QQ, atrociously misplayed IMO

Alright, so here is a hand I just played, as soon as I made my turn play, without the hand finishing, I felt I misplayed it. I was thinking a small bet on the turn, as the villain is 22/15/33 VP$IP/PFR/AFq over ~50 hands
He seems to be positionally aware, so a raise out of UTG limits his range a little more than 15%.. I was debating about whether or not ATs would be in his range, that he could have flopped TpTk, so originally I checked back the turn.

I am thinking if I put him on a range that includes AT, either he missed the flop, and fired on air, had some pp (probably his range there is 88+ or 99+ based on what I saw him play), or top pair with a good kicker...

Should the turn have been a mid-sized bet? I am late position, and not afraid of virtually anything on the river.. the scariest card might be a jack for me, but I doubt he's calling with 89 on that flop, so the only hand I'm afraid of would be AK with a Jack river (a small portion of his range)
Which it turns out, there was no cause for concern, as the river gave me the nuts..

So on the turn, my best bet is to extract the most value, and I was hoping to induce a bet, which I could raise for value on the river.. but I think I made a rookie mistake in that logic. his AFq is too low to be continuing a bluff very often, and my min-raise on the flop would have eliminated a lot of bluffing..

Anyways.. that was what was going through my head, analysis/suggestions?

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.02 BB (9 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Hero (CO) ($4.11)
Button ($3.47)
SB ($3.76)
BB ($2.11)
UTG ($13.80)
UTG+1 ($0.70)
MP1 ($3.90)
MP2 ($4.53)
MP3 ($3.18)

Preflop: Hero is CO with Q, Q
UTG bets $0.06, 4 folds, Hero raises to $0.18, 3 folds, UTG calls $0.12

Flop: ($0.39) 4, 10, 3 (2 players)
UTG bets $0.18, Hero raises to $0.36, UTG calls $0.18

Turn: ($1.11) Q (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks

River: ($1.11) Q (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $0.90, 1 fold

Total pot: $1.11 | Rake: $0.07

preflop -- don't 3bet. a 22/15's UTG range is obviously quite strong. If you 3bet an UTG raiser you basically have to be willing to get it in, which you are not with QQ because you are an underdog to his value-betting 4bet range.

flop: why did you raise? For value? The board is dry so raising for value doesn't make sense because KK-AA are totally in his range and you might just be value towning yourself, so just call, when you raise you're turning your hand into a bluff basically. Maybe repping something like TT which you don't have.

On the Turn you have to bet for value b/c if he has an overpair, he is totally going to pay you off. The goal now is to get the money in by the river without making it an overbet shove. And you are 200 BB's deep with this guy so you have a great opportunity to win a huge pot if he has KK-AA. So I'd bet big on the turn and big on the river as well. Of course hope you get raised at some point otherwise its gonna be tough to get 200BB effective stacks in

if 3betting here i make it like .24 just FYI
a squeeze here is not horrible but as chevy said, you'd need to be prepaired for a 4bet with a tight UTG. having only 50 hands I'm not quite sure we can make that assumption yet.
on the flop, if you must raise, it should be like .57 but i'm not sure raising here is the best plan. i think just calling is probably better since we are probably not ahead of his range yet.
On the turn there is no way you can check here, why would you give up a street of value?
by now the pot would be around $1.6 suttin if you bet as I stated above.. a nice $1.2 bet or something around there might be enough to have him come along. so now on the river you're looking at around a $4 pot where you can bet maybe just under a PSB. Don't take this to heart cause I'm not that good, but that's the way I'd see myself playing the hand

You have to re-raise pre to narrow villains range. He probably would shove over with A-A or K-K so you can be pretty sure those have been eliminated. Looks more like J-J 10-10 A-K etc.

4-10-3 rainbow flop - I don't see how this helped him if we already eliminate A-A K-K. Trip 10's A-10 are possible but only the trips beat you here and there are way more hands that you dominate. I think your re-pop is fine but should be for more like .60. There are no reasonable draws out there your the captain and his bet out of turn just looks like a weak steal - if he was going for value he would bet like 2/3 the pot.

