Originally Posted by AmirSF
I would have liked a 3bet much more. It just gives the other big stack many more options of proceeding with the hand.
I get the history, but with a lot of his range, when you shove there is nothing he can do but fold.
Also a few more thoughts:
- I view something like this more as losing a flip than a bad beat. That is, you would gladly get in JJ in here pre, so really doesn't matter who had JJ and who had KK
- 3betting small IMO is not only better with this specific hand, but in general has significant advantages over a jam, for one it allows you have to have a much wider bluffing range
Good points, Amir. Even though I had him on the ropes, the re-jam was reckless. Assuming he has AKs, I left myself wide open for early KO with only a 65% chance of taking it down. I say 'reckless' since, in the moment, I didnt account for the possibility of him holding AA. I just didn't, which is a mistake. It wasn't about extracting value it was about breaking him, I conceed that.
Given the history, say I do throw out my std 3-bet, with the villian holding JJ, he doesnt have a fold button. A rejam is definately in his range here, and if logic kicks in -- he flats. Assuming he does flat - the board comes K 9 9. Say he checks, I'm also checking behind. Say he decides to lead-out with his JJ, it would be silly to re-raise the nuts, so I slow-play instead; or say....he checks to me, I'm checking right back giving him a chance to improve.
The turn J - in any scenario, we're both going broke. The rest is just bad luck and a case of s*** happens.
Cheers for the analysis. A 3-bet is the correct move, regardless of history or how it played out. I won't let my emotions get the better of me next time.