UGH QQ bu v b v b

Folding baby

also folding.

We know your folding raz that goes without saying.

Flat call the 4-bet.

Hero can't fold QQ pre on the button unless Hero KNOWS a villain has AA or KK specifically. Hero doesn't want to 5-bet and bloat the pot to the point of full commitment. Hero doesn't want to get 6-bet shoved all-in when there's a chance this aggression is motivated by AA, KK or AK.

c/f on any paired broadway flop w/o a Q
c/c (a reasonable bet) on any flop with an A or K, re-evaluate on turn
c/c any flop which gives Hero a set or better that cripples the deck, b/r turn
b/c dry flops which give Hero an overpair, re-evaluate on turn
b/r on wet boards w/ Q-high, re-evaluate on turn
b/r on non-broadway paired boards w/ no A or K, re-evaluate on turn

Mojo none of your options make sense we're IP

also folding.

I would imagine that calling or raising this is a pretty large leak.

fold. don't tell anyone

Originally Posted by caddie444

Mojo none of your options make sense we're IP

Read them as check or fold, check or call, bet or call, and bet or raise.

Honestly, I don't think you can put villains' ranges exclusively on AA or KK and those are the only 2 pockets that have Hero dominated. Against AK, Hero is a slight favorite, and against any other pocket, QQ is at least 78% favorite. Even if SB and BB both have live SC's, Hero is still ahead and the favorite.

Mojo, I think breaking ranges down into he could have this or that is a mistake. Both villains have a range and neither is AK or AA or any other pocket pair. It's unlikely but possible sb has some sc'zisis but it's extremely unlikely bb does. It's also unlikely he has less than QQ/AK and I'm not sure AK is there tbh.

Yeah... Instant Karma got me on this one today.

I donked off a BI w/ AKs vs AA this afternoon.
I was on the button. Min-raise from MP. I 3-bet. BB 4-bet shoves.
I called... Did I mention it was a 4-bet shove from the BB who was making their first 3+bet over 67 hands. I tanked and called, thinking there are TT+ in that range.

Stupid.

Know your villains. I've seen some laughable stuff get shoved pre-flop, but probably never from someone with under 3% PFR, let alone 3% 3-bet.

I tend towards the "fold and tell no-one" line.

One caveat - I know I sometimes cold 4bet questionable stuff from the BB if the SB is the type who doesn't take kindly to people stealing his blinds and has been 3betting steals like a monkey. If I thought BB was up to the same thing, I might jam, but even then it may be spew. (I know SB doesn't 3bet a lot here, just thought I'd mention it to see if anyone had an opinion on if it would still be too thin)

i'm folding and i feel ok about it. until you have some reason to believe someone is cold 4bet bluffing at these stakes i'd feel pretty ok about making highly exploitable folds vs them

also, if they are folding a high % to steals, and especially if they are 3b'ing you a high % of the time they do continue, just min-raise their blinds. saves you an extra 0.5bb every time they 3b (assuming you are opening a lot and thus folding to a lot of their 3b's) and it also makes them have to adjust, which most people aren't good at. and if they don't adjust, we're printing even more money because our steals now risk us 20% less for the same EV

Originally Posted by rpm

also, if they are folding a high % to steals, and especially if they are 3b'ing you a high % of the time they do continue, just min-raise their blinds. saves you an extra 0.5bb every time they 3b (assuming you are opening a lot and thus folding to a lot of their 3b's) and it also makes them have to adjust, which most people aren't good at. and if they don't adjust, we're printing even more money because our steals now risk us 20% less for the same EV

I've gone back and forth on this stealing with 2 and 2.5 bbs in different sessions. Sample sizes might be to small but I find villains adjust much quicker to 2bbs. I guess the question is is it more than 20% faster?

Originally Posted by supa

I've gone back and forth on this stealing with 2 and 2.5 bbs in different sessions. Sample sizes might be to small but I find villains adjust much quicker to 2bbs. I guess the question is is it more than 20% faster?

If people are adjusting by 3bing more you should be printing money by minraising.

You can shear a sheep over and over, but you can only skin it once.

If they're adjusting, you're being blatant about your steals. When something keeps happening the same every time, it's easy to adjust to.

Don't steal EVERY opportunity it comes up. Fold ~25% of the time you're in a steal position (when you're holding absolute cr4p) and Villains will not defend so readily.

Villains don't need too many counter-examples (times when you fold) before they are confused by your steal raises.

Another line of thought: What about set mining? (*note: All of the following calculations hinge on the assumption that SB will not 5-bet.)

Hero bets $0.50 for value, hoping for a call, but expecting 2 folds. This bet is excluded from the implied odds calculation.

