[Dazarath]

Ok, thanks for the responses.

Hand 1: This is how the action went. I 3-bet because I reasoned his hand range included aces, two pairs, not just flushes. Villain capped. The river didn't help me. I called the river bet. Is this a fold UI?

Hand 2: I checked intending to check/call. I guess I reasoned that his flop action was either TPGK, two pair, set, flush draw (probably nut draw). After the turn action, I figured it was obvious I had the flush, and now the nut flush was more likely. I pussied out on the river and checked, intending to call a bet. After the hand, I was thinking bet/call was better than check/call.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd guess a river cr/fold to 3-bet has a greater EV than bet/call.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bad line. He's betting everything and raising only hands that beat you. Check call is better than bet/call.

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmm.. could you explain your thinking here? I had relatively little reads on the villain at the time, other than the PT stats. If the villain was willing to cap the turn without the nuts, might he be willing to 3-bet the river without them as well? I understand that 0.8 AF is pretty low, but not so much for a 45 VPIP. There's also the occassional "passive" donk, who will raise the entire way donk with "monsters" (ie. set+), regardless of the board.