this hand. david said 3 bet.

[surfdoc]

Wow Nate, almost 2 months off without posting. Welcome back. Where the hell have you been?

[elysium]

hi nate

nice thread. you've gotten better. it's rare to catch you outside of a machine game.

oh nate. i did it again. dang. the action i'm advising be taken has made me the lone holdout. gee, a 3-bet. what?

yeah it's, well, what you need to understand.....; losing. losing nate. boy i'll tell you, i'm glad i have you here because.....i know that the 3-bet is correct. but after reading the responses, and then going for the keyboard, i couldn't find any logical reason why any human being should 3-bet in that spot, at any time, but then the reason occured to me; we should 3-bet in this spot, everytime, for elenor roosevelt. cliche? oh sure. today nate, that's pretty washed out reasoning. oh, back in the day sure. i could dig it. 3-bet for elenor, why not? but today? pffft, today even my little dog buddy has forgotten about elenor roosevelt. i do still remember her though.

'very unpredictable'; that's what a few people said about elenor when they discovered that she was making this 3-bet. 'bad', others would say, 'that was very bad elenor'. when orsen wells told randolf hearst that elenor was capable of making the freakishly loose 3-bet with little more than backdoor and overs, hearst smelled a fish and ran over to the whitehouse for some 30-60 heads up with the lady. well, elenor 3-bet and showed hearst the nuts. hearst paid off like the new york lottery. he called her all the way. hearst crossed wells off his christmas list, and, unsurprisingly, the elenor 3-bet hit the scandal sheets. the media was brutal, however, as word spread, people lined up in front of the whitehouse just to get in elenor's game. times were hard, but the elenor 3-bet made it seem like once again, happier days were here. word spread around the world. even emporer hirohito, who played very solidly in home games, but who was on the passive side and a little weak/ tight in the big bonsai everywhere else, flew in just so he could get heads-up with elenor.

initially the emporer got lucky. during a bad run at pacific island, elenor busted out. man, did hirohito run good. he hit everything! elenor told her husband franklin that night about the many one and two outers hirohito had hammered her with, and that the emperor had not only rivered her with a one outer, but had also even harbored her with a zero outer. when franklin learned about all the bad beats elenor took, and that hirohito had sent elenor bust, franklin got nauseous and said, 'get me a pepto bismal.'. elenor's reply to franklin was memorial; elenor said, 'if i get you a pepto bismal, will you give me $10,000 to get back in the game with hirohito at the pacific?'. franklin then said, 'we have nothing i fear. now please, bring me a pepto bismal.'. at this jucture, we lose a little history because we don't know what elenor said back to franklin when he told her that he was tapped out. a newsreel footage error is prompted just as elenor and franklin go at it with a lot of punching and bottles being thrown. that much we know, but then there's an 18 minute gap in the newsreel thereafter. ledgend has it though, that elenor told franklin that howard hughes was staying at the d.c. holiday inn that day, and that if he didn't divy up she would go out and earn the money for a new bankroll, quickly. when the newsreel starts rolling again, franklin is yelling,'that's a date that will live in infamy.' he also appears to be having trouble getting up off the floor. i thought that strange. elenor handled herself real well in these type civils. anyway, after that, the censors censor all but little snippits here and there that look pasted together like. all we know for certain is that hirohito went on another good run and busted out macarthur in the killa in manilla, and of course that macarthur came back and busted out both hirohito and hitler at the horseshoe in hiroshima with an H high bomb. the censors toned it down some, and it came across the wire to us as the non-nut A high bomb, but all the japanese school kids there at the time all swear that it was a rivered H high.

churchill initially was a fish. he was lucky to get out of dunkirk with his underwear intact. hitler cleaned churchill's clock. well, actually it was only some minor incendiary fire damage to big ben's middle parts in one of churchill's homegames. yeah, hitler got on another one of his lucky bombing runs over london, and ran the ol' city wide fire play. nothing too serious. family pendulums were untouched. later, churchill recovered that and a little more when he ran the same play on hitler and scooped dresden. he actually started to show life during those years and picked up seveal pointers from elenor, including the importance of image. 'risk your money before risking your image', elenor instructed with a lot of rolling r's,'for anything under ten grand.', elenor added rollingly.


much has been written and said about the poker room antics of elenor roosevelt. but elenor never had to hold up a cardboard sign begging for bettors so that she could get in a raise. they lined up in droves and enlisted to be raised by elenor, voluntarily. elenor didn't lose very often, but nate, when she did lose, elenor knew when and how to do it, and she picked her spots to lose in very selectively. maybe, just maybe, elenor knew something that the rest of the world didn't.

oh, i'm going on and on about the elenor years again. anymore elenor stories, and i'll be going to bed at dawn. just remember nate, get the 3-bet in everytime when in the elenor spot. the bet is of debatable direct value; never mind the silly free card reraise with overs and backdoor theory. that will only net you pennies. no, instead nate, 3-bet for elenor. the elenor 3-bet brings out the hirohito in em, so play like elenor played it after you show it down.

[elindauer]

I think a fold is in order. You're not getting odds to draw to your AK, so the only reason to continue is if you think you have the best hand and expect to show it down unimproved.

If you do continue, you may want to 3-bet. Combined with your preflop action, your opponents may fear you have aces and give you a free turn card or showdown.

my 2 cents.
Eric

[rmarotti]

So, easy fold, right? Because if even your dog friend doesn't remember eleanor, it's certainly not worth 3-betting for her, right?

[elysium]

hi rm

elenor is spelled with an 'a'?

[rmarotti]

If you're a former first lady, yes. If you're the subject of a rather gothic love poem by Poe and his ilk, then no. And if you're the "a" sort of Eleanor, does that make the 3-bet correct then?