Play I am analysing right now

[JDErickson]

PArty Poker, Normal table.

I'm Dealt KQs in the SB. a few limpers, LP raises. I call. LP is an unknown.

Flop comes down Q High.

Whats your standard line on situations like this.

[sthief09]

I don't really like calling in that spot preflop, but I'm sure everyone else does, so I won't bring that up.

the standard line is probably to check-raise, but the flop definitely matters.

[Victor]

I cant think of a situation not to checkraise here.

[BaronVonCP]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't really like calling in that spot preflop, but I'm sure everyone else does, so I won't bring that up.

the standard line is probably to check-raise, but the flop definitely matters.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too late you already brought it up! Let's say a "few" is 3-4 limpers. What other option is there but to call?

[StellarWind]

Forcing out limpers is unlikely to change the outcome of the hand:

1. Often you are behind and the limpers are unlikely to beat the hand you hope to make.

2. You are hard to catch when you are ahead.

3. An ace overcard when you are ahead will probably make the PFR's hand anyway. Limping aces are often duplicated outs and don't threaten you very much.

My general strategy is to maximize EV by making the limpers contribute to the pot. I am not going for KOs.

The one play that is absolutely out is checkraising the PFR. Valid plans are bet-calling, check-calling, and checkraising an early limper.

[JDErickson]

One thing I have been experimenting with is Ck calling this down unless an A hits.

Reasoning: keep the PFR betting if he has a worse hand and minimising the loss if I am behind. If I CR or bet the flop I have advertised my hand.

Comments?

[La Brujita]

I think check raising or leading out are valid options depending on how many limpers, the texture of the flop and most importantly how likely the preflop raiser is going to bet.

Stellarwind, why would you say checkraising is out? That is a pretty standard way to try to protect the hand imo.

Check calling the whole way is not a very good play imo because you are letting others draw much cheaper than the otherwise might. You are probably pricing them in by check calling, hard to say without knowing flop.

My two cents.

[mike_wzrd]

[ QUOTE ]
The one play that is absolutely out is checkraising the PFR. Valid plans are bet-calling, check-calling, and checkraising an early limper.


[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't the answer depend on how coordianted the board is? I wouldn't want to give a person the right odds to draw to an inside straight on a coordianted board, so I might check raise in that situation. On an uncoordinated board, then I'd say bet out or check call.

[JDErickson]

Forgot to add something. On the flop everyone cks to the PFR who bets, I call, rest fold.

[Sundevils21]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I have been experimenting with is Ck calling this down unless an A hits.

Reasoning: keep the PFR betting if he has a worse hand and minimising the loss if I am behind. If I CR or bet the flop I have advertised my hand.

Comments?

[/ QUOTE ]

(it depends on the board imo)
The reason to checkraise is to face the rest of the table with 2 cold. Once you get out all of the gutshots, backdoor flushes, 2nd or 3rd pair hands, your chances of winning go up. Now you are headsup against a preflop raiser who hopefully doesn't have AA,KK, or AQ. Now it's time to check call to river. That one extra sb is worth it when it knocks out everyone else.
You could also fold this preflop. I hate KQ against a raiser. The fact that it is suited and you already have a little invested(what structure is the sb/bb? 1/2?) I think makes calling okay. Also because the raise came from late postition/button, you have the ability to usually face the field with 2 bets if you so desire.

[MortalNuts]

Hi Stellar --

I haven't been here (or even playing online) in a while, so possibly I'm just rusty, but I disagree.

To address each of your points in order:

1: Sure, you're behind some of the time, but "often"? Maybe this is just a difference of terminology, but you're ahead here the majority of the time. Absent a rockish read on LP, I generally assume my opponent's raising standards in that spot to be something like AA-TT, AK/AQ -- and that's on the conservative side. (Of course, many players are -- and should be -- raising with many other hands in that spot.) But against this tight-ish set of raising hands from LP, you're behind only about 43% of the time (to AA, KK, QQ, or AQ, given that AA can be dealt to your opponent 6 ways, KK 3, QQ only 1, and AQ 8). Even if you throw out TT as a possible raising hand for your opponent but keep AQ, you're ahead half the time. If you allow him to have weaker holdings, your chances get better. Of course, your other opponents may have you beat, too, but we have no information on them at this point.

2: You have one pair, and are not that hard to catch. Anyone who has a hand like middle pair has 5 outs against you, plus of course there may be straight draws and the like depending on board texture. If there were say 4 limpers before LP, the pot is now about 12 SB before anything happens on the flop. This means that you are happy to have hands with 5 outs against you fold; you're not even terribly dismayed if lone overcards fold, or if gutshots bail out. Put another way, many of the hands that are likely to stick around for a single bet on the flop would actually be correct to do so, given your holding.

