Stupid Raise or Did I Save a Bet?

[dabluebery]

Played this 5/10 hand last night;

BB with AKo. UTG is LAG preflop but decent after the flop and MP is an unknown.

UTG raises to $10, MP calls, all fold to me in the BB. I reraise to $15, and UTG caps. MP calls, I call.

Flop is AT3 with 2 spades. I bet, UTG raises, MP calls, I reraise, UTG caps, MP calls.

Turn is 6s, third flush card. I bet, UTG folds, MP raises, I reraise, he caps, I fold.

My analysis;
I was scared of the turn card, especially from MP who cold called 2 bets twice. If I'm that paranoid about dropping TPTK to an inferior hand, or I'm not convinced that I'm drawing dead here, then I should have check-raised. I still get a sense of how strong MP is, and if UTG is going to lead out, I'm going to feel comfortable dropping TPTK for two bets when it gets back to me anyway.

That said, the 3-bet saved 1 bet on the [turn / river] and convinced me I was beat. I think check-raising could have saved another bet and still given me the same confidence. Check-calling both streets would only cost me 2 bets total. What do I do here?

[Nick C]

After you get raised on the turn, I don't see how 3-betting and then folding saves you a bet over calling down.

Anyway, I would probably call down after the raise (instead of 3-betting and then folding), while strongly suspecting that I was in fact drawing dead. Mainly, I'd be hoping MP just had top pair and one spade, but I wouldn't be very optimistic.

I wouldn't go for a checkraise on the turn. But if I did check, and the action behind me went bet, raise, I would fold. I suppose checkraising after a bet, call sequence would have its merits, but I'd be kind of worried about UTG at that point and might just call instead.

In any event, the main advantage to checking that I see is that you can find out what UTG and MP want to do before putting money in. On a check, check, bet sequence, I'd probably just call.

Most likely I would lead the turn, but I don't think checking would be so bad, really. MP seems determined to stay in, and if you are still ahead, checking probably won't cost you the pot or anything.

[Mr. Curious]

It seems like you were looking for a fancy way to lay this hand down.

You 3-bet the turn and fold to a raise, which costs you the pot if you are ahead and saves you two theoretical bets if you are behind (calling and then c/c the river).

If you had instead just called the turn raise and check/called the river, it costs you the same amount as the 3-bet, but gives you a chance to still win the pot if MP is a donk, plus you get some info about how MP plays. This is especially important in relation to how the hand played given MP's 2 cold calls preflop and 2 more cold calls on the flop.

btw - I take it niether of your cards were a spade?

[dabluebery]

Right. I had no spades.

Yeah, I could have seen a showdown for the same price, and I'm stupid for that. But in realizing that, I realized could have saved a bet by check-calling, too.

Don't look at it from a results-perspective. I like that you keep betting on the turn here, but when you get raised on this board, it's pretty much a call-down barring a read that tells you to fold or raise.

When you are ahead, what does the turn 3-bet gain you?

[dabluebery]

The guy had mercy on my pathetic soul and showed KQ of spades.

[W. Deranged]

I think it is very important to recognize those situations where you can call down and actually see a showdown for the same price as making a crafty raise/fold play.

I see no reason to three-bet here. The only remote fear is villain is raising for a free showdown and you don't want to miss bets, but you still get 2 BB in and you don't run the risk of folding the best hand.