Turn is a Q - all i can say is never slow play trips, bet out 2/3 the pot for value. You need to bet here to enable him to make a big mistake - he might think your just betting a scare card and bluff at you. If you don't bet he doesn't have a chance to make a mistake.

River is a Q - make your suck bets 1/3 to 1/2 the pot. He's never making a crying call for almost a pot sized bet.

3betting preflop is fine and sizing is fine.

Call flop and if you're going to raise then please don't minraise here...

As played. Bet turn, if he doesn't give you value here then you won't get any on the river anyway.

Alright, thank you everyone,
I think I got a few things out of this - honestly I don't see his range folding to a 3 bet, so I still think I like my 3 bet. If I get 4 bet, I'm almost always folding away my 18c, which I think is better than flatting, as I won't be likely to make a big mistake post-flop.

Flop: I can see why min-raising here is bad, I still think raise/call is about even EV in the long run, as we are essentially giving a free card to a dangerous range if we flat call, but I did no better by min-raising... so slightly bigger bet on the flop, or flat it. Either way, I messed up the flop.

Turn: I think this was my biggest concern, and it was confirmed, looking at your guys suggestions, I'm maybe 1/2 to 2/3 pot betting the turn depending on how much is in the pot, and what would get us in on the river, but that also depends if I altered how I played pre, and on the flop. If I flatted I'm leaning more towards 2/3, and if I raised to .60+ I'm probably sizing it closer to 1/2.

River: Smaller bet in relation to the pot; hopefully if I played the other streets better, I would have a larger pot at this point, so I might be able to get more out of it, or have forced him to make a mistake earlier..

Thank you all!
~Sven00100

sounds like you pretty much got it.. we all think differently but usually when reading these replies you can see the points where we do agree and take what you can from it.

2 notes -- when he calls your 3bet preflop pokerstove has you here against his range:


equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 55.038% 53.78% 01.26% 270740232 6329616.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 44.962% 43.70% 01.26% 220017912 6329616.00 { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }


A 55% favorite over his flatting range. So you're not a huge favorite, and that discards the fact that if you get 4bet you have to fold your monster (and he could 4bet with hands you beat, so if you plan on instafolding to a 4bet, why 3-bet at all)

so when he calls you are in a huge 3bet pot, and you dont know where you're at really and the pot is huge -- lots of difficult postflop decisions and you're playing for stacks anyways basically.

re: min-raising the flop -- never min-raise. That's what fish do, constantly, when they are worried about not getting called. But I would always just flat the flop here anyways.

Without reads you should avoid 3betting JJ-QQ vs a nitty utg open. You'll only fold out hands you have crushed, and if he shoves you are likely a dog vs his range. Getting your 3bet called is almost worse in this situation, because you can at least fold vs his shove and usually be correct, where as on the flop you're put in a situation where your spr will make decisions tougher.

I dont like Guessing where Im at. 3 betting Pre defines his hand. He could be open raising with Pocket 7's -we only have 50 hands on him. Re-raising lets me eliminate A-A and K-K if he shoves over we can fold - sure maybe we fold to A-K on occasion too but so what. Once the flop hits, Pokerstove Q-Q vs the same range but remove A-A K-K. (sorry I dont have it with me). Pretty sure your crushing.

Rather fold to the shove pre then to be guessing if Im good and playing weak scared the rest of the hand.

I guess my point is if he doesn't shove pre (and he didnt) you are good so bet for strong value the rest of the way.

Originally Posted by Wikkiwikki

I dont like Guessing where Im at. 3 betting Pre defines his hand. He could be open raising with Pocket 7's -we only have 50 hands on him. Re-raising lets me eliminate A-A and K-K if he shoves over we can fold - sure maybe we fold to A-K on occasion too but so what. Once the flop hits, Pokerstove Q-Q vs the same range but remove A-A K-K. (sorry I dont have it with me). Pretty sure your crushing.

Rather fold to the shove pre then to be guessing if Im good and playing weak scared the rest of the hand.

I guess my point is if he doesn't shove pre (and he didnt) you are good so bet for strong value the rest of the way.

