The problem I am having is its really hard for me to articulate my thoughts on this spot.
Callum, this is very often a signifier that your thinking is incorrect/illogical. It's not always the case of course, but I strongly believe that in this case it definitely is.
You (and Pleno) have not addressed at all the lengthy logical analysis that I have given. I don't know whether you have properly read it through and thought about it, but I hope you have because it was intended for the two of you - hopefully to give you both a 'lightbulb moment'. You have both also seemingly ignored James' wonderfully succinct comment, that pretty much disproves your argument in one short sentence:
If you think 3b > fold AND villain is polarised, then it is almost a logical impossibility that call isn't better than 3b.
It's like someone hearing a clear and logical explanation of something and then seem to not listen to/ignore all the points made and just say, "yeah, but... (insert something that has already been logically shown to be false)". This is essentially what you are doing when you repeat that folding is better than calling, without giving any reasons for this and ignoring the fact that James has shown this to be completely flawed.
My overall thought is. Vs anyone with a brain we are going to find it impossible to get to showdown if we flat flop.
This does not make any logical sense, although it sounds good upon first reading. It implies that you think villain is going to be bluffing a lot on the turn and river, and this will thus prevent you getting to showdown. Well if that's genuinely what you think then simply...
do not fold! If instead you think villain is likely to be one and done on the flop then simply call flop and fold many turns. If you think villain will double barrel but pussy out on the river then call turn and fold most rivers. You are using your
poker skill through the streets to make good decisions and gain an advantage on your opponent, whether that is by making good calls or good folds. Finishing the hand right away by 3betting does not allow you to do this. And, very importantly, it plays into your opponent's hands the times when he has the strong parts of his range.
If you
don't know villain's tendencies then you make the best judgement you possibly can given your assessment of general population tendencies in the games you play in, and then adjust from there in later hands if the hand goes to SD. This is another way in which you are using your skill. I agree that when you don't have much info on an opponent's frequencies it is
sometimes good to play a hand in such a way that you don't make any mistakes on future streets. But this applies mostly to spots where:
A) There is an information asymmetry - i.e. your opponent has more info on your tendencies than you have on his. Thus he is likely to make fewer mistakes than you are on later streets. And,
B) The spot is very close anyway, so you might as well take the option that likely leads to fewer mistakes.
Neither of these is the case here.
Remember that we have a protected range here. We have a LOT of Kx in our range when we flat the flop raise. We are NOT turning our hand face up as a medium pair. So villain
cannot just go barrelling us willy nilly. And of course, if you think he will still do so... well then, simply DON'T FOLD!
I get the strong impression that you and Patrick feel much happier playing with the initiative, and are perhaps more than a little uncomfortable when playing without the lead. This is not the worst leak to have by any means, because many spots are indeed more profitable to play with the lead. But this is not true in all situations, and this is definitely one of those in which it is untrue (or more accurately, the price of re-taking the lead is too high compared to the 'benefits' that it might offer). I think your overall assessment of this hand is clouded by your dislike of playing without the initiative and that your judgement is being affected by this. It is why you are having trouble explaining yourself properly... because your 'gut feeling' is telling you that you don't like a certain line, yet you can't justify this feeling. Your feeling is caused by a preconceived preference for having the lead. And in this case it has led you to the wrong conclusions.
Author