Poker Forum
|
Over 1,246,000 Posts!
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
08-04-2009, 04:05 AM
Post subject: tough qq spot all in
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
ok villain was 18/6 over 75 hands...what makes this either ev+ or ev- is whether or not i include jacks in his range, aa,kk,qq,jj,aks,ako as his range gives me 47.33% equity, while for without jj, my equity shrinks to 40%...i have 46% pot odds so this is either a marginal call or a clear fold....so in future fold?
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
UTG ($6.72)
UTG+1 ($5.49)
MP1 ($2.02)
MP2 ($2.30)
CO ($0.95)
Button ($5.79)
SB ($1.95)
Hero (BB) ($4.39)
Preflop: Hero is BB with Q , Q
UTG calls $0.02, UTG+1 bets $0.14, 3 folds, Button calls $0.14, 1 fold, Hero raises to $0.40, 1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $5.49 (All-In), 1 fold, Hero calls $3.99 (All-In)
Flop: ($8.95) 3, 10, 4 (2 players, 2 all-in)
Turn: ($8.95) K (2 players, 2 all-in)
River: ($8.95) 6 (2 players, 2 all-in)
Total pot: $8.95 | Rake: $0.40
Results below:
Hero had Q, Q (one pair, Queens).
UTG+1 had K, A (one pair, Kings).
Outcome: UTG+1 won $8.55
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
kmind
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Not Giving In
Posts: 4,240
|
|
I really don't think he'd felt JJ and he's going to have a pretty tight isolating range as it is because we can reduce a couple of weaker PP that he'd normally raise preflop. This is an assumption but what usually happens. Anyways, I'd just flat preflop as I think his stack off range is very very tight.
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
Don't 3bet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Don't 3bet
|
Explain this please. I can see reasons for calling and reasons for 3betting. What's your reasoning?
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
Well UTG+1 is only opening 6% of hands. Assuming he is positionally aware, that range should be even tighter from EP. So QQ probably isn't too far ahead of his opening range, and since his opening range is so tight, we can only assume his continuing range to a 3bet is even tighter. Which means, that with QQ we are pretty unlikely to get him to continue against a 3bet with worse. So if we are 3betting only to narrow his range to a range that beats us, then we are no longer getting value from out 3bet.
I understand your thoughts for 3betting. And I'm sure it namely comes to the fact that there is an overcaller, and the fact we are OOP. And I agree it kind of sucks to have to play a 3way pot OOP. But, we do have QQ, so it's not all bad.
If we 3bet, and villain folds JJ/AK, as I believe he very likely would. And only continues with QQ-AA, then we are in terribad shape, right? We are in way worse shape, than if we had just flatted and played a 3way pot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
I understand your thoughts for 3betting. And I'm sure it namely comes to the fact that there is an overcaller, and the fact we are OOP. And I agree it kind of sucks to have to play a 3way pot OOP. But, we do have QQ, so it's not all bad.
|
This is exactly why I'd 3bet. I want a HU pot for sure. But is it worth it? I don't know. Because what if button and UTG both calls the 3bet? Then we're in an even bigger 3-way pot OOP with a tight-ranged UTG raiser.
So now I'm leaning more towards just calling, which you suggested. What do we do on this flop of 3s Ts 4c.
We check, UTG bets, BU calls, Hero?
OR we check, UTG bets, BU raises, Hero folds?
I hate being OOP. 
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
Well HU pots are great and all. However, it's not great to be in a HU pot OOP against a range that totally crushes us. Which is what could very well happen if we 3bet here. UTG+1 is opening 6% overall. From UTG+1 that could be as little as like 2-3%. 3% of hands is AK+, JJ+.
I know that when I open UTG, and get 3bet by unknowns, I don't feel comfortable with AK/JJ, and sometimes even QQ. So, I definitely expect villainwho is 10/6 to be even more likely to fold those hands (JJ-QQ, AK). Which means he is continuing with only KK-AA. In which case, we just narrowed his range from a range that we were pretty much Breakeven with, to a range we now only have 18% equity against.
So basically a 3bet, only gets calls from better, and folds out worse. Which generally makes for a pretty bad bet/raise.