This was my reasoning behind the 3bet pre- as well.
Pretty much eliminates AA and KK as they don't often flat pre, especially at these stakes;
Also, I wouldn't eliminate AJs or necessarily ATs depending what his exact range is:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 67.069% 65.61% 01.46% 276376440 6137676.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 32.931% 31.47% 01.46% 132574992 6137676.00 { QQ-TT, AJs+, AQo+ }

So I agree with everything pretty much but not 3-betting here pre, aside from the fact that (which I excluded from my original discussion) The players between he and I are something like 60/5/50 and 65/15/30, the dynamics of the table tend to make me 3-bet/fold unless I'm drawing in this case, but even with a normal range of opponents, I think I'm 3 betting here, so I don't have to flat the flop. Also, I think I'd find out fast whether or not he was holding TT. Advantage of playing deep is I still have enough of a stack to fold to a shove when I raise the flop.

Notably: based on the pokerstove I presented, I'm getting even money on my 3-bet IMO, but it allows me to play better post-flop, since i'm getting 67-32 (~ 2:1) if he doesn't 4bet. If he 4 bets, he had AA or KK most likely, and my stack is protected once I fold. if he doesn't, i can pretty much eliminate AA or KK, and I get to continue play with a limited range, which doesn't exclude much of his raising range, except the top end. due to the massively larger number of combinations of his non- AA, KK hands, and the difference this makes in my post-flop EV, I still opt for my 3-bet preflop. if his range included AA or KK versus not including AA or KK...


Post flop::
(4s Th 3c)

With AA, KK::
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 57.728% 56.73% 01.00% 168483 2970.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 42.272% 41.27% 01.00% 122577 2970.00 { TT+, AJs+, AQo+ }


Without AA, KK::
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 73.311% 71.99% 01.32% 162507 2970.00 { QQ }
Hand 1: 26.689% 25.37% 01.32% 57273 2970.00 { QQ-TT, AJs+, AQo+ }


This is why I tend to advocate for 3-betting, especially since we see many players 3-betting with a more polarized range than his 3-bet calling range here at 2NL

I appreciate the large discussion this has generated though makes me happy.

3-betting an UTG opener to "see where you're at" or "define your hand" (pretty much the same thing in essence) is retarded, especially when you have position. You bonks are so scared to play postflop in position it's absurd.

That being said, this villain does appear fairly loose aggressive, and I doubt has a really narrow UTG range unless his ATS is like 90% or something. So i like the 3-bet pre for value because his calling range could very well be wide also.

Originally Posted by d0zer

3-betting an UTG opener to "see where you're at" or "define your hand" (pretty much the same thing in essence) is retarded, especially when you have position. You bonks are so scared to play postflop in position it's absurd.

That being said, this villain does appear fairly loose aggressive, and I doubt has a really narrow UTG range unless his ATS is like 90% or something. So i like the 3-bet pre for value because his calling range could very well be wide also.

I'm sorry if my post didn't really clearly say this:

-I think the 3-bet is even value with a flat call percent-wise.
-If the pot gets bigger with a 3-bet (which is innately true) that is +EV
-This ALSO tells me a bit about his range, AA and KK are not flat calling this often. The main portion of my post was not addressing the EV, i simply stated that the EV would be relatively similar, even if you included my folding to a 4bet, and would in fact be +EV by further inspection.

Originally Posted by d0zer

3-betting an UTG opener to "see where you're at" or "define your hand" (pretty much the same thing in essence) is retarded, especially when you have position. You bonks are so scared to play postflop in position it's absurd.

That being said, this villain does appear fairly loose aggressive, and I doubt has a really narrow UTG range unless his ATS is like 90% or something. So i like the 3-bet pre for value because his calling range could very well be wide also.

yeah 3-betting preflop to see where you're at is not a good way to look at it, and yeah as mentioned, it hints at being scared of playing postflop and hand-reading.

Also somebody mentioned earlier something about knowing you're not up against KK or AA if there's no shove or 4-bet -- that's just false. I myself and many other opponents often flat AA-KK UTG when getting 3-bet, unless I think the 3-better is definitely going to get it in preflop. The point is to play optimally against your opponent's range and that means keeping his worse hands in and his best hands out. Often 4-betting does not accomplish that. So that's easily in the villain's range going into the flop here.

