3-betting as opposed to folding situations
I've been wondering whether I'm missing opportunities by folding some hands, rather than 3-betting them. Consider the following situations.
(1) You are in co. A TAG (who is solid post-flop) raises in mp. If you 3-bet, you can be relatively sure the hand will end up HU. Do you fold or 3-bet with:
-K10o
-KJo
-Q10s
-A9s
-A8s
-A7s
-J10s
(2) Now assume that the MP player is somewhat of a LAG, i.e., he open-raises lightly and will follow up with aggression on the flop, but is not a maniac and will slow down eventually. You still expect a 3-bet to get it hu. Do your answers change at all?
(3) Assume that the MP player is weak/tight. So his open-raise means he has a premium hand, but he is also capable of folding post-flop too easily. Do your answers change?
(4) Finally, assume that the MP is kind of in between a TAG and a LAG, but now you expect that the BB will call even if you 3-bet. BB is basically very loose, likes to see flops and turns, though often folds on the river. Do your answers change now?
|