Table Reamed Me Out For This Hand

[ QUOTE ]
If the board eventually is paired with 3 clubs, and Hero gets in a war with sb, he will hopefully realize his reraise on the flop is not as standard as some of you guys seem to think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't give SB credit for a set at this point. In my experience they like to spring those on you on the turn. Seeing full houses with a board pair, while possible, is generally MUTB.

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't give SB credit for a set at this point.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, but unless you are willing to rule it out, and rule out 2 pair, you don't have the equity to 3 bet this flop.

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience they like to spring those on you on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
What about the read on sb makes you think he is dumb enough to do this?

[ QUOTE ]
Seeing full houses with a board pair, while possible, is generally MUTB.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seeing a monster under the bed is one thing, but be careful not to employ a red herring argument. With a CR on the flop you have to consider the increased possibility of a set. You can speak of seeing MUTB all day, but that does not make ignoring the possibility of a set any less wrong.

Based on the check raise I'm thinking a set here. I suppose I could figure out what your pot odds are in this spot but I'd probably call instead of raise. Depends on if you think CO will come in for the extra bet.

[Wetdog]

I don't like the 3bet. I'd rather the CO come along while you spike a clubon the turn. The Pot is at 6 BB if you call along with the CO. Until you do get the flush, if you call the turn you will always have the odds to continue on the flush draw alone. Throw in 3 overcard outs and it seems more in your favor.

The table is ripping you because you're not playing the weak-tight game. No raise without two pair or better! Call down on draws! Don't rock the boat!! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

While I'd hate to drive out CO, and your free card (which you likely won't get anyway, but I'm sure you knew that) is officially no longer free as of that reraise, another bet for value is not the worst of ideas here. (Folding would be the worst of ideas.)

Edit: Fear of a board pair that hasn't yet come is irrational to the extreme. Worry about it if it happens.

And a flop check-raise, in my experience, is more likely to be hand protection for an overpair, draw, or TPTK. If it were the turn, a set might be the first thing on my mind, but not here.

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
Fear of a board pair that hasn't yet come is irrational to the extreme. Worry about it if it happens.


[/ QUOTE ]
*sigh*
Why are some of you guys so insistent on this point? How many hands in SB checkraising with?

Pokerstove:
1) If SB has and set and CO has a random hand:
Pot equity is ~25%, so betting is -EV.
2) If SB has 2 pair and CO has a random hand:
Pot equity is ~33.4%, so is break even.
3) If SB has TPTK and CO has a randome hand:
Pot Equity is ~44%, so betting is +EV.

I think that the first two outcomes are more likely given the checkraise, with option one being the most likely.

Greg,

your comment refers to a future board pair and 3 clubs. That's why I brought it up again.

Discussion:
If you 3-bet and get capped, I'm in the "he's got a set, or two pair" camp along with you. But a mere checkraise can be alot of things, especially with 3 to the flop on a relatively ragged board against the preflop raiser who appears likely to have whiffed the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
1) If SB has and set and CO has a random hand:
Pot equity is ~25%, so betting is -EV.
2) If SB has 2 pair and CO has a random hand:
Pot equity is ~33.4%, so is break even.
3) If SB has TPTK and CO has a randome hand:
Pot Equity is ~44%, so betting is +EV.

I think that the first two outcomes are more likely given the checkraise, with option one being the most likely.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's where we disagree. You're figuring the set to be far more likely than I would, based on my experience at 1/2. Again, we're talking a flop c/r, not a turn c/r. If it were a turn c/r I'd be inclined to agree with you.

You also neglected to consider the whole range of SB's possible hands, including the draw that is IME at least as likely as a set.

[Greg J]

I appreciate yr tenacity in this argument. However,

[ QUOTE ]
If you 3-bet and get capped, I'm in the "he's got a set, or two pair" camp along with you.

[/ QUOTE ]
As my pokerstoving suggests, betting for info is not worth it here. You are not getting the additional bets when he only has TP, and you are getting them when he has 2 pair or a set. When you call you are much more likely to illicit a bet when you hit yr flush. By 3 betting you are putting yourself in a position to win the least when you have an equity edge, and lose the most when you don't.

[ QUOTE ]
But a mere checkraise can be alot of things, especially with 3 to the flop on a relatively ragged board against the preflop raiser who appears likely to have whiffed the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]
WHAT? How has the preflop raiser (hero) shown he has wiffed this flop? B/c the flop is ragged? So you are saying this makes a CR with a marginal hand trapping the preflop raiser and a caller more likely? Or are you suggesting a semibluff? I find that unlikely given the read on SB as a decent player, and a semibluff in this situation is pretty retarded.

Let's not forget reverse implied odds here, especially against TPTK, or if CO cold called a hand like A7s -- reverse domination is a bitch.

EDIT: I think I made my point clearer in this post than in the previous ones. Here is a rule for thumb: when it's 3 handed you generally should not get in raising wars with the nut flush draw, especially against reasonable and/or tight opponents. You likely don't have a the equity edge you think you do. When it's 4 or more, go bonkers.

[Student Caine]

[ QUOTE ]
...or if CO cold called a hand like A7s -- reverse domination is a bitch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Question - I was thinking about the possibility of our 3-Bet folding out CO if he has A7s or A3s...how likely do we think this is?