I possibly didn't explain myself as well earlier, sorry, but hopefully this post combined with Nodeg's good response and d0zer helps.

Oh and D0zer is right btw if he has some ridiculous range like 30% 3-betting is just fine. But against 25/13 he's to tight.

D0zer makes a few good points for calling. I just noticed how deep you are with the villain, and that changes things because it will widen his calling range. I think you still have to fold to a 4bet shove, and you're in a rough spot if he 2.5-3x 4bets you.

Knowing that you're deep a 3bet is fine here, but your reasons for doing it aren't.

This is 2$NL I dont think I've ever seen anyone flat a 3 bet with A-A or K-K at this stake.

if you call pre - then maybe you can call the flop - then call the turn - and then call the river.????

If Im 3 betting an UTG raiser what can happen -
1. He folds - I win a small pot
2. He calls and I become the captain in position
3. He shoves - I lose a small pot

If I call pre what can happen -
1. I get to play a hand in position against an UTG raiser who is the captain.

So aggressor in position or passive in position? Whats the plan on the flop after he c-bets? another call?

Well, as I said, since we're deep the 3bet is fine, and may even be the best move because it isolates.

I'm guessing you think this would be fine at 100bb deep too, and it's not. Here are my counter-arguements:

1. he folds all the hands you beat. So you lose a small pot instead of winning a decent sized one.

2. You become table captain with a low SPR. That puts you in a rough spot a lot of the time. That and his calling range is going to be pretty tight. 1/3rd of the time the board is going to be scary and in his range, and you're going to probably be incorrect folding to a donk or c-raise even though you'll be beat a lot.

3. Sure. But why is that a good result? Why do you want him to fold so bad? Why do you want him to define his range at the expense of losing value from his weaker hands?

Your Q-Q is unlikely to improve post flop and you currently beat 98% of the hands pre flop.
If your playing a 1 pair hand post flop then your playing to a small pot anyway.

His range has tons of potential to improve post flop (straights flushes 2 pair etc).

Its a win a little or lose a lot hand. I would rather bet and take the small pot or fold to his shove.
If I flat im on the flop being c-bet into and still have no Idea where Im at. If you re-raise now your doing it from a weaker position having just called and giving hands that you dominate pre 3 free cards.

"Its a win a little or lose a lot hand"

QQ??

QQ should be one of your most winning hands over a large sample. If you're not looking to get tons of value out of a hand as premium as QQ then something's wrong. 3-betting preflop is not the only way to get value out of the hand, by the way.

The only logical argument you made so far is that it's 2nl and you may be able to assume he always shove AA/KK. And even that argument misses the point. You fold out hands you dominate pre because they may improve on the flop? Value and protection are kissing cousins. You can't think about one without the other.

ok. Lets do a 2nl example here.

You're 100bb deep. Say you have 77ch. A fairly solid playing 22/15 opens from utg for .08. You flat from the button and everyone else folds. Flop comes 73Tdds. The pot is .19.

Villain cbets .19, and you happen to know he has exactly KQdd and will only keep going if the implied odds seem good. How do you bet and why?

I like betting, I like aggression. I think Q-Q is a strong hand Pre-flop and I'm going to raise and Bet it aggressively. Betting builds the pot (something I want) it also puts pressure on my opponent and gives me a good idea of what hes holding. UTG could still call with a lot of his hands (especially against someone like me who 3 bets thin) J-J A-K etc.

Its not a scared play. No ones afraid to flop and play from position, I get to do that when he calls. When he doesn't I win the pot and if he shoves I was beat anyway and can fold.

I guess calling is less risky in a sense as your playing to a smaller pot, and can continue based on flop texture, but I think your mostly going to win the hand so you should be getting money in the pot.

In the long run I think you extract more value from betting or raising earlier in the hand then calling.
That being said you may also have more volatility.

Flatting to keep his range wider does have it merits.... god I love this site.

