Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

Is TJ really a common cold calling hand in the CO from an UTG raise in a 10-handed game? Especially from someone who "seems tight?" AA, KK, QQ, and 22 are all unlikely as you didn't get 3-bet PF and 22 rarely calls 2 cold. I say this turn is a 3-bet and c/c the river if capped and you don't improve.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is TJ really a common cold calling hand in the CO from an UTG raise in a 10-handed game? Especially from someone who "seems tight?" AA, KK, QQ, and 22 are all unlikely as you didn't get 3-bet PF and 22 rarely calls 2 cold. I say this turn is a 3-bet and c/c the river if capped and you don't improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think good players ever are the first cold caller of an utg raise? Once someone cold calls there, I can't put him on a hand because I would never cold call in that spot.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

whats with no river bet?

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

Paluka - That seems like a pretty damn good reason to coldcall to me.

I agree with whoever said you should play cautiously because AK is a hand people tend to start from when you raise PF, so if they're popping you on an AKxx board they aren't doing it lightly.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is TJ really a common cold calling hand in the CO from an UTG raise in a 10-handed game? Especially from someone who "seems tight?" AA, KK, QQ, and 22 are all unlikely as you didn't get 3-bet PF and 22 rarely calls 2 cold. I say this turn is a 3-bet and c/c the river if capped and you don't improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think good players ever are the first cold caller of an utg raise? Once someone cold calls there, I can't put him on a hand because I would never cold call in that spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, if I knew the villain better I could read his hand better and make a better decision here. Also I could fold the river UI if I knew him better. But since he's basically unknown I want to go to showdown.

Let's say calling down is the base case. If I 3 bet and I'm ahead and he calls down, I win 1 more bet than if I just call down. If I'm behind and he caps, I then call down and lose 2 more bets (he will never cap when behind, and rarely he'll fold when he's behind, which leaves me only as well off as calling down to start with).

I now think the EV of the 3-betting vs calling down is pretty close. If you think he's much more likely to have KQ/AQ than JT or 22 then of course you favor the 3 bet, and vice-versa.

I should donk the diamond river though, since I get protection from a raise and I don't want it to get checked through.

Everyone's comments have been excellent, this hand is much more interesting than I first thought. When I played it I thought it was a clear call down, when I posted I thought it was a clear 3 bet, and now I think its pretty close. I asked another good player I know and he thinks its still a clear 3 bet.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

[ QUOTE ]
Paluka - That seems like a pretty damn good reason to coldcall to me.

I agree with whoever said you should play cautiously because AK is a hand people tend to start from when you raise PF, so if they're popping you on an AKxx board they aren't doing it lightly.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think cold calling is a good idea just because they can't put you on a hand?

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

Occaisonally yes. Confusing a good hand-reader is a plus that might push a 3bet to a coldcall occaisonally.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

[ QUOTE ]
Occaisonally yes. Confusing a good hand-reader is a plus that might push a 3bet to a coldcall occaisonally.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I could see cold calling with a monster sometimes. But obviously this is another reason to not 3 bet this turn.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

I aigree that 3betting the turn is bad.

Re: 50/100 AK vs possible straight and flush
 

because he was slowplaying AQ or made his hand KQ