Re: TT vs.a small army of coldcallers
 

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't this a textbook wait for the turn situation? By 3-betting the flop, we're offering anyone with 4 or so outs the chance to correctly see the turn, and consequently the river. Furthermore, our equity changes drastically on the turn, depending on what card falls. Seems standard to me, and I'm surprised it hasn't been brought up. Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not, because we probably won't be in a position to protect our hand on the turn. The flush draw takes up a large portion of the villain's hand range, and so we can't risk giving a free card if the turn does come up clubless.

Also, even if we were willing to take this risk, if our villain has a lone nine (which is what we're hoping he has), a lot of cards could come to scare him off of betting.

So the flop 3-bet is likely the only chance at protection hero is going to have this hand.

Results
 

River goes check-check and MHIG. Button had 9s7s.

Re: TT vs.a small army of coldcallers
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's not, because we probably won't be in a position to protect our hand on the turn. The flush draw takes up a large portion of the villain's hand range, and so we can't risk giving a free card if the turn does come up clubless.

Also, even if we were willing to take this risk, if our villain has a lone nine (which is what we're hoping he has), a lot of cards could come to scare him off of betting.

So the flop 3-bet is likely the only chance at protection hero is going to have this hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, all true. Thanks for that. I should've paid closer attention to villain's range.

Re: TT vs.a small army of coldcallers
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Intuitively, I'd still bet/fold

[/ QUOTE ]


no no, no.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I meant was that I'd probably do that in the heat of the battle myself, not that it's a good play [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I won't do it in the future anyway [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]