Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

basically like trying to solve the quadratic equation until you realize (b^2-4ac) is negative...

[/ QUOTE ]

There's no way that folding is right here. I'm almost certain he's FOS or drawing often enough to call down at the least.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your pretty sure these were frustration plays? How bout I guarantee you these were frustration plays...

My best idea for you is don't tilt and even better dont make posts trying to convinvce yourself and us all that tilting is actually a good idea.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's no way that folding is right here. I'm almost certain he's FOS or drawing often enough to call down at the least.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obvviously you are the one at the table and so you have seen the preceeding hands and there is a very good chance the guy is FOS so yes calling down is def an option in Hand 1. However I dont see any point to 3-betting unless you know your A or T is coming on the river.

In Hand 2 I think folding is likely right but if your read says so calling down might be OK I just never see how 3-betting is a good idea here.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know your wrong when BZ urges moderation...

Seriosuly this thread will be complete as soon as AggroHUSHPoster contributes...

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

You must be thinking on a level above me, because I really don't see the benefit of 3-betting in either hand.

If you think your hand in first case is worth a showdown, why not just call-down?

Only reason I see to 3-bet in second situation is if you think villain got aggressive on turn because of a good flush draw. Doesn't seem possible to make that opponent fold a better hand.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold to a cap in hand 2, so you shouldn't 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was my issue. I'm fairly certain he doesn't have an ace (or he would have raised PF). A smaller pocket pair, a made flush (though he'd probably c/r the flop), or a pair with a spade are all possibilities. As is a set.

The problem is against this range I can't fold because of my possible spade being good. And then if I make the flush, I again can't fold. And even if I don't, I'm still ahead of his range enough to call down.

Basically, I'm going to get the same in most of the time, but he's gonna pull another bet out of me when I'm behind by a fair amount.

I don't like hand 2 either and I'm certain it was a tilted play after thinking about it.

Now back to hand 1...

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

"i still think the fact that he is likely to lead with his bluffs unimproved is the overriding factor."

This is a correct thought in many situations, where you get your 3bets if he misses but save a bet when he hits. But it is also very important to show LAGs that when they checkraise the turn, they are risking more than just 2 bets. If you can get a 50/30/2 to ease up and check-call more often vs. you, now you have a bona-fide fish at your table (rather than a fish who can bite every so often).

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
You must be thinking on a level above me, because I really don't see the benefit of 3-betting in either hand.

If you think your hand in first case is worth a showdown, why not just call-down?

[/ QUOTE ]

I want him to fold a straight bluff with 6 outs. I will never put in more than I was going to already anyways. I don't want him to quit on a semi-bluff and not fire the river.

[ QUOTE ]
Only reason I see to 3-bet in second situation is if you think villain got aggressive on turn because of a good flush draw. Doesn't seem possible to make that opponent fold a better hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think a pair + spade (or pp with spade) is in his range a lot, but I'm still better off calling down. Hand 1 is closer IMO.

Re: Come yell at me (very iffy turn 3-bets with river checks)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
perhaps the reason it is so hard to figure out the problem is because we're debating between calling and 3-betting when the correct decision is to fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your pretty sure these were frustration plays? How bout I guarantee you these were frustration plays...

My best idea for you is don't tilt and even better dont make posts trying to convinvce yourself and us all that tilting is actually a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does the line you quoted have to do with your response?

The second hand I've conceded was bad after I had some time to think about it.

I still like the first hand, however. I'm the only one who has even tried to argue against it by using some sort of logical reasoning (I've also argued for it using that same reasoning). It's close, but I'm leaning towards liking my 3-bet. I'm still up for debate on it, but no one has actually debated with me than to say, "why don't you just call down?" which I've answered.