3-betting AQ PF
 

I have a PT read for once. CO is 14/8 over 1400 hands.

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (10 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is Button with A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls, MP1 calls, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 folds, MP1 folds, CO calls.

Flop: (10.50 SB) 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, CO calls.

Turn: (6.25 BB) T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">CO bets</font>, Hero's action.

I really suck, especially postflop. What's my plan here?

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

Edited: I thought this was a steal situation originally.

1. Pre-flop reraise is not automatic. Gap effect kicks in here; behind all those limpers, the raiser is raising a legit hand here and you are not going to be that far ahead of it. The profile, though, suggests he might be raising some value type hands like suited broadways. I don't like calling here, though, because it does nothing to improve your chance of winning. So I guess I raise to isolate. Suited I actually think a call might be good here because playing a monster multi-way pot with AQs and awesome relative position rules.

2. Flop is routine.

3. Turn is odd. I doubt villain has a flush. He more likely doesn't want to give a free card to a random club. My guess is you are still well ahead.

4. I don't like waiting until the river to raise, because a club could put us in a bad position (we're not really raising a club river, are we?) and/or kill our action. The turn bet doesn't look like a pure bluff here, so I'm not worried about losing bluffing action. It may be a semi-bluff or something and we want to charge those.

So, I raise the turn. If you get three-bet, come back and we'll talk some more, and hopefully at that point you can give us the useful PT statistics, like WTSD and post flop agg. factor.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

CO will raise with a fair number of hands here and I think the PF 3-bet is in order. You're fortunate that all 3 limpers folded though.

I'd raise the turn. I think CO is betting a draw (or weaker hand) more often than not. If he's beating you, he's probably going to 3-bet and, absent a read, you can safely fold.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

yeaaaaa, raising the turn is pimp!!! I see this bets come out of nowhere with hands like KQ with the K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. If he was really that strong, he probably would have check-raise the turn instead. The donk bet doesn't really convince me that i'm beat.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

The question is, if you raise the turn....

a) do you take the free showdown when no clubs come on the river?

b) if another club does come, do you clarkmeister it or do you check through? Do you call a donk bet? (I don't...?)

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

PFR could be raising 9T-KQs here, or 99-JJ.

-d

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

Yeah I like raising the turn, but since we do have 4 outs, I kind of hate putting in 3 bets on the turn, since we obviously have to call a 3-bet. If he is very likely to bluff a missed draw on the river, too, I'd consider just calling down, since you are not losing much (since you get 2 bets when you raise the turn when he's on a draw, lose 3 when behind and he 3-bets, but often get 2 when he is just bluffing if he usually follows through). This any good?

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

1. I think if called and checked to on the river I'm probably betting. I think hero is still ahead here very, very often. A river check-raise sucks but I choose not to live my live in fear of river check-raises.

2. Clarkmeister has no power here because you are out of position. I'd be wary of calling a donkbet here. The rare times I'll call a donkbet against a hand like this are against maniacs and known 2+2ers, who are known to know Clarkmeister's theorem and bet any four suited river.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

I don't agree that we have four outs and I don't agree that we have to call down a turn three bet.

I think we have only two outs (the queens) usually when behind.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because we have so few outs that we raise the turn. This is a classic example of where it is correct to play the turn aggressively with few outs.

If we had a decent club (like the K, though not necessarily the A) I think a much, much better argument could be made for calling down.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

[ QUOTE ]
a) do you take the free showdown when no clubs come on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think a free showdown is in order against most cards. Villian's most likely hand is a draw (typically a club with a straight draw of some type). Villian's second most likely hand is a hand that's beating you. In either case, you gain nothing by betting on the end.

[ QUOTE ]
b) if another club does come, do you clarkmeister it or do you check through? Do you call a donk bet? (I don't...?)

[/ QUOTE ]
Likewise, I check through on a 4th club. He's not folding many hands that beat you and he's not calling with any that you beat. And I don't call a donk bet on a 4th club either.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

I would call him down. He could have had QK preflop and you may have him dominated at this point. He could have 2 spades but you hope he doesnt. I dont think he has a 2.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree that we have four outs and I don't agree that we have to call down a turn three bet.

I think we have only two outs (the queens) usually when behind.

In fact, it is EXACTLY because we have so few outs that we raise the turn. This is a classic example of where it is correct to play the turn aggressively with few outs.

If we had a decent club (like the K, though not necessarily the A) I think a much, much better argument could be made for calling down.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure this makes sense. If a deuce is no good here, CO has to have either AA, KK, or a deuce, right? Is CO raising any hand with 2 preflop? Does CO not raise or bet out on the flop with AA or KK?

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

Good point. The deueces are probably outs as well.

4 outs is not that much. Basically, 4 outs is not enough to merit continuing to draw anyway. That way, I'm not worried about getting raised off it.

The time to not raise with draws are in situations wear your draws are strong enough to merit continuing to the river on their own. Those are the situations where you absolutely must see the river, and so you don't want to be forced to pay too heavily for that obligation.

Here, the strength of our hand comes from it's immediate showdown value, not from the draws. We're not improving often enough to play this as a "drawing hand." So I like a raise.

That we have 4 outs instead of 2 is pretty immaterial.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

Not true. After the 3-bet, we're getting 11:1 to call, on a 4-outer (make it 3.5 if you like, plus a river bet we'll usually get). With 2 outs, we have an easy fold to a turn 3-bet, not so with 4 outs. I'm not saying raising is wrong, but folding to a 3-bet seems like a bad idea, especially since his most likely hand at that point will be a flush, which does give us 4 clean outs (although if he does have a flush, we are getting at most 1 bet on the river unless he's retarded, so the call, while plus EV, is thin).

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

All right, all right... it's closer than I originally thought. (Note to self... actually look at the numbers first...)

But anyway, getting three-bet would suck, but I don't worry too much about this here. Villain's play is not what many would do with a flush. A blank 2 is not all that likely to reraise you here because the flush draw came. And so forth. So I don't think that the concern about getting three-bet and maybe having to make a very thin call is enough of a reason to not raise the turn. The factors, enumerated in a previous post, far outweigh that.

But thanks for bringing up an important point.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

I'm raising the turn as well, because I think you're ahead a huge percentage of the time. But the 4 outs versus 2 is relevant, because if you are 3-bet, you've put yourself in a horrible spot if you only have 2 outs. You'll be getting 10.25 to 1 when you need 21 to 1 to call down your hand that does have showdown value. With 4 outs, you'll need only 10 to 1 to call. So if you are 3 bet, you might've raised yourself into a fold when you'd like to see a showdown at the very least.

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

Given CO's tight preflop play I'd assume he has you beat most of the time. However, how about his post flop stats? I might put him on something like AJ of clubs, or something in that neighborhood. He didn't cap preflop or lead the flop so I don't think AA or KK is what you're worried about. I'd probably raise and fold to a 3-bet on the turn. However, the pot is probably too big to fold, and for the same two big bets you can see a showdown. So there you go, how about calling down?

Re: 3-betting AQ PF
 

He makes and bets for value his flush on the turn because he doesn't want you to check. You could check if the flop bet was a position/PFR lead bet.