[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
im sorry but your 'rules' sound like a really bad way to play 'LAG'



[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I do raise positionally and situationally. My addition of random hands is done only to a small extent. My selection is limited and only serves to supplement my legitamate and situational raises. This small amount of "game theory" is mainly for metagame purposes and not for value.

[ QUOTE ]
2-flush board, middle pair, this is not really a good time to 3-bet

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was really asking about. The preflop raise just somehow became such a big focus that I had to address it. The raise is meaningless except for the possible "read" it could give my opponents. The multiple draws are the primary reason that I tried to block bet/semibluff this hand. I really thought that he was more than likely c/ring with a flush draw and an over, a str8 draw, or 2 overs. I thought this was far more likely than the bettor having TPTK or a set or 2 pair. I also made this decision based on the flop bettor's flop aggression factor of 6.00. Now, I'm not trying to defend this 3-bet to $100, rather, I'm merely trying to give you my heat-of-the-battle reasoning for making such a rash decision. I suspected that the villain was trying to make a play, so I played back, and I, in turn, got played.

By your rational, the fact that I hold middle pair on a 2-flush board is exactly why I should not 3-bet this hand. And yet, that is exactly why I did so. Do you say that simply from a pot equity standpoint? (I know my overall pot equity can't be good if we go to the river. However, if I add fold equity into the equation, does it make the situation any better?

Additionally, if I take the line of not 3-betting, do I simply fold or do I call-fold if I go unimproved on the turn? At this point, do I simply take the chance of making a bad laydown?