AA 10/20, simple turn/river decision

[Catt]

I'm a bit skeptical of the call and raise river line in this hand, mainly because I think the range of Villain's possible holding make it pretty unlikely that either (1) he folds to a three-bet getting 10:1 closing the action with a hand he was willing to raise on this turn; or (2) we earn more BBs those times we take this line. If he is on a stone cold bluff or a smallish pocket pair, sure he folds to the turn three-bet; but if he's on a pair of Ks, perhaps a K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] x[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], a non-paired FD semi-bluff, etc. he's likely not folding to the turn three-bet and there's a decent chance we miss out on a raise if he ck-cls the river (or ck-folds). It's certainly a viable line, but I think I still favor the three-bet here on the turn given the nature of the board and the action thus far (and I'd favor it more if we didn't hold the A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]).

[JrJordan]

[ QUOTE ]
I think waiting until the river to raise him will lead you into trouble more often than not. By raising the river you leave your opponent open to losing only one bet on the river (if he folds) but will usually end up having to pay him off an extra 2 bets when he was indeed slowplaying a set or strong 2 pair. IMO waiting for the river to attack in this situation is costly.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make sense. If you raise the river instead of the turn and he folds then he was most likely bluffing and you gained 3BB. If you decide to act on the turn by 3-betting and he was bluffing, he will fold to this 3bet and you only get 2BB. By waiting until the river, you induce another bet from a player who wouldn't call otherwise. Likewise, if the villain is slowplaying a set, then correct I will lose 2 extra BB on the river when he 3-bets. So, what's the difference between this and 3-betting the turn? He will cap here and guess what? You lose the same 2BB. Likewise, I think there's a better chance of the villain just calling your river raise with a strong 2 pair, than having him call your turn 3-bet. A turn smooth call, river raise line displays much more strength than a turn 3-bet line IMO.

[ QUOTE ]

Also, someone said that by raising the river you can get a small two pair to slow down. That is great and all, but why would you ever do that knowing he will most likely call with a better hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, this statement doesn't make sense. You're raising the river for value. Yes there is the possibility that he has two pair and you are beat. This same risk applies to 3-betting the turn as well though. My point is that there is a better chance of getting capped on the turn, than 3-bet on the river. First, impression wise I think a river raise means a LOT more strength after slowing down on the turn, than just ramming and jamming with a turn 3-bet. This means a 2-pair hand is more likely to slowdown because he might be behind. Second, and probably more important, a 2pair type hand on the turn can cap when you 3-bet, and not have to worry about you coming over the top with a 5bet. If you raise on the river though, he has to consider the fact that you can still reraise on top of his 3-bet. On the turn he doesn't have to worry about you coming over the top, on the river he does. Which scenario do you think our villain will slow down the most? My vote is the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
But hey, we all play different.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes we do. The big difference is some of us are willing to explore other options before shutting them out completely.

[KidPokerX]

ok, you win.

[Cancuk]

raises.
cheers.

This is easy 3 bet

Jack
patexashold-em.com