I promise this is my last post in this thread because the poker logic isn't getting through on why not 3-betting is correct even though it is. "Liking betting" is not a good reason.

so i could say more but i won't. However when you said "he could still call with some hands" and of course you want to keep him in the pot, not fold. That range you articulated -- you're not a favorite (you're a 47/52 underdog). So you're keeping his best hands in and his worst hands out -- reverse poker logic -- reverse definition of value-betting.

PF is fine either way but most people have shitty reasoning for their decision.

I'm not exactly thrilled about getting in ~200BBs on the flop against some fairly aware player (basing off your description) even at 2nl. I'd flat flop and go from there. Turn is obvious a bet we want mobnies we need to bet.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

PF is fine either way but most people have shitty reasoning for their decision.

I'm not exactly thrilled about getting in ~200BBs on the flop against some fairly aware player (basing off your description) even at 2nl. I'd flat flop and go from there. Turn is obvious a bet we want mobnies we need to bet.

I <3 you guys as well. Haha, while I have the statistical reasons why I was 3 betting pre- with QQ, I seem incapable of articulating them. barring my bad assumptions, which made me do some more calcs. I am starting to think that my flop raise was more of a "see where I am" bet than a value raise... which is terrible. Aside from being terrible, obviously this is going to kill his action on the turn, where he might bet light depending how he viewed my call.. that and if I wanted to bet there I mis-sized it. If he had re-raised I would have been in a bad situation that I put myself in.

I smell my over-aggression. Though I'm still not sure how (nor do I think there is agreement here over how) it should be played ideally, I can definitely improve my line based on this discussion. considering after reading this discussion I only moderately stand by 1 of my streets,
thank you everyone.

regards
~Sven00100

3-bet then fold if he 4-bets EZ game

Originally Posted by nodeg

The only logical argument you made so far is that it's 2nl and you may be able to assume he always shove AA/KK. And even that argument misses the point. You fold out hands you dominate pre because they may improve on the flop? Value and protection are kissing cousins. You can't think about one without the other.

ok. Lets do a 2nl example here.

You're 100bb deep. Say you have 77ch. A fairly solid playing 22/15 opens from utg for .08. You flat from the button and everyone else folds. Flop comes 73Tdds. The pot is .19.

Villain cbets .19, and you happen to know he has exactly KQdd and will only keep going if the implied odds seem good. How do you bet and why?

That's just it though we don't fold out all the hands that we dominate. hard to get a villains call 3-bet range without a shit load of hands but say he will flat our 3-bet with 99-QQ and Ak and 4-bet with KK+ and Aks. Without even opening stox it looks to me like 3-beting would show positive equity.

So we're assuming that he will never shove anything that's not aces or kings? And we're planning to fold to a 4bet with one of the best hands in the game? Isn't that turning your monster into a bluff? And you're basing your strategy on how many hands? What if he 4bets with JJ, AQ, or TT? I've seen a lot of regs that would stuff 99 here. I just don't think you have enough information, and you're 3betting for all the wrong reasons. Especially if "to see where you're at" or "to define his range" is anywhere in your plan.

I think you're forgetting that you're supposed to be maximizing your profits vs the villain's entire range. I think having a 3bet here as your default play with no reads shows a fear of playing post-flop. The idea that this plan allows you to either win a big pot or lose a small one is wishful thinking.

If you're planning on folding to a 4bet with QQ you should really not 3bet because you're turning your hand into a bluff. If you are planning on calling a 4bet you should do it vs someone with a bigger range, or a defined 4bet range and knowledge of how he plays in 3bet situations. You're making too many assumptions for stacks.

This is really my last 2 cents on this.

Originally Posted by nodeg

So we're assuming that he will never shove anything that's not aces or kings? And we're planning to fold to a 4bet with one of the best hands in the game? Isn't that turning your monster into a bluff? And you're basing your strategy on how many hands? What if he 4bets with JJ, AQ, or TT? I've seen a lot of regs that would stuff 99 here. I just don't think you have enough information, and you're 3betting for all the wrong reasons. Especially if "to see where you're at" or "to define his range" is anywhere in your plan.

I think you're forgetting that you're supposed to be maximizing your profits vs the villain's entire range. I think having a 3bet here as your default play with no reads shows a fear of playing post-flop. The idea that this plan allows you to either win a big pot or lose a small one is wishful thinking.

