[bernie]

I'm basing it off the OPs read of the player. Not just on his stats. If during this session, regardless of stats, he thinks this persons raise in this spot could be a little light because of the limper, it's not an auto-fold.

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that your opponent knows about position and isolation says little if anything. Most decent players that have played any significnt amount of poker understand these concepts. By the way, your 3-bet is not isolating anybody here.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's actually designed to keep the pot shorthanded, not just HU. In fact, in some ways, it can be advantageous to take the pot 3 ways with a bad player involved.

[ QUOTE ]
As to the quote above, point me to one two plus two limit holdem book that states that this 3-bet is a standard play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a raise/fold situation. Feeney's book goes into this and explains it well. It's a standard read-based play that could go either way, read depending.

[ QUOTE ]
Further, of all the best limit holdem books, you won't see any authors saying to 3-bet AQo against a legitimate raise. This player DOES NOT raise enough to think he is "raising light".


[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on who's read your following, doesn't it? You're right, against a legitimate raise, it's a fold.

[ QUOTE ]
If you 3-bet AQo regardless of the player as a standard play you will lose money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who ever said to just auto-3bet here? The situation itself, in regards to adjusting for the raiser, is a standard and basic concept.

b