[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why?

-Jaran

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he's aggressive, would generally checkraise a King, and there are a fair amount of draws an aggressive player could be betting.

I'd raise the turn.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not really seeing these draws. the villian only really has 4 outs at best here. if the flop were two-tone, i'd like a turn raise more. as is, it sounds like he's the type to fire the third bullet, so we make just as much when ahead by calling the turn.. but we could potentially fold a total bluff by raising him.

what's your plan if 3-bet on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Villain is aggressive. This is important as his handrange goes way up.

2) QT, Q9, AT, T9 -- all of these are "draws" that villain could very conceivably bet-call. QT has 8 outs, the rest have 4 -- but the fact that they won't always bluff the river needs to be very strongly considered.

3) Nothing has been stated about villain bet-folding on scary boards. I don't see why we're considering it even reasonably likely that he's betting a complete bluff into hero very often, especially on this board.

I'm not raising the turn to "charge the draws" as much as I am raising to gain value against his likely hand, which is generally going to be some derivative of Jx (JT, QJ, etc). Sometimes I'll get 3-bet by a King that was playing straightforward and while that sucks, I'll still draw out occasionally (woo!) and sometimes I'll get 3-bet by a worse hand.

I don't see any significant advantage conferred by waiting for the river, especially given how often a hand like JT played aggresisvely will go bet-bet-check(call).

Rob