If you're planning on folding to a 4bet with QQ you should really not 3bet because you're turning your hand into a bluff. If you are planning on calling a 4bet you should do it vs someone with a bigger range, or a defined 4bet range and knowledge of how he plays in 3bet situations. You're making too many assumptions for stacks.

This is really my last 2 cents on this.

Yes it sucks to fold ladies preflop but don't we need to think about how much of his range he will flat call us with when we 3-bet.?

"you're 3betting for all the wrong reasons" ---- yes 3 betting to build a pot with what is likely the best hand is wrong? So you dont like to bet your monsters - got it....

"you're supposed to be maximizing your profits vs the villain's entire range" --- I dominate most of his current range so I should be betting to maximize profits. (glad we agree)

"3bet here as your default play with no reads shows a fear of playing post-flop" - Actually I think your the one afraid to bet with what is likely the best hand. The 3 bet is trying to actually build a bigger pot post flop against hands we dominate.

"I just don't think you have enough information" - Again we agree, thats another good reason to bet, to gain information.

-By not betting you don't allow villain to make a mistake.

-last point
If you could see his cards how would you play if his range is 10+ A-J+

Against Aces or Kings you would fold; against Q-Q you would call ---- against all other hands you would raise for value. There happen to be way more card combinations of 10-10 J-J A-J A-Q and A-K then pocket aces and Kings.

So most of the time if you could see his cards you would be betting for value.

you cannot just speak about the specific hands QQ gets value from, but the villain's entire range. His 3-bet calling range is, as I mentioned above, ahead of you. So yes, as nodeg states, when 100 BB deep, and you 3-bet a standard UTG raiser with QQ you are turning your hand into a bluff. Not to mention the fact that this is full ring! His UTG range in FR is ridiculously tight.

This general chat about always 3betting your monsters and 3betting preflop for information (which is just ridiculous of course) is a perfect reason why we have the term "Reverse Implied Odds."

Ok, now I am seriously done with this thread even though i already said I was but I couldn't resist. Onwards and upwards.

It's actually kinda hard to know what the best play is as we don't know what villains calling range is. Sure maybe he folds every hand that we beat but how do we know that with such a small sample size. Now say we have 1k hands on villain and we know his pfr range utg is 88+/aj+/ajs+. If we 3-bet he will flat with 88-qq and aq+/aqs+. With KK+. Now i'm not so good at math but i'm sure if you ran it through stox it would say that 3-betting is very +ev. I'm just having a hard time seeing why people don't want to pump the pot up when you are likely infront of villains calling range. Also by not betting we give hands like Aj and Aq a chance to see a cheap flop

oh and why are people calling a player with a 15 percent pfr a nit?

bt the w, my (and almost all other TAG-ish players) 3bet calling range out of position like this is TT+, AKo+ (maybe AQs occasionally), and I will often flat KK-AA as well or 4bet it. It sounds tight but that's standard.

If you 3bet me and the others with my range here, which is most tag regs range, you will lose money in the long run. simple as that.

"His 3-bet calling range is, as I mentioned above, ahead of you" --- Finally the real issue

We disagree here.... I dominate his 3 bet calling range, Totally dominate it. He will 4 bet shove Aces and Kings (not call)- and I get Value from everything else.

Your just wrong about his calling range. 10+ A-Ko+ A-Ks+ (maybe even A-Q) are reasonable and I'm 66-33 against it.
Everything weaker folds.

if u take KK-AA out of his range you are making a big mistake.

OK. I'm done with this thread! Too frustrating! gl at the tables see u in another thread

Originally Posted by mrchevyceleb

if u take KK-AA out of his range you are making a big mistake.

OK. I'm done with this thread! Too frustrating! gl at the tables see u in another thread

Yes i agree it's damn frustrating to think that people actually believe he is folding everything that we beat when that just isn't the case against most 2nl peeps. I get the feeling that a couple people in this thread are nits and are assuming everyone else is as nitty as them.

{Locked}

Quit acting like dickheads. Pretend you're adults.