UTG raiser is pretty agrresive reg 25/21/7,6 AF/8% 3bet (220 hands). MP is on the other hand fish 40/24/1,4 AF with 10% 3bet after 220 hands. I choose to isolate fish as it'll be hard playing TT, when J,Q,K or A falls on the flop against reg. Fish didn't 3bet so he doesnt have JJ+ most likely, and he calls too much... On SB is another bad player 40/0 after 20 hands so flatting wouldn't be that bad with great implied odds, but still prefer 3 bet IP. I feel like he calls flop pretty wide flop namely any pp, overcards, FD, Jx etc so small cbet seems like the best option. Now here's where I'm not sure, whether bet turn to make him pay for any FD and pp is superior to checking back and evaluating river.

3bet pre?
bet turn???

Utg has nice ~65% fold to 3bet and because he's OOP and I'm 3betting fish as well, he will put me on very strong hand thus I expect him to fold much more than 65% of the time... On the other hand fish will call here wide bc. he seems to have problem folding preflop in general

BTW. Your post doesn't help me at all, so please use more than 4 words and less question marks

3bet pre is not totally ******ed, but TT has a bunch of value in a 3-way pot with position and calling is better. The disadvantage of 3-betting is that you will puke if UTG 4-bets

Turn seems like a relatively obvious check-back. If he has a 3, J or flush you are just throwing money away. Re eval river, if he remains passive he might have just a smaller pp and you might find a river vbet

I agree after getting x/r on turn, I regretted betting...

Although I don't mind folding to 4bet, as his 4bet range crushes me hard anyway (or am I wrong?). I'm more concerned about loosing value by not set-mining here (I expect SB to flat as well). Is this why you're advocating to flat ? Bc. I'd hate to play multipot with TT when over card falls, not even knowing whether utg has higher pp etc. Does it make sense or am I just trying to find excuses ?

so why da **** are you 3betting?

I expected his 4bet range to be extremely narrow - this why I 3bet him in the actual hand. The concern showed up AFTER I had played the hand and this is why I don't think NOW that my decision was optimal, also why I posted it here. I wanted to hear your thoughts about the hand.

No need to feel offended MartimC, I do appreciate that you answer to so many threads.

flat pre, x/b the turn then, no value in betting

A hand like AQ would be a whole lot better to 3b because if you get 4b you have no probs chucking the hand away and you might even have avoided some postflop trouble, e.g. you flopping TP and not having the best hand

Also a 4b might blow the fish out of the hand

yea + we dont fear many rivers

Pre is OK and turn is OK imo but flatting pre and checking turn are probably better as people have said.

You say you do not want to lose value from value betting but you 3bet preflop , better off flatting and see flop , good to bet flop but why bet turn it accomplishes nothing in our favour (folds out any non club pairs most times , if they raise or call we are likely dominated )


Always ask yourself "Why am i doing this?" "Does this make sense?"

The only possible reason to 3B pre is if we have a solid read that UTG flats many worse hands vs. 3B a lot oop. 65% fold to 3b makes this an easy call. Remember, we should only bet to make a better hand fold or a worse hand call. Not to make hands more 'playable'. There should be no better hands folding here and you open yourself up to an Ax 4b bluff.

Turn is more debatable, though I'd lean towards a fold. Does this fish float atc? Will he call any single face club here? Whats the worst pp he'll continue with? Also some 888 fish will jam that pot button on any river after bet flop - x/b turn line, yet slowplay nutted hands, so it could be the cheapest way to SD.

Still I think the most profitable option is to x/b turn, with the intent to bluffcatch riv on most runouts. I'd only VB river a tiny amount, if at all, if you think fish will call any worse there.

First of all thank you for responses, next time I would flat it pre for sure in given situation. Also do you flat JJ here too or TT is the best pp you flat here against this UTG?


"The only possible reason to 3B pre is if we have a solid read that UTG flats many worse hands"

I don't agree to this statement though, purpose of 3bet was to isolate the fish (which is inferior to flatting at least with TT, but this what I've learned too late) so the higher UTG's fold to 3bet would be, the better isolating would work here? For example we wouldn't like to play AA, KK in a multiway pot with 2 or more players. The question is ofc which pocker pair is good enough to 3bet here, JJ or QQ? If jacks are good enough then 3betting TT is borderline at worst.

Hey Erhaven, sorry if I wasn't clear, rereading my post it was a bit of a mess

I was referring strictly to the TT example in the hand given.

When we merge our 3b range we rely on calls from worse hands. Against a player who will likely respond by either folding or 4 betting (UTG V) its better to polarise our 3b range.

Before isolating you need to consider whether you are raising for value or as a bluff. AA is obviously always a clear 3b for value (never as a bluff, we would rather 2+ callers than 2+ folds especially when IP!). TT, however, can't be raised as a bluff as there are very few better hands that will fold. UTG will play perfectly by raising anything better and folding worse here. TT here is only good for 3b value if 1) UTG will call with a ton of worse hands, or 2) spaz bluff shove so much you're confident you can profitably call down.

Sure its possible to get a reg to fold better and a fish to call worse but its almost impossible with this hand in these positions.

With a decent reg UTG and a passive fishy station on the right your value range is pretty tight here. With all the implied odds and position you want to be thinking of what is the worst hand I can flat with and start adding 3b bluffs from weaker hands that still have decent equity vs fish.

Personally I'd be flatting 22-QQ, the best SC's, most Axs, AQ and maybe AK. 3b bluffs would come from Acerags and weaker SC's against villains described. Against another pair of villains where my postflop advantage was narrower I'd move some of the weaker flatting range hands over to the 3b range (lower pp's, or some Axs' for example).

Mostly grunch, pre is fine but flat is obviously pretty standard/fine as well.

I really, really like a turn check as played.

I'd check back turn as well. You can't make a fish fold a jack, but even most fishes will fold a hand like 66 (particularly with no clubs). You also have at least some outs against most hands containing a jack or trips and even some made flushes. You're mostly worried about giving a free card to something like AQ with one club, but that's only one scenario (and you can easily make the correct decision in position on the river when the fish bets, especially since fishes often bet small when they bluff and large when they valuebet).

About preflop: I typically only 3bet TT when shoving after a 4-bet is +EV. A TAG, opening from UTG probably doesn't 4-bet eg. A9s or 77. Although, when I open from UTG and face a 3bet from a 3-bet monkey (but capable of folding to a 4-bet), I sometimes 4-bet bluff, because my 4-bet has more fold equity when I'm UTG, as opposed to BTN vs the blinds situation.

You simply don't even have 40% eq against a somewhat realistic calling range on the turn, even with the assumption that it's really light {(smaller PPs;AK/Q/T) w/ a club}.
So while I agree that this stuff will usually be in their range for calling twice, it's still not enough and not particularly close.

Pre is debateable in general. There's merits for both approaches but if you combine the chance of UTG 4betting (low, agreed) and the one of SB flatting (high), it should definitely be a call.