All in all, I think checkraising the PFR is a perfectly fine way to play this hand. Your hand is sufficiently vulnerable that you're happy to fold out much of the field (or to make them pay worse odds than 13 or 14:1, at least), yet sufficiently strong that you want bets going in.

There are combinations of players that would make check-calling or betting better -- e.g. a very tight PFR, or a field of limpers that you are certain will call one bet with literally any two cards on this flop, but will never call two bets unless they have you beat -- but I think those are the exception rather than the rule.

just my 2c.

cheers,

mn

[MortalNuts]

Hi JD --

Absent any read, I think generally check-calling is not so hot. My reply to Stellar has more detail, but basically I think you're ahead here a decent chunk of the time unless the PFR is unusually tight. Furthermore, I really don't think a "typical" PFR will correctly fold all the hands that you're beating if you do put in some tasty flop action, nor will he reliably 3-bet with all the hands that have you beat. Finally, and importantly, the presence of other players means you have to give some consideration to protecting your hand.

Together I think these make check-raising the PFR a better play. heads-up against a tight PFR my answer would be different; but then again I wouldn't be here if there were no limpers and the PFR was very tight.

just my 2c.

cheers,

mn

[sthief09]

ehh I just don't like being in tough situations out of position. our relative position is great though.

[sthief09]

I agree with your analysis on a Q72 board. on a QT8 board, though, I think you have to clear out the limpers.

[J.R.]

Qxsxs, or QJT. You bet and 3-bet that flop with TP and flush draw or TP and straight draw.

[J.R.]

"I just don't like being in tough situations out of position"

cop out. maybe if you tried them they would cease being so tough.

[J.R.]

OMG- sorry, but what happened here?

1. Often you are behind and the limpers are unlikely to beat the hand you hope to make.

Huh? Often you are behind v an unknown raiser w/ TPGK on a Q high baord? Good thing I only raise AA, KK, QQ, AQ. Unlikely to beat you? Flushes, straights, trips- what's the board look like, and how many limpers are we against? Doesn't that matter?


2. You are hard to catch when you are ahead."

You don't even know what the board is or actual the number of opponents! But either way, no you aren't. Perhaps individually, but you are against a collective field and there is no prize for second place. And there can be some really good draws as well, depending on THE TEXTURE OF THE FLOP.


3. An ace overcard when you are ahead will probably make the PFR's hand anyway. Limping aces are often duplicated outs and don't threaten you very much.

What did JD PM you about this hand? An unknown raised, and now you are both often behind and will lose when an A comes. Good thing people stopped raising pairs and suited broadways (and worse hands too!) after limpers in position, I hadn't yet got that memo. Its also good to know that limping aces are often duplicated outs. Tell em again how many limpers were they, and how you know they are type to limp with Ax? And how big is the pot. Or is that no longer relevant to determing whether you want certain hands to fold or not.


My general strategy is to maximize EV by making the limpers contribute to the pot.

Good thing you don't use a cookie cutter approach like this and fail consider things like pot size, board texture, number of opponents, relative position, and so forth. Whew. I'll go puke now.

[bernie]

The pot looks like it's about 6BBs. Looks like a great spot to go for the c/r. Betting out isn't protecting anything.

b

[sthief09]

in a 1/2 structure, semi-cold-calling in the SB is basically like cold-calling on the button, right? despite the excellent relative position, I'd still need 2 or 3 others in the pot.

with 3 limps then a raise, do we consider 3-betting out of the SB or on the button to fold them out? what about the CO? whether or not they call we're getting good value on the raise (they come along with inferior hands and we make money, or they fold and we get dead money). FWIW I wouldn't even consider it from the SB.

but yes, it is a big cop out.

[MAxx]

JD- Brutha pullease.

When you post a hypothetical, please lay out a hypothetical flop. Without a flop, turn, and river.... if we are to share our views on the hand, we are forced to make our own assumptions about the hand. Some will view it as a hand protection hand, some as losing the least vs gaining the most, or many other various ideas. Truth is that there are little bounds to proper play when the question is not properly defined. S-thief, J.R., and others have pointed out board texture etc... so I dont wanna really harp on that. Really though you force the readers to choose between not making comments at all, or making a multitude of varying assumptions.

[molawn2mo]

Thank you maxx. This hand looks quite interesting but not "discussable" without the details. Thanks for saying what this lowly writer was thinking.

