I'm not picking you out Hobbs, your post was just the easiest to break down.

Here's what I was thinking when I looked at the hand.

[ QUOTE ]
easy 3-bet as

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the decision to 3bet is a lot closer than people are making out.

[ QUOTE ]

we a) might have the best hand

[/ QUOTE ]

Might - being the opperative word. You've got two villians already liking their hands and two still to act.

[ QUOTE ]

b) have a big draw when behind

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. But have you added value by 3betting. I definitely don't think fold equity is a concern at this point.

[ QUOTE ]
and c) because getting somebody behind you to fold a J is [censored] huge.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't mean squat if you don't fold every J. This is only benificial if you think Tens and Nines will hold up. It's not like you can go to war with them when they hit.

All I'll say is that having one of the other two limpers call is worth .6 sb at least, having both call 1.2sb. Can we make this up on the times we aren't capped by folding overcards etc.

Who knows that SB won't 3bet if we call. If he does, you've got good position on the turn for when you do make your hand.

There are lots of factors to consider here.

If there was a chance for a free card, it would be easier.
If I knew I wasn't going to end up HU to a hand I'm behind.

If I knew I could fold every overcard or every J or I knew my T's were good.

I don't know.

But I'm not convinced that the benefits of 3betting outway the potential earnings from those behind and taking the initiative away from hands that you have good relative position on, for when you make your hand on the turn.

I think this hand would benefit from some hard mathematics.

I'm too tired to attempt them now and I'm sure that someone else would be better than me anyway.

Just my 2c.