Set mining: (odds)*(bet) - (pot) <= (ESS)
odds = 7.51/1 = 7.51 ~= 8
pot = 0.10 + 0.20 + 0.50 + 1.30 + 3.45 = 5.25
bet = 3.45 - 0.50 = 2.95
ESS(SB) = $17.15
ESS(BB) = $22.54

using exact odds:
7.51*2.95 - 5.25 = 16.90
Hero is barely priced in to set mine against SB, fine against BB.

using approximate odds:
8*2.95 - 5.25 = 18.35
Hero is still priced in to set mine against BB, but not SB.

If the $0.50 was a complete bluff/steal, which Hero expected to check/fold on most flops, then it gets tight enough to fold
7.51*3.65 - 5.25 = 22.16
8*3.65 - 5.25 = 23.95

Using the exact odds, Hero is barely priced in to set mine vs. BB. It's a losing proposition against SB.

In all of this, though, I'm assuming that either the BB or the SB will continue past the flop. Doesn't the idea that both might continue and stack off against a set make this even more +EV? Or are there enough boards on which Hero catches a set and still loses that this is moot?

Something Bikes recently pointed out to me about 2bb steals (I was doing it from the SB) is it gives the BB just too good of a price to call with basically anything even remotely playable, of course this problem is even more compounded if you do it from the button.

That said, if people aren't adjusting, keep doing it.

did mojo just write a wall of maths about setmining in a 4bet pot?

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Another line of thought: What about set mining? (*note: All of the following calculations hinge on the assumption that SB will not 5-bet.)

Hero bets $0.50 for value, hoping for a call, but expecting 2 folds. This bet is excluded from the implied odds calculation.

Set mining: (odds)*(bet) - (pot) <= (ESS)
odds = 7.51/1 = 7.51 ~= 8
pot = 0.10 + 0.20 + 0.50 + 1.30 + 3.45 = 5.25
bet = 3.45 - 0.50 = 2.95
ESS(SB) = $17.15
ESS(BB) = $22.54

using exact odds:
7.51*2.95 - 5.25 = 16.90
Hero is barely priced in to set mine against SB, fine against BB.

using approximate odds:
8*2.95 - 5.25 = 18.35
Hero is still priced in to set mine against BB, but not SB.

If the $0.50 was a complete bluff/steal, which Hero expected to check/fold on most flops, then it gets tight enough to fold
7.51*3.65 - 5.25 = 22.16
8*3.65 - 5.25 = 23.95

Using the exact odds, Hero is barely priced in to set mine vs. BB. It's a losing proposition against SB.

In all of this, though, I'm assuming that either the BB or the SB will continue past the flop. Doesn't the idea that both might continue and stack off against a set make this even more +EV? Or are there enough boards on which Hero catches a set and still loses that this is moot?

What about the % of time bb shoves over the top?

Originally Posted by BorisTheSpider

Something Bikes recently pointed out to me about 2bb steals (I was doing it from the SB) is it gives the BB just too good of a price to call with basically anything even remotely playable, of course this problem is even more compounded if you do it from the button.

That said, if people aren't adjusting, keep doing it.

Another reason I don't like doing it.

Originally Posted by d0zer

did mojo just write a wall of maths about setmining in a 4bet pot?

Why yes, I believe he did.

Originally Posted by BorisTheSpider

Something Bikes recently pointed out to me about 2bb steals (I was doing it from the SB) is it gives the BB just too good of a price to call with basically anything even remotely playable, of course this problem is even more compounded if you do it from the button.

unless i'm misinterpreting, i've gotta disagree with the bold. when we have the button we have position. we are in the drivers seat and our positional advantage is more powerful the deeper the effective stacks are.

when we are in the SB we are always out of position so the BB can make our life a lot harder for us with 3b's and floats and other things, especially if we are playing a wide range of hands (hence why 3x or 3.5x open-raises are "standard" for most regs in the SB).

Originally Posted by d0zer

did mojo just write a wall of maths about setmining in a 4bet pot?

Since you asked this, can I assume you think this is not a good idea? Why wouldn't the maths be the same? Only now, you're not guessing if you can get the whole ESS in if you hit, you're assured. Villain has practically laid his/her hand face up and told you they will stack off. Now you get to decide if you want to stack off or not, after you see the flop.

Isn't this is why calling with SC's in position is +EV? SC's are ~22% to beat an overpair. This is only 2% more than an underpair vs. an overpair, which is ~20% (2 outs = ~4% per card @ 5 cards). Hey, there's the ~12% to setmine! 2 outs 3 times (on the flop)! Tada!
WOW, it works for the ~30% for any Ax to beat KK. 3 outs 5 times!
Nice.

Originally Posted by supa

What about the % of time bb shoves over the top?

If Hero flat calls, unless SB raises, the betting is closed to BB. Of course, if SB raises that's the final disaster in this catastrophe that makes me finally, peacefully, quietly lay down the Q's, my analysis, and my hubris at not accepting your wisdom w/o question.