[J.R.]

in a 1/2 structure, semi-cold-calling in the SB is basically like cold-calling on the button, right?

Not really, but sorta. The Ciaffone rule, which I think is fairly true, is that having the button is worth about a sb. But that's a seperate concept IMO from the one presented here, becuase the Ciaffone rule is general and represents a value throughout the hand, and I think the value is derived from being in a postion from which to control the hand, which isn't the case when there is a pfr.

Additionally, the more multiway a hand is, the less improtant position is, because more multiway generally means showdown poker. Sure the button still has some value mutliway, especially if you opponents are passive and will check to you, but the button has even greater value in less multiway spots. So the value of the button, while generally around a sb, is still situational, and this is a case where I would devalue the button's value, where in other spots the button may be worth more than a sb. But having the button makes a coldcall more attractive than in another positon. Here its a "it costs you 3 to see a flop with a pot expected to have at least 19 sbs (if there are 3 limpers)", so its a pot odds kinda thing (which it is on the button to some degree as well).

Anyway, I quess I am inarticualtely trying to express why I think this is better call form the sb than on the button, and the reasons are 1) the pot odds are better, and 2) button isn't as valuable here as it might be in other spots.

I'd still need 2 or 3 others in the pot.

Don't we have a "few" limpers in the hand, which is consistent with at least 2-3, IMO. And there are times where this raise will come after 1 limper and is likely to be an isolation riase, and in that case the call/3-bet seems a fine option to consider as well.

do we consider 3-betting out of the SB or on the button to fold them out? what about the CO?

This is really gonna depend on what I think the pfr has, how these limpers are likely to respond to a raise, how bad there limpers are. But generally, no, even more so when in the sb as opposed to being in position.

[JDErickson]

Thanx for all the responses. Sorry to be so vague but I wanted to try and get opinions based on a lot of different options. Its not just 1 particular hand I am analysing. Its this particular situation with different hand details.

I think the flop CR would be good against a lot of weak limpers.

I think Ck, call would be good HU against 1 opponent.

I think a 3 bet may be good if the raiser if LAG or a maniac.

Jim

[Piiop]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing I have been experimenting with is Ck calling this down unless an A hits.

Reasoning: keep the PFR betting if he has a worse hand and minimising the loss if I am behind. If I CR or bet the flop I have advertised my hand.

Comments?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is a bad plan when headsup. But in this hand, the limpers are important to consider. You can gain bets from them or they can catch a weak draw and take the whole pot.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop comes down Q High.

[/ QUOTE ]
When JD gave this and asked for a general approach, I assumed he meant there were no other interesting cards on the flop, e.g. Q73r.

It has to be that way if this is a "general" discussion. A dangerous flop like Q /images/graemlins/club.gifT /images/graemlins/club.gif8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif requires an analysis of these exact cards. I would never discuss it in general.

Please read my previous post in that context. Assume Q73r or similar nonthreatening flop.

JD, there is a moral here. Next time you do this it would be better to have an exact example with specific cards and seats.

[MAxx]

i assumed the same as you, but it can get real confusing real fast if your don't know if people are making the same assumptions.

for example, i was thinking: i like a c/r. then i was like... hold on a minute we have NPA SW not liking it. is he seeing the same hand I am. well probably. then why would he not....etc. then I begin to feel the question is unclear... i am not even sure if others are makeing the same assumptions about hand layout, to even discussion optimal choices.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
Forcing out limpers is unlikely to change the outcome of the hand:

1. Often you are behind and the limpers are unlikely to beat the hand you hope to make.

2. You are hard to catch when you are ahead.

3. An ace overcard when you are ahead will probably make the PFR's hand anyway. Limping aces are often duplicated outs and don't threaten you very much.

My general strategy is to maximize EV by making the limpers contribute to the pot. I am not going for KOs.

The one play that is absolutely out is checkraising the PFR. Valid plans are bet-calling, check-calling, and checkraising an early limper.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there was one limper, this is less awful than if there were a bunch of limpers.

But it's still pretty bad.

scrub

[StellarWind]

OK folks,

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the answer depend on how coordianted the board is? I wouldn't want to give a person the right odds to draw to an inside straight on a coordianted board, so I might check raise in that situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes it does. My bad for assuming that JD meant a safe flop and everyone would understand that. It doesn't make any sense to ask for a general plan if the flop may have unspecified special features. If the board is dangerous you need to make a custom plan.

I'll be more careful next time.

