+1

[QUOTE=Shaffer;25247304]This rant is very, very results-oriented IMO. At the time hero made his flop raise, there's no way he could predict that UTG+1 flopped a monster and was going to cold-3bet and put him in a crappy OOP spot. He's reacting to a weak-ass donk from the SB and a weak-ass call from the BB that could mean any mixture of weak-ass made hands, draws, bluffs, whatever. Yes it's profitable to draw, yes fundamental solid poker is fine in spots, but our implied odds are not great here because A) our overcall screams flush draw to anyone at the table with two brain cells they can rub together, WTF are they going to do, check-call off their stacks when a club hits the turn and all of a sudden we start bombing, and B) our straight puts a 4-straight on the board and doesn't even bother to give us the nuts. This makes the semibluff option much more attractive.



I have to laugh on that one. Pardon me please.

But anyhow, when OP raises, what do YOU think Op's plan was? Lets forget about results and all that, what would be your plan if you remotely think raising here is good?

I happen to think that conversely it is you that is not really planning the hand through, and not DG being results oriented. Dg happens to be spot on. And since i never get to say it, so was Always-tilting. And others too, you know who you are.

And of course, thats all just my own opinion.

This contention strikes me as really very bizarre; I don't see what's so controversial about a flop semibluff with a big draw. I read SB's donk as mostly weak semi-made one pair hands "figuring out where he's at" and not looking to get married against any hard aggression. The plan is obvious. Get UTG+1, SB, and BB to fold, with a backup plan of getting SB and BB to call to build up a bigger pot to bluff on the turn and the secondary backup plan of hitting our hand on the turn and frankly probably not getting much more action anyway.

Most people are being results-oriented here by acting like we can expect to get 3bet here a ton. I call BS. If SB's plan was to donk-3bet he would have donked for more, I'm not fearing a BB backraise in the slightest, and UTG+1 is facing 2 bets cold and is folding the vast majority of the time.

Yes a call is +EV, that doesn't make it the most +EV play available and I think raising is considerably better. I don't think this is the ideal raise size, but let's not pretend that "bet and get the other players to fold" doesn't count as a plan, and that a spot where we have a mega draw isn't a perfectly reasonable spot for it given our equity against 100% of the hands we could possibly be facing.

ok, so here's the result.... flop 5c7c8, utg+1 hold 46, lower nut straight, sb has nothing/one pair whatever which he folds anyway, bb has kc8c and think for a long long time before he dump.

not been result oriented, but if i call, utg+1 raise, because him and bb both are deep, i think bb's at least gonna call with top pair second nut flush draw........... and i end up shoving anyway cause my stack is just not deep enough to just call.

oh and bb claims of course that if utg+1 fold to my raise, bb was gonna get it in with me obviously.

btw, you all rite on about sb's donk bet, he's down 3k that nite, fish, donk bet air/low pair stacking off with ace high on flop... etc etc.

also, when we play hand like a9suited, isn't this is the type of spot where we get in with our stack? i mean, we don't really play suited ace for top pair rite?

i do agree that i should've rasied more.

also, when you c ppl gets in 100 bb aj vs a8 preflop, this is the kinda table where you might want get some action going... that's why i don't mind raise a9 suited UTG.

turn and river blank blank. either way we were meant to lose to one of em.