As far as the flops go, we would have to proceed fairly cautiously, check/folding to any A/K board. On a board such as Ts4c3s, I probably check/call the flop, then happily check/fold the turn. If UTG wants to put a lot of money in the pot, without a set, we shouldn't be in the pot anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the explanation Stacks. Good stuff.
|
|
|
|
dontezuma
|
|
Straight
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Catchin' fishes
Posts: 116
|
|
Isn't QQ at the top of your assumed range here? My guess is that UTG+1 figured you were squeezing and could be on a wider range than QQ+ and decided to shove over to pick up the pot. This is a massive 4-bet all in, and I think you can release the hand here, hard as it is. There's just no reason to risk 2 full buy-ins on a hand that is either AK or you're crushed under KK, AA.
I disagree that a 3bet is incorrect here. I do think that if villain is 4-betting all in after a 7X pfr in EP, you give him credit. Even at 2NL.
The 3bet is fine, IMO, because this villain could raise big UTG+1 with probably 99+/AJs+/KQs and even some other randoms to keep the .02 players from playing their total rags. I agree with stacks, though, that the continuing range is pretty tight. He could figure you for a squeeze since you're in the BB, and call with JJ+, AJs, and if he was really stubborn, some of his other randoms (KQs) since he has position.
However, unless he's a maniac or a bully, he's not 4-betting all in 10X the pot on a bluff. It's value town. AK has greatest value when it gets it in pre, so it's a huge part of his range.
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontezuma
Isn't QQ at the top of your assumed range here? My guess is that UTG+1 figured you were squeezing and could be on a wider range than QQ+ and decided to shove over to pick up the pot. This is a massive 4-bet all in, and I think you can release the hand here, hard as it is. There's just no reason to risk 2 full buy-ins on a hand that is either AK or you're crushed under KK, AA.
I disagree that a 3bet is incorrect here. I do think that if villain is 4-betting all in after a 7X pfr in EP, you give him credit. Even at 2NL.
The 3bet is fine, IMO, because this villain could raise big UTG+1 with probably 99+/AJs+/KQs and even some other randoms to keep the .02 players from playing their total rags. I agree with stacks, though, that the continuing range is pretty tight. He could figure you for a squeeze since you're in the BB, and call with JJ+, AJs, and if he was really stubborn, some of his other randoms (KQs) since he has position.
However, unless he's a maniac or a bully, he's not 4-betting all in 10X the pot on a bluff. It's value town. AK has greatest value when it gets it in pre, so it's a huge part of his range.
|
doesnt the bold statement contradict everything else you wrote? Not to be a dick, i defintiely appreciate the well thought out post, but it seems like you are saying to fold the hand (which i will in future) bc he is not doing this play with anything but preemies, but yet the bold states that you think he could just be bluffing to pick up the pot....
a quick separate question, what if the effective stacks were halved and i was playing normal 100bb, is this still a fold? cause then i would be getting better money odds
|
|
|
|
dontezuma
|
|
Straight
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Catchin' fishes
Posts: 116
|
|
PP:
No, I wasn't clear, but I wasn't contradictory. I was saying he shoved for value to protect against a squeezing noob catching his crap on the flop. For example, if he's holding KK, he shoves so you don't hit your ace with your weak-ass AJo that you decided to squeeze with. Or he has AK (!) and doesn't want you calling with 88 and is denying you implied odds to hit.
Yes, if stacks are smaller, this becomes a call at some point, but I'm not sure what the breakeven is. Obviously, if you 3-bet to $.40 and only had $1.60 behind (having started with $2.00), you can call. So, yeah, it's the double deep stacks that bother me.
So, I'm saying, YES, I like the 3-bet. And YES, I expect to get some folds, some cold calls, and some 4-bets, but against a 4-bet all-in, I have to tip my hat and say, "NH, moooovin' on...."
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontezuma
PP:
No, I wasn't clear, but I wasn't contradictory. I was saying he shoved for value to protect against a squeezing noob catching his crap on the flop. For example, if he's holding KK, he shoves so you don't hit your ace with your weak-ass AJo that you decided to squeeze with. Or he has AK (!) and doesn't want you calling with 88 and is denying you implied odds to hit.