Assume three limpers plus the BB and Q73r flop for the rest of this post. Now we can all discuss the same problem. Six players and 12 SB.

[ QUOTE ]
Absent a rockish read on LP, I generally assume my opponent's raising standards in that spot to be something like AA-TT, AK/AQ -- and that's on the conservative side.

[/ QUOTE ]
That simplifies the problem. I'm going to the fridge for a soda while the hand plays out. No way I coldcall preflop against this. Virtual total domination.

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, you're behind some of the time, but "often"? Maybe this is just a difference of terminology, but you're ahead here the majority of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree completely. "Often" does not mean a majority of the time. I would have said "usually", "probably", or "most likely" if I meant that. But you will see AQ/AA/KK/QQ frequently enough that it should affect your strategy.

[ QUOTE ]
You have one pair, and are not that hard to catch. Anyone who has a hand like middle pair has 5 outs against you, plus of course there may be straight draws and the like depending on board texture. If there were say 4 limpers before LP, the pot is now about 12 SB before anything happens on the flop. This means that you are happy to have hands with 5 outs against you fold; you're not even terribly dismayed if lone overcards fold, or if gutshots bail out. Put another way, many of the hands that are likely to stick around for a single bet on the flop would actually be correct to do so, given your holding.

[/ QUOTE ]
A lot of this goes away when we agree on a safe board. You are right that you don't want to screw around with (say) a ten on the board. Too many middle pairs and too many straight draws. I'd be the first to checkraise.

Now see how a Q73 board makes the objections go away. The straight draws are essentially gone.

Middle/bottom pair for five outs? Let's see:

1. Not such a common hand to begin with on a safe board.

2. What's the kicker? A7 has five outs but only two of them are my problem if PFR has AK/AJ/AT. PFR has an ace the majority of the times you are ahead. You can only lose this hand once. No extra penalty for finishing third.

K7 has two outs. Q7 is unfortunate but I don't need to checkraise it. Little sevens do have five outs but my redraws against two pair taint them considerably.

On average, middle/bottom pair has a lot less then five outs that make me lose.

The same idea applies to a limping ace overcard. Three outs on paper but closer to one out in reality.

An overall issue is that we are behind maybe 30% of the time. That's 30% of the time when knocking people out is probably the worst thing we could do. If you happen to be behind and drawing to 3-5 outs you want as much company as you can get. Win a big pot when you suck out.

[ QUOTE ]
OMG- sorry, but what happened here?

[/ QUOTE ]
OMG J.R., calm down. This is so not like you.

The essence of your post seems to be that it matters what the actual deal is. I agree with you.

[ QUOTE ]
Forcing out limpers is unlikely to change the outcome of the hand

[/ QUOTE ]
This is my primary theme.

1. You may be the one drawing.

2. It's going to be really hard to win this if an ace comes, regardless of how you play it.

3. The limpers have very few outs that aren't aces.

The best way to play this hand is to bet through the field. Let the PFR raise and trap them for two bets. Making them pay is much more profitable then forcing them out.

Checkcalling is a viable strategy if you are very afraid the PFR has you beat. You shouldn't have called preflop if you feel that way. Don't pay 1.5 bets to be scared to death of such a great flop.

[ddubois]

Is PFR going to have AK/AQ/AA-TT exclusively, or can he have AJ/KQ/ATs/KJs/99?

Also, "When is domination not as dangerous? In multiway pots." I read that somewhere.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
The one play that is absolutely out is checkraising the PFR. Valid plans are bet-calling, check-calling, and checkraising an early limper.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was bugging me while I ate lunch, so I figured I'd write more.

(1) Per Sthief, I don't think folding preflop would be a huge mistake. Especially in a 1/3 blind game. The fold gets worse the more limpers there are, the worse the limpers play, and the more often LP raises preflop. I would often fold here on a 1/2 or 1/3 blind, but there are situations where I would call too. I would never 3-bet.

(2) My problem wiht Stellarwind's post is that he's playing KQ in this spot like he should have folded it preflop, and like he's heads up with the raiser in a small pot. Unlike folding KQs preflop in this spot, not checkraising this flop can be a big mistake. The pot is big enough to be worth protecting, and failing to protect it is expensive.

If you've called preflop, you're assuming that the preflop raiser is raising a wide enough range of hands that he doesn't have {AQ, AK, AA, KK, QQ} as the major elements of his raising hands. Given that you've affirmed that you are not dominated most of the time by calling, you have to assume your TPGK is ahead here most of the time.

