well, perhaps "totally out of whack" is too strong a term, but i do think you are going about things in the wrong way. Basically, you seem to want to justify your play purely based on "reads" that sound quite limited... even if they weren't limited, you still dont really want to base a play purely on reads. What I would suggest is starting out listing reasonable ranges in pokerstove (so far you haven't done much besides argue about how great your reads are), then use the information you have available about the players to make small adjustments (such as discounting -not eliminating - draws for the passive player)...

good LHE players dont use reads to stray far from the norm, but typically to make small adjustments.

Okay, point well taken... I used to stove quite a lot of my hands... I'll do that more in the future.

NOTE: the entire reason for betting out this flop was for information, to see where I was at. the information I received was I was drawing very slim, at least that was my interpretation.


Here's the stove for this hand:

Hand 0 is me
hand 1 is the BB
hand2 is the button
hand 3 is MP, who I fully expected to call (put her on a flush or straight draw mostly)

These are the wisest ranges I could think that fit the action. In stove, I'm way behind:

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

15,354,158 games 47.407 secs 323,879 games/sec

Board: 2c 7s 6s
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 14.483% 14.04% 00.44% 2156299 67374.50 { JcJh }
Hand 1: 33.300% 32.71% 00.59% 5022805 90201.50 { TT-66, 22, 98s, 76s, 72s, 62s, 54s, 98o, 76o, 72o, 62o, 54o }
Hand 2: 23.970% 23.49% 00.48% 3606666 73761.00 { TT+, AsKs, AsQs, AcKs, AdKs, AhKs, AsKc, AsKd, AsKh }
Hand 3: 28.247% 27.62% 00.63% 4241006 96045.00 { AsKs, AsQs, AsJs, AsTs, As9s, As8s, As7s, As6s, As5s, As4s, As3s, As2s, KsQs, KsJs, KsTs, Ks9s, Ks8s, Ks7s, Ks6s, Ks5s, Ks4s, Ks3s, Ks2s, QsJs, QsTs, Qs9s, Qs8s, Qs7s, Qs6s, Qs5s, Qs4s, Qs3s, Qs2s, JsTs, Js9s, Js8s, Js7s, Js6s, Js5s, Js4s, Js3s, Js2s, Ts9s, Ts8s, Ts7s, Ts6s, Ts5s, Ts4s, Ts3s, Ts2s, 9s8s, 9s7s, 9s6s, 9s5s, 9s4s, 9s3s, 9s2s, 8s7s, 8s6s, 8s5s, 8s4s, 8s3s, 8s2s, 7s6s, 7s5s, 7s4s, 7s3s, 7s2s, 6s5s, 6s4s, 6s3s, 6s2s, 5s4s, 5s3s, 5s2s, 4s3s, 4s2s, 3s2s, AcKs, AdKs, AhKs, AsKc, AsKd, AsKh, AcQs, AdQs, AhQs, AsQc, AsQd, AsQh, AcJs, AdJs, AhJs, AsJc, AsJd, AsJh, KcQs, KdQs, KhQs, KsQc, KsQd, KsQh, 98o, 54o }


Are my ranges wide enough? other thoughts?

AB

AB, w/out reads its a bad fold. With your reads its a good fold. Passives never pump draws, only STRONG made hands.

Generally speaking, plays made on reads are not best for discussion on the forum, as we were not there. Trypt, however, made an excellent point, reads are useful for small adjustments, not the main reason for a play.

W/r/to the hand, IMO you are behind on the flop and have 2 outs at best.

reads are for the river

This.

It's fine to make crying calls when you are probably behind (although I don't mind a read-based fold once in awhile either), but not when it's going to cost you multiple bets on several streets. When you see that 3-bet on the flop, you have to ask yourself, "how much is this going to cost me to commit to showdown and what's the likelihood that I am really going to have the best hand if I commit to it?".

yes.. i think the same.

i got the same result but for all different reasons than OP mentioned.

tryp do you ever go for flop c/r to thin field here?