Yes, if stacks are smaller, this becomes a call at some point, but I'm not sure what the breakeven is. Obviously, if you 3-bet to $.40 and only had $1.60 behind (having started with $2.00), you can call. So, yeah, it's the double deep stacks that bother me.
So, I'm saying, YES, I like the 3-bet. And YES, I expect to get some folds, some cold calls, and some 4-bets, but against a 4-bet all-in, I have to tip my hat and say, "NH, moooovin' on...."
|
thanks donte, good response
|
|
|
|
dontezuma
|
|
Straight
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Catchin' fishes
Posts: 116
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
thanks donte, good response
|
You're welcome, and good luck with the operation. I'm getting tired of grinding the $16Ts. I'm working on moving to cash games (easier rakeback), so I guess we'll pass each other going the other way! LOL!
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontezuma
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
thanks donte, good response
|
You're welcome, and good luck with the operation. I'm getting tired of grinding the $16Ts. I'm working on moving to cash games (easier rakeback), so I guess we'll pass each other going the other way! LOL! |
yea thanks, the sig is actually old i gotta change it, i switched to cash also after dropping my first 50 dollars playing 3.40s and 5 dollar DoN's, you can check out my op at http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...88.html#920751
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
I have a few problems with your post dontezuma. I'd first like to say that in order to make a correct decision our assumptions of villain's ranges must be correct. We have some stats, but it's over a smallish hand sample. However, given the stats, we can begin to make assumptions about the villain. The first assumption that jumps out is that the villain probably does not have a very wide raising range. While 6% could be untrue, and it could be tighter, or wider than that, I would venture to say it isn't too much wider if any (basically he probably isn't going to be opening 20% of hands on average).
Using this assumption, as well as other standard assumptions given to unknown players at these stakes, I assume that villain is (1) on more of the passive side, and (2) isn't great with ranges.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontezuma
Isn't QQ at the top of your assumed range here? My guess is that UTG+1 figured you were squeezing and could be on a wider range than QQ+ and decided to shove over to pick up the pot.
|
While this statement is undoubtedly true, I really don't think it applies here. It is true that if we were squeezing in this spot a large % of the time, and villain was aware of this, then we would need to also squeeze with our value hands with a higher frequency, and could even widen our value range, because we expect villain to play back lighter (given our wide squeeze range).
However, this is 2NL. Villain's are not likely to be thinking that deep into things. Since they aren't likely to 3bet bluff themselves, or squeeze as a bluff themselves, they probably don't assign you a large 3bet/squeeze bluffing frequency, if one at all.
So we can throw out what our perceived range is at this point, as well as balance, and solely play our hand as +EV against his range as possible.
Note: Even if we were to consider our perceived range, well it would not be as wide as you think. We are squeezing an UTG open from the blinds. This doesn't exactly encompass a weak line.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dontezuma
I disagree that a 3bet is incorrect here. The 3bet is fine, IMO, because this villain could raise big UTG+1 with probably 99+/AJs+/KQs and even some other randoms to keep the .02 players from playing their total rags. I agree with stacks, though, that the continuing range is pretty tight. He could figure you for a squeeze since you're in the BB, and call with JJ+, AJs, and if he was really stubborn, some of his other randoms (KQs) since he has position.
|
As I stated previously, it really depends on his ranges to determine whether a 3bet is correct or not. And whether calling the 4bet is correct or not. We can only make assumptions. And my assumptions is that if his PFR % is on the low side, that he is likely to given 3bets tremendous credit. He probably doesn't 3bet anything but the premiums, therefore he likely thinks most villains think in this manner. I say this because I doubt this particular player has a HUD, etc to pick up stats/reads.
Also, it really doesn't matter what his opening range is in this case. It only matters what range he is continuing to a 3bet against. If he is folding 99-JJ, AK, and only continuing with QQ+, then a 3bet is pretty obviously not the correct decision. That is because he is folding all worse hands, and only continuing with better.
If he is continuing with his entire opening range, then it might possibly be correct to 3bet. If he is doing something like calling 99-QQ, AK, and 4betting KK-AA, then it may be correct to 3bet/fold. However, these exact assumptions about how he plays his ranges are very hard to come by, and we obviously don't have that information. So we have to use our other assumptions, and that is that he likely has a pretty tight continuing range to a 3bet, one in which we don't fair great against.