Even with just two limpers and a BB fold, there are 2(4) +1 = 9 SB in the pot. These are your SB! Checkraise the LP raiser and protect your (now 10) SB from a limper 5-outer or other calamity.

When you're behind the LP raiser, this will only cost you 1-2 extra SB, since you're going to showdown barring the limpers getting there and pumping on a later street. When you're ahead (and you have to assume you are), the CR could decrease your chances of losing to one of the limpers significantly, and will prevent a hand like JJ or AK from checking behind you on the turn and costing you even more money. The advantages of the checkraise makd you much more than it costs rare time you're behind and lose an extra SB.


Edit: Thought about my SB play and realized that I would fold more often than I would call unless it was a 2/3 blind, so I flipped around the releveant sentence in (1)

scrub

[JimRivett]

If the flop is Queen high and I have a Queen, I'm betting most of the time.

However, if in fact the pre flop raiser is unknown, I probably fold pre flop.

Jim

[bernie]

To me, the pot is big enough to start trying to win it. If it were smaller, then i'd be more inclined to just bet out. Lots of hands are getting a good price at 12-1 (per his 'few limpers' description) to call. Even a lone A, much less a flopped pair that could have 5 outs.

b

[bernie]

With a 'few limpers' and an LP raise, i would call this in the sb. Unless the guy is a total rock. Even then i might consider it.

[ QUOTE ]
Unlike folding KQs preflop in this spot, not checkraising this flop can be a big mistake. The pot is big enough to be worth protecting, and failing to protect it is expensive

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Yes, you may lose if an A hits. But why give him odds to catch it? If you raise and knock out 2 pkt pairs and an A, you just freed up 7 outs. If Lp has you beat, you still have outs. To me, this is a textbook spot for a c/r.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Truth is that there are little bounds to proper play when the question is not properly defined. S-thief, J.R., and others have pointed out board texture etc... so I dont wanna really harp on that

[/ QUOTE ]

When does pot size become more a factor than board texture?

b

[helpmeout]

Firstly I call this any day, folding this is weaktight. A late position better doesnt automatically have AA KK QQ AK AQ. I'd raise 99 TT JJ AJo KQo KJs in that position and KQs isnt dominated by any of those.

When the flop comes Q high I bet. If its raised I call it down (fold if i have to call another 2)

If I improve on the turn or river then I checkraise.

I dont like the flop checkraise, if he has you beat he will likely raise you on the turn. If he doesnt have you beat he will fold the turn unimproved, instead of calling with his AK or whatever, which is what you want.

[MAxx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Truth is that there are little bounds to proper play when the question is not properly defined. S-thief, J.R., and others have pointed out board texture etc... so I dont wanna really harp on that

[/ QUOTE ]

When does pot size become more a factor than board texture?

b

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't recall an exact answer. i could take an educated guess......

i would say the bigger the pot is- the more we want to take it down. a more secondary factor seems to be the texture... very important. I cannot understate the importance of board texture, but still secondary.

If we think our hand is currently boss (or estimate our hand to be top dog here a good percentage of the time) and we determine the pot big... why not c/r away to increase our chances of taking this pot down?

the point has also been made that if we are ahead, we are probably far ahead on an individual opponent basis. Maybe or maybe not so far ahead on a collective basis. That still seems to be an issue to me.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Firstly I call this any day, folding this is weaktight. A late position better doesnt automatically have AA KK QQ AK AQ. I'd raise 99 TT JJ AJo KQo KJs in that position and KQs isnt dominated by any of those.

[/ QUOTE ]
I read this type of comment a lot. The average unknown LL player is not you. Look in PT sometime and see what the average PFR is for the games you play. My Party opponents are well under 6%. Also consider that the average player does not adjust his raises nearly enough for position.

There are many, many players that will not raise here with less than AQ.

This is a very marginal coldcall with no read. Too often you are putting 1.5 bets into near certain domination. With a read that your opponent is aggressive preflop it can be an easy coldcall.

BTW, not of great importance here, but it doesn't get much worse than playing a 6-way pot with another KQ. You have no showdown value, no position, and only four pair outs to half the pot.

[helpmeout]

True but you have a couple of early position limpers to soften the blow if you are dominated.

You might be dominated 65% of the time but your flush potential will make up for the other times.

It might be breakeven to call down with TPTK including the number of times you improve to two pair or trips.

The times you make a flush will push this into +EV territory.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
On the flop everyone cks to the PFR who bets, I call, rest fold

[/ QUOTE ]

This is irrelevant since the action stops at your turn. You don't know they will fold except in hindsight.

b