10nl AQs BU

Originally Posted by Pelion

I probably just call pre. We have a tonne of equity and position against his squeeze range, but he has to be 5betting seriously light for us to be ahead when he shoves. I'd prefer to 4bet with a worse hand.

You have to call when he shoves, but its a pretty horrible spot. FWIW, if he only shoves QQ+,AK we almost have to call...

Actually thinking again I may prefer this option. The price is almost good enough for a call even if we don't win another bet after the flop when we hit, and we are very likely to win at least a half pot cbet in average when we hit.

I think you need some reads that he continues with worse to a 4b. OK you can reasonably assume that he could fold stuff like 22-77, which are marginally better in all-in equity, but in reality not much better (if at all) when he has to play 3 streets OOP with them.

Originally Posted by daviddem

Actually thinking again I may prefer this option. The price is almost good enough for a call even if we don't win another bet after the flop when we hit, and we are very likely to win at least a half pot cbet in average when we hit.

I think you can call a cbet on most flops and expect to win with A-high a decent amount. I don't think most people are going to double/triple barrel KJ in a 3bet pot at this level, and you probably even get some weak pairs to check down with you after the flop.

As you said, he's likely to always cbet A or Q high flops too, which is awesome.



(edit: Hey Jyms )

edit: sorry for the ramble, i get to the point at the last bit

Now I'm probably way off in my reasoning here but that's what this forum is for so here goes...

if i just call the squeeze pre does this not lead to me making mistakes postflop? like either folding the best hand on some runouts or calling off when i'm way behind on other runouts? whereas if i get all in pre i realize all my equity without being able to make a mistake postflop.

i realize this reasoning is likely erroneous but i can't quite put my finger on exactly why. i guess it could be just wrong to get all in pre here to begin with, though that depends on how much of villain's squeezing range he jams/calls/folds, so that's probably where i should start!

so i loosely assume that this type of villain would be jamming like ATs+, ATo+, 88+, something like that, maybe KQs, KQo (how does this range look, not sure if it's too wide or too narrow?)

okay now i've got my thoughts in order. if i 4bet pre for value here i think i need to be 50%+ vs. his calling AND his jamming range! is this correct?

Originally Posted by mondayscool

edit: sorry for the ramble, i get to the point at the last bit

Now I'm probably way off in my reasoning here but that's what this forum is for so here goes...

if i just call the squeeze pre does this not lead to me making mistakes postflop? like either folding the best hand on some runouts or calling off when i'm way behind on other runouts? whereas if i get all in pre i realize all my equity without being able to make a mistake postflop.

i realize this reasoning is likely erroneous but i can't quite put my finger on exactly why. i guess it could be just wrong to get all in pre here to begin with, though that depends on how much of villain's squeezing range he jams/calls/folds, so that's probably where i should start!

so i loosely assume that this type of villain would be jamming like ATs+, ATo+, 88+, something like that, maybe KQs, KQo (how does this range look, not sure if it's too wide or too narrow?)

okay now i've got my thoughts in order. if i 4bet pre for value here i think i need to be 50%+ vs. his calling AND his jamming range! is this correct?

The logic in the bold portion above is terrible and should absolutely never, ever, ever be given any amount of credibility. If the bold was important enough to sway your decision, then you could never call 3-bets pre-flop.

What it really comes down to is that you don't want to call the 3-bet because you're scared of playing the hand post-flop. To get over that, you need to realize that it's no different than any other poker situation. He has a range, you have a range, there's a flop SPR, and you go from there. It's like if you raised preflop with AQs, he called with the same range that he has now, and you're seeing a flop.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

The logic in the bold portion above is terrible and should absolutely never, ever, ever be given any amount of credibility. If the bold was important enough to sway your decision, then you could never call 3-bets pre-flop.

What it really comes down to is that you don't want to call the 3-bet because you're scared of playing the hand post-flop. To get over that, you need to realize that it's no different than any other poker situation. He has a range, you have a range, there's a flop SPR, and you go from there. It's like if you raised preflop with AQs, he called with the same range that he has now, and you're seeing a flop.

Sound logic is sound, thanks spoon.

I suppose too if I'm always afraid of playing flops in 3bet pots I'll get the experience required to get better at it far slower.