Extra passive JJ hand, first hand of SNG

[PrayingMantis]

I've played mostly higher buy-ins recently, but after using most of my BR for some spending, I'm at mid-low level again. The differences between buy-ins are quite interesting.

Anyway, This is a hand from a $27 turbo on stars. Aggressiveness is something that comes easily to me, so when I decide to play something *very* passively, I often wonder if I did the right thing.

First hand of the game. All have 1500, blinds 10/20. I know nothing about my opponents. But I found these games to be rather loose-passive in the early stages. Raises don't get much respect, that is.

Folded to UTG+2 who limps.

I hold J /images/graemlins/club.gif J /images/graemlins/spade.gif at UTG+3. I decide to limp along.

2 more limpers. Button folds. SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif 7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif K /images/graemlins/heart.gif (pot: 120, 6 players)

It is checked to me. I decide to check. CO (last position) bets 60. SB call 60. All fold to me, I call. All others fold.

Turn: 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif (pot: 300, 3 players)

SB checks. I check. CO checks behind.

River: 5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

SB bets 100, I call, CO calls.

I think this is quite an interesting hand. Any thoughts?

[Sam T.]

As I was reading this, I caught JJ in a Stars two-table, and decided to try the same thing.

Flop came A74 rainbow, and was checked around.

PF limper min bets, I call, others fold.

Turn is a blank. Min-bet, call.

River, another blank. Min-bet, call.

He turns over A9o.

Ah, well.

[LethalRose]

my bet villian has Kings with a weak kicker...if he had a stronger kicker most people would be more aggressive, he wants to bring it to showdown to see if you have a better kicker than his.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
my bet villian has Kings with a weak kicker...if he had a stronger kicker most people would be more aggressive, he wants to bring it to showdown to see if you have a better kicker than his.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. I think you're looking at a K8 give or take a few kicker points (I think I made that term up just now).

You could possibly be up against TT or 99, but with two callers, I think you're beat.

I'd still call, by the way.

-Jman28

[chill888]

PrayingMantis:

With regards to limping with JJ. My thoughts.

I quite often limp with JJ - early on - as it is very vulnerable and in a loose early game I treat it as a small (ok medium) pair.

In general, I think the key to limping or going slowly with any big hand is to be consistent on all betting rounds with this philosophy. In other words, don't suddenly speed up after the flop when it doesn't warrant it.

As an extreme example, often people (me included) will limp UTG with AA but get no raises and 4 callers. At this point you need to remember that AA is no longer a power house and be very careful. You usually can't come out all-in raising postflop against 4 others. You have to accept and respect the impact of your preflop limp.

Often I'll queitly fold my AA or JJ post flop thinking "hmmmm I hate slow playing them .... but no big deal at least I didn't get stupid and go broke"

I think you played the hand fine. Once the K hit the flop your JJ is an OK but VERY vulnerable hand early in a tourney.

gl

[Irieguy]

I'd play the hand the exact same way, FWIW.

Irieguy

[durron597]

This seems fine, I put SB on a smaller PP, and CO on either A7, another PP or a weak king. I wouldn't be surprised SB had a weak king himself, though, but I think you win enough times to make the call fine with the dead money in the pot.

[PrayingMantis]

Thanks for the replies.

I found this hand interesting for a few reasons:

Very early, 0 read, very nice but very tough hand to play (maybe the toughest when it's early), bad position, lots of limpers, a K on the flop.

On the flop, I thought CO could have been betting his position, with some Ax, or a low PP. SB could call with a weak K, some lower part of the board, or a slowplayed monster. This combination of the 2 players in the hand, didn't let me a chance to take even the smallest stab, IMO, and made me check/call all-along. It was relatively interesting, because the bets were not exactly limit mini-bets, but the whole action resembled a limit-hand, in a way.

On the river I felt I'm getting enough overlay to call. If it was even a slightly bigger bet (~200?) I think it would have been tougher, especially with the player behind.

I think chill's points are particularly interesting, in that he speaks about being in control of the level of aggression (or passiveness) throughout the hand. Here, it's quite like the opposite case of "following through" with a bluff on the turn, in other cases. Playing a hand in a consistent manner, whether it's passive, aggressive or whatever (some relevant mixture), is extremely important, and I keep working on it all the time.

OK, results:

SB had 96o, CO had TT and I took it down. This is a very good combination for me in this hand, especially since SB was acting a bit aggressive on the river, and I got the over call from CO. I know I will be losing to some Kx (specifically from SB) some % of the time, but I believe there aren't better lines of action here, and after reading the replies I'm more certain of it.

[uclaguy]

Passive with jacks when blinds are tiny works for me. Getting 4:1 on the flop warrants a call, so OK there. Turn checks..OK there too. Calling the river bet getting only 3:1 with the flop raiser still to act: BAD. Your odds are no longer that good with a King and a pair on board and more importantly, the flop raiser may very well come in for a re-raise putting you in a very bad spot so I feel a river fold is in order.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
Passive with jacks when blinds are tiny works for me. Getting 4:1 on the flop warrants a call, so OK there. Turn checks..OK there too. Calling the river bet getting only 3:1 with the flop raiser still to act: BAD. Your odds are no longer that good with a King and a pair on board and more importantly, the flop raiser may very well come in for a re-raise putting you in a very bad spot so I feel a river fold is in order.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the points. I thought the river was close, but still felt calling is slightly better than folding. I'd think SB would have bet the turn with a K, and acually, I could put SB on many other hands that I beat (especially with 9's), like he did. and (if he hit a monster) I'd think he would have bet a bigger amount on the river.

As for CO, I'd think he'll bet the turn with a K with position, which he didn't. These are the main reasons I thought my JJ is good big enough % of the time here.

[stripsqueez]

i dont like it - i think if you play it this way pre-flop (which i might do very early at the front - but i'm more likely to raise) you should check/fold the flop a lot

i dont think you should put money in early when you are vulnerable to any big bet unless its a 1 bet bluff - so i would rather fold or raise on the flop - that your opponents on this hand played soft and stupid doesnt reccomend it as a good line

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont like it - i think if you play it this way pre-flop (which i might do very early at the front - but i'm more likely to raise) you should check/fold the flop a lot

i dont think you should put money in early when you are vulnerable to any big bet unless its a 1 bet bluff - so i would rather fold or raise on the flop - that your opponents on this hand played soft and stupid doesnt reccomend it as a good line


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the reply. I'd generally agree with you. If I play JJ passively PF without position, it's not a hand to put money in later, unless on favorable flops and of course sets. However, the action on the flop went in a way that suggested that there's quite a good chance I'm ahead: checked around to CO (last position), who bets 1/2 pot. He can do it with many hands, as you know. SB calls. He can very well call this (he's getting 1:3 now, and will get more if others will call), with a 9, Or with low 2 pair (that I beat on the river. this is a very important point, IMO, in regard to my river call: the board is paired and I have better 2 pair than SB if he's on 97). Sure he can do it with some bad K also, but my guess was that enough times he won't have the K, plus the call is small enough (I got 4:1 on the flop) AND, there might be some nice implied odds for my set, especially if someone did had a K, or SB has hit a semi-monster.

So, there's quite a good chance I'm ahead these 2 hands, BUT, I cannot see these hands call a raise with inferior hands (and there are no draws) So I don't think I gain anything by by raising (I might be wrong - that's why I posted it. There's a chance I make a weak K let go of his hand - but it's too early for it, IMO, and a small pot). I'm looking for a cheap show-down, and that's pretty much what I got. On the river, as I've already mentioned, I was even more certain that I'm ahead a nice % of the time, since the blank on the turn got checked around.