[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, depending on how good of a TAG the opponent is, his 3betting range is MUCH wider.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to add, if we're referring to the linked post... hero had been raising more lightly in previous orbits. If villain is a good TAG he would've definitely figured this into his 3-betting range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you gentlemen. I think this is a big part of the difference in opinion between Derek and myself. Derek assumes all TAGs are good players. I assume all TAGs are tight and agressive, and might be good players (until proven otherwise). Derek assumes that since the BB is a TAG his 3-betting range is very small. I assume that since the BB is a TAG his 3-betting range might be small, or it could be much wider due to the assumption of Superior post flop play, steaming, or the long shot hope to get the hand heads up and take the lead on the flop (dumb move IMHO, but its amazing how often idiots try).

Its two different philosophies that result in two different plays on the flop/turn. I do however find it interesting that the most respected small stakes posters who have weighed in on this hand agree with my flop play of calling & raising the turn, where as the majority have voted to side with Derek's flop play of raising the pre-flop aggressor. What does that mean to you?

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see why even the assumption that TAG is a good post-flop player means we should raise the flop. In that case I still want to call and raise most turn cards.