i dont think you understand you can get it HU later in the hand which is a big part of why i call 3rd.

I don't like your chances of getting it heads-up later in the hand with the pot as bloated as it is. I think you overestimate your "playing advantages" on the later streets. Maybe you've got a small equity edge here (I doubt that your share is as high as .30, however), but you've got four more streets where it's entirely likely that you'll be forced to put your money in as a money dog--and three of those are big-bet streets. I'm still tossing this when it gets back to me on third.

I'm not paying a bet on Fifth street unless my life gets a lot better than having a pair of Fives. You're suffering future pain unnecessarily.

You plan on folding fifth getting more than 10:1 most of the time? If you're planning on folding fifth unimproved, definitely fold third instead.

That is not my plan, I'm just saying you don't necessarily have to pay all those big bets you're afraid of.

I'm kind of seeing both sides of the 3rd street argument.

I don't play this game so I would be interested to know how it should be played at 3/6 instead of 30/60, assuming there is a difference.

Third street is thin, and I don't have a problem with anyone's argument that it is an expensive spot to play.

But 30/60, 40/80 and up are expensive stakes. Not in the dollar amount, but in how they are played. If you consistently let yourself be taken off hands like this, you will be destroyed.

Players will raise and re-raise playing for the dead money in the middle, and if you keep folding, that's your money they are playing for.

ceegees point is getting lost in the mathmatics. Whether we have 23% equity or 31% equity is not the issue. It's an exercise in a different level of thinking.

The opponents have to know that you will defend light, or at the very least you are willing to take a stand often enough to keep the hounds at bay.


Whether THIS hand should be played or not: personally I was on the fence, as it was close, but if you don't want to play this one, you better be willing to play the next.

7

Exactly. Most posters don't understand their ranges here are like gutshots and low pairs in the hole a lot at these stakes.

If players' ranges are so wide and consist mostly of marginal holdings, what does the action look like when seats 3 and 4 actually have premium hands?

Also, if games get this wild and crazy, my natural reaction would be to tighten up and punish them with my premium hands. I'll lose 1 SB in small pots like this, but if people are capping 3rd with split nines and gap/2flush type hands, then I can get paid off by waiting for the goods.

I'd call 3rd but if I accidentally folded it wouldn't really concern me much either For this situation we have one of the best hands in our range, so if we call at all it should be with this hand (not that we have to call, ever, bc I think this is pretty rare action and it doesn't matter if we folded everything < KK ith).

As played 3-bet fifth, next street ?

Rest of the hand is boring
http://www.handconverter.com/hands/557903

You will not be able to recover all your lost bring-ins, antes and early folds.

If this is your thought process, then don't even bother getting into a high(ish) stakes game. You are constantly being played at. You need to play back to survive.

This is a 6-handed game with an $8 ante. By the time you pick up the 'goods', you will be stuck quite a bit.

And even though the game may look 'crazy and wild', it doesn't mean that the players don't know what they are doing. They will quickly adjust to you being a rock, and you will start wondering why you only win small pots with your aces.

7

I'm not implying that we should never play back. I'm suggesting we should adjust to whatever the present situation. In this case, the situation is a lot of aggression with wide ranges, and my natural instinct is to tighten up. When things calm down, then loosen up.

You're going to wait a long time before this happens

Poker is confusing

There really isn't more than one adjustment in a high stakes game. It always runs loose and aggressive just like low stakes is almost always loose passive.

All the more reason to fold 3rd.

It depends on board texture. If no one catches well im seeing the river with a king over if the action is not likely to go crazy. IF someone makes open aces well then we aren't always calling now are we? I think you guys are too interested in a always do this or always do that situation. You have to evaluate the board texture and texture of the game at the time with these kinda hands.

How often does it happen that you raise and then three other guys raise behind you? I really don't think that folding third is an invitation to get run over.

Yes, agreed, which is why I capped 'THIS' in an effort to separate the playing of this hand with the concept CG was trying to get across.

While this is definitely true, those adjustments go both ways. Once you have established yourself as a rock, you are free to loosen up and start taking shots.

Of course, they will eventually start noticing that you are playing more hands (or you will get caught) and will readjust whereupon the whole circle starts again.

folding split 5's to re-re-re raises obviously labels you as a huge nit/rock.

Only if your opponents are reading this thread.