[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your reasoning makes little sense. You seem to think that you are ahead pre-flop, but that your outs are tainted post-flop. How did that happen?

Also, you say that the only people that will fold are weak pairs, gut-shots, and backdoor draws, and that your only chance of winning is to go to a showdown.

This is EXACTLY why you raise. You would love hands like Q 3 (or K 3, and yes, at least on e person here has a hand THAT bad) to fold, because if you do hit your Q you want it to be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

hey, that's confusing: at first you ask me how it is possible to be ahead preflop and having tainted outs post flop and a moment later you tell me you want to get hands like Q,3 out. i think you know why some outs might be tainted...



[/ QUOTE ]

You are arguing semantics. Your original argument that the A and/or Q outs are tainted seemed to imply it was because you believed we might be up against an A with a better kicker -- at least that's how I interpreted it. And that is precisely the argument that does not gel with 3-betting preflop.

By the way, you also want hands like Kx to fold (please don't tell me they will anyway... these limits are full of people that will call one SB on the flop in a big pot with any overcard), leaving one less redraw. You also want any weak pair/weak kicker hand to fold, also reducing opponents redraws.

[ QUOTE ]

yes, if you get a small pair with an A or Q kicker to fold, you will probably double your chances to win. but at the same time you double your investment. that means a raise is only a good play if all the following conditions are met (that's a little rough, but valid most of the time) :
- a call is better than a fold (if a call has negative expectation, a raise with twice the price and twice the chance to win shoun't have a positive EV either)
- a small pair with a A or Q kicker is out there
- the small pair with A or Q kicker would fold if you raise

not very likely that all these circumstances are met.


[/ QUOTE ]

And that's where we essentially disagree. I say we have odds to call, and IF YOU DO, then raising is better.

You claim that I'm saying we don't have odds to call. We are getting 13.5 to 1 (with callers left to act). If we called, we could expect 1-2 more callers, giving us just about the right odds with only 3 outs. Raising is better because:

1) if we get Q3 or A3 to fold, we double our outs.
2) if bad-pair + A/Q kicker are not out there, we have 6 outs anyway, meaning we have a bit of pot equity, and getting any other pairs or draws to fold increases our chances of winning.

Or are you arguing that we actually have no outs, and A + Q are both tainted?