99 HU

[tijean]

To me, this is a straight meta-game situation - it almost doesn't matter what cards are being played. We know his numbers, we've seen him bluff before, and now he's pulling a move that represents a monster. Does he have the goods? We don't know, but we're sure as hell not giving him credit for it until we see it.

However, if you assume he's bluffing and try to push him off the hand, you run into some potential problems:

1) You're wrong - he does have the goods. Can you fold to a c/r on this turn? If not, it's going to cost a lot of money to see his quad As.

2) You're right, he doesn't have the hand he's representing, but you still lose, because he pulled the LRR with some Ax bullshit.

3) You're right, and he bluffs you off another pot. Once again: Can you fold to a c/r on the turn? If so, he can run another bluff.

In all these scenarios, you don't lose just the money on the table you also lose the meta-game - your opponent has outplayed you (actually, in the second, he's just a lucky SOB, but it amounts to the same thing for your table image).

Now, if you just call down:

In the first two scenarios, you still lose, but you don't lose any extra money or meta-game points. He showed strength, and you called down with a good hand. Smart poker. And the third scenario changes to:

3a) You're right - he was bluffing. You win the pot, and the meta-game balance shifts back to your advantage where it belongs.

I'm calling down from the 3-bet. I want to see his cards. Especially if he's bluffing, I want everybody to see his cards face up on the table. Because that won't stop him from bluffing (I don't want that, I just want him to stop bluffing me), but it means everyone else will give him action thinking he might be. Which means when I get a hand, there'll be more money on the table.