Trapping w/ Middle Set (Good or Bad?)

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
you might wait for the turn to get the bigger bets in

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll be getting those in anyway, since top pair/overpair and a flush draw aren't folding the turn after you lead it.

Checking this turn is a big mistake IMO.

[halis123456789]

Answer me this though, how much of an edge is it when you use the deceptive play to goad the inexperienced MP1 into a pissing contest on the turn? Then poor MP2 is left sitting there calling raise after raise after raise just to see one card when I am a huge favorite.

I do believe the reason so much money got in the pot is that I didn't raise on the flop. So MP1 thought I was making a play. And once he re-raises me he's doomed. That's when I cap it and he realizes that he's beat (but it's too late because I got him on the expensive street.)

But the real edge is that if the spade hits the turn I can try to do what I can to lose the minimum. You're trying to optimize the play both ways. But the only reason it worked is that I knew MP1 would bet on the turn (having him re-raise me was quite a surprising little bonus.)

[johnd192]

Decent but I think you could have gotten more bets if you had bet out on the flop. TPTK would have raised and flush draw would have called. You probably missed 3 sb. Smoothcalling his flop raise then performing the c/r on the turn would probably still get all those bets on the turn.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
Your edge isn't really drastically improved by the turn anyway...it's already HUGE!

[/ QUOTE ]
If our equity isn't changed then aren't we increasing our EV by keeping our opponent in the lead (and a loose caller in the middle) rather than making a strong move on the flop and killing further action when the bet doubles?

[Rico Suave]

Crunchy:

[ QUOTE ]
If our equity isn't changed then aren't we increasing our EV by keeping our opponent in the lead (and a loose caller in the middle) rather than making a strong move on the flop and killing further action when the bet doubles?

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem, as I see it, is that the pfr may not bet the turn if he has a hand like JJ, AQ, or AJ...so there is a reasonable chance you collect nothing on the turn. If the pfr has a hand, then you are likely to get 3-bet on the flop, and then you can still get in a c/r on the turn if you are so inclined.

--Rico

[crunchy1]

Thinking about it more - leading the flop is a good line too. If MP raises loose/passive button will probably call 2 if he was going to call 1. You could've maybe even gotten a capped flop out of this.

I think this is good is you can expect MP to continue his aggression on the big streets AND expect Button to continue calling along regardless of whether it's one or 2 bets to him.

I think your reads in the OP are fairly ambiguous - the correct line depends a lot on what those reads actually mean.

[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem, as I see it, is that the pfr may not bet the turn if he has a hand like JJ, AQ, or AJ...so there is a reasonable chance you collect nothing on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

After reading the OP's read of: "MP1 is aggressive and loose" I don't think we need to be too concerned about the turn getting checked through. An aggressive player is not raising PF, betting the flop and then checking the turn often enough for us to worry about it getting checked through IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
If the pfr has a hand, then you are likely to get 3-bet on the flop, and then you can still get in a c/r on the turn if you are so inclined.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is why I'm leaning more to betting out on the flop - again dependent on the loose Button's propensity to cold-call (because I'm expecting MP to raise a flop bet)

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Answer me this though, how much of an edge is it when you use the deceptive play to goad the inexperienced MP1 into a pissing contest on the turn? Then poor MP2 is left sitting there calling raise after raise after raise just to see one card when I am a huge favorite.
I do believe the reason so much money got in the pot is that I didn't raise on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying the slowplay is right or wrong but I think you need to be careful about coloring your standard line with a specific hand where everything worked out perfectly. In this hand you happen to have an aggressive player with TPTK and another one with pot odds to chase a flush draw.

I wonder if you would have posted this hand if the turn had been checked through and both players folded to your river bet. The only thing that needs to be different for that scenario is for MP1 to have AQ instead of AK.

[AUSTIN]

Good flop... Lead the flop to allow preflop raiser to raise and put pressure on 3rd guy (at these limits any 2 spades are coming along for the ride)... this sets up the turn for CR too.

[Rico Suave]

Crunchy:

[ QUOTE ]
After reading the OP's read of: "MP1 is aggressive and loose" I don't think we need to be too concerned about the turn getting checked through. An aggressive player is not raising PF, betting the flop and then checking the turn often enough for us to worry about it getting checked through IMO.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I saw that. I still think aggressive players are going to check behind on the turn here fairly often without a hand after being called in 2 spots...but it is kind of silly for us to debate what his read meant. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is why I'm leaning more to betting out on the flop - again dependent on the loose Button's propensity to cold-call (because I'm expecting MP to raise a flop bet)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably reasonable.....but I still think I like the standard and obvious c/r here on the flop and take it from there.

--Rico