Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is SB with Ks, Ah.
UTG calls, 4 folds, CO calls, 1 fold, Hero raises, 1 fold, UTG calls, CO calls.

Flop: (7 SB) Kd, 4c, 3c (3 players)
Hero bets, UTG raises, CO folds, Hero 3-bets,

If Hero were to call here, instead of re-raising, would you say he is weak/passive?

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

It depends why hero is calling.

-Michael

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

Raising or calling in this situation has nothing to do with being weak/tight or any other description. It's about extracting the max bets from your opponent and that is very player dependant.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

My standard line here is to three-bet as you did and lead any turn. If villain caps I'm check calling or check folding the turn depending on reads. If a club hits on the turn I'm bet/folding without a read. Villain could be raising a mid PP or a club draw. With a club draw you want to charge them max $ to see the turn. With a mid PP the average PP player is calling down. If you do have a read that villain is LAGGY just calling the raise is OK if you plan on check raising the turn without a club hitting and leading the river.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

[ QUOTE ]
With a club draw you want to charge them max $ to see the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the pot is 3-handed or more, the flush draw is actually making more money when you cap the flop. Generally, it's incorrect to think that you're 'charging' the flush draws when you 3-bet the flop--what you're really doing is denying them an opportunity for a free-card play.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

[ QUOTE ]


If the pot is 3-handed or more, the flush draw is actually making more money when you cap the flop. Generally, it's incorrect to think that you're 'charging' the flush draws when you 3-bet the flop--what you're really doing is denying them an opportunity for a free-card play.

[/ QUOTE ]

The pot is heads-up. Hero should 3-bet and charge the flush draw. Come on.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the pot is 3-handed or more...

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read me more carefully.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the pot is 3-handed or more...

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to read me more carefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read the if. But it doesn't apply to this hand at all.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

Right, it applies to the thoughts and reasons for our choices in general.

Re: Is not 3-betting TPTK weak/passive play?
 

Because he raised preflop out of position (in the blind) bet out on the flop & got raised. If UTG raised with a set, when are you going to get off the hand?
If he has KQ, I'm going to walk with him to the river. Even if he has the Qc, I'm going to win the great majority of the time as he bets away with weaker kicker. What else did UTG limp with that warranted a raise, next to act after the blind raised preflop and the bet out on the flop?
He is not raising on the flop with nothing but a flush draw when there is another player behind him, unless he thinks he can push the blind off his hand after getting the 3rd player to fold.
No, UTG either hit his hand hard, or is a donkey.