Originally Posted by rpm

unless i'm misinterpreting, i've gotta disagree with the bold. when we have the button we have position. we are in the drivers seat and our positional advantage is more powerful the deeper the effective stacks are.

when we are in the SB we are always out of position so the BB can make our life a lot harder for us with 3b's and floats and other things, especially if we are playing a wide range of hands (hence why 3x or 3.5x open-raises are "standard" for most regs in the SB).

I agree with everything you wrote, but I still stand by the original point - if you minraise the button you give BB 7 to 2 odds to call, that's getting on for "call with any two" odds. I don't doubt that most of the time the BB won't exploit this, but it's something to be aware of.

Sure, you may have position and high SPR but that doesn't (and can't) nullify the outstanding odds you lay BB on a call, and if he adapts and calls wide enough he'll profit from this.

Just to throw a random observation out there, since any 2 unpaired hole cards make a pair about a third of the time on the flop, you give BB odds to call for "any pair", taking the obviously bogus and extremely crude assumption that this would necessarily win the hand for him. It does though illustrate that you can't really be offering these odds if villain will take advantage of them, and that if people do make a habit of minraising the button we should be calling _extremely_ light.

i feel you are under-estimating how much even good regs lose playing from the blinds. and that's only from playing typically somewhere between 15-30% of hands vs steals.

lol @ The last few posts in this thread. Minraising is really really fucking good and hard to deal with. All you people thinking you can call everything and play like gods OOP postflop are mildly retarded. If you were that far you'd be crushing the biggest games online. Even bvb minraising is really really good v tonnes of players but I'd stay away from it in micros w/o reads because so many fish actually play SUPER WELL v it.

/thread

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Only now, you're not guessing if you can get the whole ESS in if you hit, you're assured.

the only guarantee we have in this life is that it will end.

Originally Posted by d0zer

the only guarantee we have in this life is that it will end.

You're only saying that because the evolution of our sun will cause it to increase in brightness such that it will boil the oceans in roughly 1 billion years.

-.- Don't try to level me; I have a BS, and I fling it, too.

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Don't try to level me

wouldn't dream of it, sir

Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey

Don't try to level me

Don't worry, I'm only at level 2.5 - I think you think about what I'm holding, but I always assume you put me on AK.

minraising the button in the micros is bad due to rake not them defending too much

Originally Posted by BorisTheSpider

Just to throw a random observation out there, since any 2 unpaired hole cards make a pair about a third of the time on the flop, you give BB odds to call for "any pair", taking the obviously bogus and extremely crude assumption that this would necessarily win the hand for him. It does though illustrate that you can't really be offering these odds if villain will take advantage of them, and that if people do make a habit of minraising the button we should be calling _extremely_ light.

I don't get this at all. If someone is persistently min raising your bb from the button, calling any two cards is not going to be a great idea unless you're extremely good post flop. What happens when we miss? We c/f. What happens when we hit a low pair? We don't know if it's good. What happens when we bink a miracle? Villain's range is so wide that he rarely has something that pays off.

I would imagine it's better to 3bet light, or call with plans to c/r bluff lots of flops. Calling just to hit a pair and hope button has worse but will still put money in seems like a crappy plan to me.

It also prevents burnout which is inevitable due to 55555. Through what agency do old pros run across painless 22222 opinions? I may need to share this 11111 information. What does 33333 do? Necessarily, this afternoon things are different. This is how and where to use 55555. Let me tell you something.
Didn't this produce the desired outcome? These are delightful ideas dealing with 44444. There are no concrete suspicions on this feeling. A earlier report comparing Canada and 8 European countries found this to be true in respect to 33333. I wish it was available then. They made an overwhelming impression on me. Time may never seem to go fast when chatting bordering on 44444 and 11111 hasn't been proven. You ought to expect to get top dollar for a vintage 22222. It was the law of the jungle. That is a fashionable mix. That's how to become an expert in 11111. But I must simply try to skip it partially. I'm on the bandwagon now. It can take some time to actively engage in 22222. I might be completely off here but that is the case if 11111 was under control. They still have many points to work out. Are you foolish to do that? I am trying to get away from 33333. It involved ingenious methods.

THE ILLUMINATI ARE HERE

Originally Posted by Cariotonn

Through what agency do old pros run across painless 22222 opinions?

You've come to the right place.

Originally Posted by Cariotonn

You ought to expect to get top dollar for a vintage 22222.

I've always found this to be true. If some scoundrel offers you bottom dollar for your old 22222, even in used condition, they're ripping you off.

Originally Posted by Cariotonn

It can take some time to actively engage in 22222.

True, but anything worth doing is worth doing well; doing something well takes time.