Pedal to the metal with trips...

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
I would rather you just bet the flop. One problem with slowplaying is that you can get caught in your own trap because you interpret your opponents strength to your slowplay. If you have bet out and it had been capped on the flop and turn, you have a somewhat easier job determining your river play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although a good argument can always be made for betting the flop with trips, it usually isn't so that one can gather reliable information--which is especially true against this lineup.

[Jake (The Snake)]

There's no way I'm 3-betting that river. Even though villain is an idiot, I would assume that even HE knows he won't win this pot on a bluff or with a 6 or something absurd by the time we get to the river.

There are too many hands that beat you, and they will all cap against you. Risking 2 to make 1 more requires you to be good like 55-60% of the time. Unless you have a spectacular read on this guy, I can't imagine you're good that often.

[Entity]

I'm check-calling the river.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm check-calling the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then I assume also that you wouldn't have capped the turn.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm check-calling the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then I assume also that you wouldn't have capped the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm check-calling the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then I assume also that you wouldn't have capped the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems like shutting down too soon with a great hand against a retard.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm check-calling the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is true then I assume also that you wouldn't have capped the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seems like shutting down too soon with a great hand against a retard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The lack of information you get out of your flop check is one of the consequences of checking the flop. In general, when someone 3-bets the turn, they've got a good hand. Especially when they 3-bet a turn checkraise. I completely disagree with your flop and turn play because I think they're absolutely transparent, but whatever.

I know that you say you've seen him make some "idiotic floater" moves, but I fail to see how either of those situations detract from his possible range of hands here. If you tell me that he'd raise A4o here or that he was generally overaggressive, that's going to change my read and play accordingly. But you didn't. You mentioned two situations, one which wasn't a great raise but was far from terrible, and another which might be good but might be terrible, depending on contexts, and neither of those seem to have much applicability here.

You've shown extreme strength here and he's responded with more strength. If I had a read that he'd play lots of hands this way on the turn, then yeah, I'd cap the turn and lead the river (though I think 3-betting the river is asinine). But you don't provide a read with the equivalent of that.

Rob

[asherpuppy]

Tough with mixed reads on villian. I like the turn, I don't think you can put him on anything that has you beat at that point. I would have just called his raise on the river without any read on him that he would bluff-raise after the turn action. Then again, he's an idiot.

Say you bet the flop. How would you change your play on the turn and river if he just called you? What if he raised? With a wild player like that do you think either would give you more info than what you had by just check/calling the flop?

[Nick C]

Villain sounds erratic, and there's a good chance he's not particularly observant.

A couple of thoughts, though:

(1) Anyone who plays Party 3/6 and pays much attention at all should be aware of the check-call flop, checkraise turn line with flopped trips. I know you don't do it all that often, but that doesn't mean Villain doesn't see it all the time.

(2) It seems like when someone is willing to put in this many raises against me heads-up postflop, he usually has something very good.

I often have trouble figuring out when to slow down with a strong hand -- especially against the kind of player your opponent is. But I don't think you should have put quite as many postflop bets in as you did.

That said, if you won the hand (maybe because Villain was going nuts postflop with KK or 95s or something), well, then you went with your instincts based on your read and were right this time. I do think that sometimes a play that can be correct at the table can look wrong in a posted hand, because sometimes a read can contain subtleties that are hard to describe in a post.

Edit: For instance, if Villain seems to take it personally and gets carried away when someone checkraises him, of if he tends to either play his hands passively or continue raising indefinitely, with some disregard for his hand's actual strength, then those would be reasons to keep playing back at him with a hand as strong as trips.

Probably he can usually bully someone into just calling him down eventually, if he raises persisently enough, since he won't usually be up against the nuts. So if he's a player who lets his ego get involved once he shows strength in a hand, then your river 3-bet starts to seem less reckless to me.

[PokerBob]

i bet/call the river.