I would say that since his opening range is probably tight to begin with, and his continuing range to a 3bet is even tighter, we fare better by calling his open, and outplaying him postflop. Rather than 3betting, and having him fold his worse hands, and only continuing with better. The fact that were are deep could make for more of an argument towards 3bet/folding, because he will call with most pairs to setmine. However, given the fact that we are OOP, I don't really want to build a large pot against a tight range.
|
|
|
|
dontezuma
|
|
Straight
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Catchin' fishes
Posts: 116
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
However, this is 2NL. Villain's are not likely to be thinking that deep into things. Since they aren't likely to 3bet bluff themselves, or squeeze as a bluff themselves, they probably don't assign you a large 3bet/squeeze bluffing frequency, if one at all.
|
OK, OK, QFT.
Quote:
Also, it really doesn't matter what his opening range is in this case. It only matters what range he is continuing to a 3bet against. If he is folding 99-JJ, AK, and only continuing with QQ+, then a 3bet is pretty obviously not the correct decision. That is because he is folding all worse hands, and only continuing with better.
If he is continuing with his entire opening range, then it might possibly be correct to 3bet. If he is doing something like calling 99-QQ, AK, and 4betting KK-AA, then it may be correct to 3bet/fold.
|
Alright, I see what you're saying. We don't want to fold out worse hands, and given this villain, it's likely we're only getting even a call with a range that largely squishes us like a bug.
And this villain does seem pretty nitty. 75 hands is a small sample, but may be a reasonable enough proxy to say he's on a tight range UTG. I see the wisdom here.
This is what a tourney player gets for posting in a cash forum. LOL.
Thanks, Stacks. That's why I post, so better players can correct my thinking and force me into a deeper analysis.
So, if this is a button or CO raise, you 3-bet all day, right? Even against this villain...? Or do you cold call even late raises with QQ and pray an A or K doesn't come?
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
what i did not mention in my original post is that the button is a loose/passive fish running about 53/17 over 100 hands...including him into the equation means i def should 3bet for isolation, no???
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
what i did not mention in my original post is that the button is a loose/passive fish running about 53/17 over 100 hands...including him into the equation means i def should 3bet for isolation, no???
|
Leaving out such information is retarded.
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
what i did not mention in my original post is that the button is a loose/passive fish running about 53/17 over 100 hands...including him into the equation means i def should 3bet for isolation, no???
|
Leaving out such information is retarded. |
lol, thanks stacks....it was not really that important, you had already noticed the button caller in your previous response, and i just reread it and it still makes sense....id rather play 3way multipot with qq, than all in against qq+
|
|
|
|
littleogre
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,344
|
|
i assume we should fold if we just call pre-flop an ace or king comes on the flop?
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by littleogre
i assume we should fold if we just call pre-flop an ace or king comes on the flop?
|
i am fine with that, it just sucks being oop b/c i have to check and get cbet and fold...so if the bet is pretty weak i may stick arounid and reanalyze the turn
|
|
|
|
philly and the phanatics
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,109
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
what i did not mention in my original post is that the button is a loose/passive fish running about 53/17 over 100 hands...including him into the equation means i def should 3bet for isolation, no???
|
Leaving out such information is retarded. |
stacks do you agree with dontezuma that if our stacks were halved then calling this all in would be ok?
|
|
|
|
Stacks
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Im opedipus bitch, the original balla.
Posts: 2,605
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by XxStacksxX
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by philly and the phanatics
what i did not mention in my original post is that the button is a loose/passive fish running about 53/17 over 100 hands...including him into the equation means i def should 3bet for isolation, no???
|
Leaving out such information is retarded. |
stacks do you agree with dontezuma that if our stacks were halved then calling this all in would be ok? |
If I have 100bb, and squeeze here, then yeah I'm probably calling.
|
|
|
|
Latest Poker News
|
|
KoRnholio
|
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
|
|
According to an email sent out by Mark Bryan, a gaming analyst at Merrill Lynch, the Australian government plans to legalize online poker sometime in the next six to 12 months. This move will coincide ...
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:17 AM.
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
