Step in my opponents shoes.

[Ikke]

It's 3-handed. Game is aggressive as always.

You raise on the button with JhTh and I 3-bet in the SB. BB folds and you call. HU between us.

The flop comes 4d 3h 8s

I bet, and you call (?).

The turn is the Ts. I lead again. Your action?

Suppose you call. What is your plan for the river?

Suppose you raise, but get 3-bet. Your action. River action?

Suppose you call the 3-bet and the river brings the Qs and I bet again. Your action?

What do you put me on?
Regards

[stripsqueez]

i call your pre-flop 3 bet - despite the fact i have the odds to call even if you have a big hand your 3 bet is often based on losing the BB - i think there is merit to capping pre-flop from time to time

calling the flop is fine - if i assume that my opponent is a good player i'm not going to raise such a flop a lot and i'm never folding on this flop

i auto raise the turn - i find calling the turn bizarre - i invested money on the flop to hit this card and now i am cashing in

what to do after the 3 bet is not so clear as the rest as it becomes more player dependant - i have the odds to draw by paying the 3 bet but the issue is do i call the river - against the vast majority of opponents i'm happy to call down from the turn 3 bet - against a good opponent i can fold the river

the Qs is a bad card to river - i dont like to base my decision to call/fold on what that card is - truth is that its likely taking an overly precise view to believe that the scales have been tilted enough by the presence of that card - i try not to let scare cards scare me too much - against a good player i have probably made up my mind before i see the river what i am going to do when a blank hits and its unlikely to change

as for an answer other than "it depends" - i'm calling you down - you just look dodgy to me

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
The flop comes 4d 3h 8s
I bet, and you call (?).


[/ QUOTE ]
I call.

[ QUOTE ]
The turn is the Ts. I lead again. Your action?


[/ QUOTE ]

I raise.

Suppose you raise, but get 3-bet. Your action. River action?

Call. Call if no ace on river - else 50/50 fold/call depend on my reads on you - can you push 77 this way?. Raise on river if J or T falls.

Suppose you call the 3-bet and the river brings the Qs and

I bet again. Your action?
Call, hoping to catch 55-99, AK,AJ,KJ and some % suites to trick me if you're very aggro. I believe i have odds.

[ QUOTE ]
What do you put me on?

[/ QUOTE ]

22-AA,AK-AT,KQ-KJ,A8s, QJs,JTs - if i don't know nothing 'bout you except that you reasonably aggro.

[Ikke]

I thought this was interesting for several reasons, but from the few replies it got it apparently isnt :-)

IMO it touches again on the subject of exploitability. The way to play the hand seemed agreed upon by both posters who replied, and it also was the way my opponent played the hand.

I had KTo and took it down.

So, was my opponent bound to lose this much?

Regards

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this was interesting for several reasons, but from the few replies it got it apparently isnt :-)

[/ QUOTE ]
Keep posting as many hands as you can. I haven't responded to the few you've posted lately cuz as I read I'm just like "wow there's a game at a totally different level than what I can win at." I enjoyed reading this one and the other one where you took advantage of a tell on your opponent. It's good stuff, just hard for me to relate to as much as I wish I could [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Yeah, I think your opponent was bound to lose that much, unless he's never seen you 3-bet on the turn with mid pair, or as a semi-bluff. He can't lay it down, and if you can't raise TP a lot of the time when HU then you can't raise other hands because a smart opponent will learn your raise means either 'complete bluff' or 'monster'.

[auntieklava]

I lurk alot on this forum, and your posts are easily some of the most interesting and valuable. Essentially repeating what Schneids already said; I guess many have troubles relating to the games you play - and don't want to sound foolish. Keep posting though, I think creating some discussion around your posts would be very rewarding for everyone reading and posting in the SH-forum.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this was interesting for several reasons, but from the few replies it got it apparently isnt :-)

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very interesting. However, I often find it tough to contribute to good discussion re: 2- and 3-handed situations without knowing the players and the rhythm of the game up to that point.

[ QUOTE ]
So, was my opponent bound to lose this much?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's a reasonable amount to lose. However, when I'm unsure in these spots, I'll often just call the turn and call the river (bet if checked to) until I have a firmer read on the situation.

[Ikke]

[ QUOTE ]
I often find it tough to contribute to good discussion re: 2- and 3-handed situations without knowing the players and the rhythm of the game up to that point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand, but I really think when talking about 2 or 3 handed games it's important to have a conceptual discussion (not sure if that's correct English but I hope you know what I mean ;-). It's important, especially when playing against very good players, to approach an optimal strategy, whereas against worse opponents a maximizing approach is required.

Suppose that you are playing against a very good shorthanded player, who respects your play as well. Same situation as the hand described above.

I agree with the other posters that a default line would be to raise the turn and call down. But against a very good player, maybe when specific conditions are met, it might be better to take another approach. I was thinking about calling the turn and raising any none ace river if I were in his shoes. Does that make any sense? (under which conditions?)

Regards

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]

I was thinking about calling the turn and raising any none ace river if I were in his shoes. Does that make any sense? (under which conditions?)


[/ QUOTE ]

I like that line, but ... just curious ... if the river came a blank, and he raised, would you 3-bet?

[Surfbullet]

I'm in the middle of learning SH from full games, so take this with a grain of salt, but here's my question about the way this was played.

On the flop, the ThJh has no pair, no realistic straight draw - only a gutshot flush draw and overcards... Overcards that may or may not be dominated based on the opponents pf 3-bet which makes it pretty reasonable to assume he's got big face cards or a PP.

If he's got a PP you have to hit to win... and you are not getting odds to do that...is calling thus okay because you expect to make a few bets from him if you hit when he's on a PP b/c he can't know that you've hit?

If he has AT/KT/QT or AJ/KJ/QJ (reasonoble pf 3-bets) you are in trouble. If he has any other high face cards (except TJ) you are going to lose unless you hit also, which you still aren't getting odds to do.

Is the call here because it is HU which means you can't give him an advantage by folding rags flop to aggression because it probably missed him too?(HEPFAP situation where an aggro player gets an immediate advantage by betting all the time)

TJ doesn't have a whole lot of showdown potential unimproved, and at this point there are only 6-7(flushdraw) outs and as it turns out 3 of them were no good. Is this the wrong way to be thinking? It just doesn't seem like this is the best place to make a stand to keep the aggressive guy from having an advantage.

Thanks for the help.

Dan