AJo in the SB.

[bisonbison]

The table has two clear soft spots (the super-loose BB and the super-loose UTG+1) and a bunch of at least reasonably tight schmucks.

Both the BB and UTG+1 are in over 70% of hands (100+ hands), BB tending towards passive, and UTG+1 tending towards aggro.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with J/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#666666">5 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, BB calls, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 3-bets</font>, Hero calls, BB calls.

Flop: (9 SB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, BB calls, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 3-bets</font>, Hero calls, BB calls.

Turn: (9 BB) 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
Hero checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks.

River: (9 BB) Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets with the intention of calling a raise</font>

Normal, eh?

[ghostface]

I really dont see how to play it different. The limp reraise could mean any two cards I guess so when you hit the flop you have to bet. If one of them is holding a 6 thats too bad but since they suck, their betting isnt going to tell you anything about their hands. The fact that the turn checks through sucks, but I dont know if a bet would be right there. I would expect super aggro UTG+2 to raise there representing something bogus like a two pair made boat or trip sixes.

I guess if you bet the turn and get raised its probably check the river and call a bet. Otherwise looks good.

[SCfuji]

preflop: cool

flop: no cap?

turn: going for a c/r or the 6 slow you down? im a micro-er at the moment, but i prefer leading this turn.

river: bet sounds good.

[bisonbison]

The limp reraise could mean any two cards I guess so when you hit the flop you have to bet.

Do I?

And if the limp-reraise means any two cards, what does the flop 3-bet mean?

[bisonbison]

turn: going for a c/r or the 6 slow you down?

The six had almost nothing to do with my decision to check the turn.

[SCfuji]

could you explain to ignorant me why checking the turn is better than betting the turn? through my eyes it just seems like you are ahead enough of the time to bet.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 calls...<font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>...<font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 3-bets</font>

[/ QUOTE ]
hahahaha, way to get in all your money drawing dead...FISH!

I like the flop check raise. Once he 3 bets, as bdk3clash says, this is the part of the hand where I start calling.

When the turn gets checked through I'm just utterly confused. My first though was maybe AKs for UTG+1 and some rando pair(or maybe not, who knows) for BB.

The river bet is pretty easy, but I have a hard time calling a raise here. Based on your reads I don't see either of these guys getting tricky with AK or aggressive enough to raise a worse jack after playing it like that. If I'm raised I'm folding.

[JinX11]

I prefer betting the turn - you gave the nutballs a free chance to spike an A, K, or Q, which happened.

But, yes, I would bet the river and call a raise by UTG+1. Maybe not from BB, if he's passive.

EDIT: Ha - misread the hand - an A would be an "ok" card to catch.

[Evan]

After being limp-reraised and 3 bet on the flop TPTK loses a lot of value.

[Evan]

I don't see how you're so convinced these guys (mainly UTG+1) are drawing against your top pair. Based on the action up to the turn I think assuming bison has the best hand an overwhelming majority of the time is ridiculous.

[bisonbison]

I prefer betting the turn - you gave the nutballs a free chance to spike an A, K, or Q, which happened.

I'm not particularly worried about him spiking an A.

[lil']

When I started playing, the limp re-raise was almost always A-A. Now it almost never is. But I digress...

This seems good to me. The flop 3 bet has concerned you enough that you check the turn. It's a little risky because you may give a free card to two players instead of one, and a pair of jacks is more vulnerable than a pair of aces or kings, but it seems like the right play. If your opponent wants to pay 3 bets on the flop with nothing to take a free card, good for him.

[SCfuji]

wouldn't a hand like JTo be something that UTG+1 would play just as aggressively?

[JinX11]

A combo of things:

1) Limp-reraises from LAGs explicitly mean they are NOT that strong. If I had to guess, the range of hands I'd put him on are a middle pair like 88-1010 or something like KJ, KQ, AJ, AQ. No way does he have AA, KK, or QQ, and I'd seriously doubt AK. Just my experience with limp-reraises from bad players.
2) The board itself *is* relatively draw heavy.
3) UTG+1 checks the turn. If he's not sitting on A/KQ, I think Hero has him beat.

I'm more worried about the other guy.

[JinX11]

*lol* yeah, I know...added an edit to my post. How's this game played again????

(sorry)

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
When I started playing, the limp re-raise was almost always A-A. Now it almost never is.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even these days it is more often from UTG/UTG+1 when he's the first limper instead of that rando LMP over limp reraise.

[Evan]

1. I don't think he's limp reraising JTo, he may be, but not often enough for me to assume it.

2. If he's aggressive/crazy enough to play PF/flop in that manner with JT I don't see him checking the turn, do you?

[SCfuji]

[ QUOTE ]
2. If he's aggressive/crazy enough to play PF/flop in that manner with JT I don't see him checking the turn, do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

hm.. sold!

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Limp-reraises from LAGs explicitly mean they are NOT that strong

[/ QUOTE ]
This is true.

[ QUOTE ]
No way does he have AA, KK, or QQ

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not, even bad players get dealt good hands.

[ QUOTE ]
3) UTG+1 checks the turn. If he's not sitting on A/KQ, I think Hero has him beat.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think bison is ahead too, hence betting the river. But if either of them raise I don't think top pair is good. These guys don't seem like the types of players to get tricky on the river, and after their turn play, raising the river with a worse hand would be getting tricky.

[chief444]

Looks good to me Bison. I think the biggest decision would be whether to call a river raise or not. I believe I would also.

[MHarris]

The presence of the BB is enough for me to check-call this river. Given your description of BB, he can hold QJ, a worse J, a 7, a 6, 98, any gutshot, or 2 clubs. Are you calling a raise from him on the river?

Since UTG+1 is more aggro, I'd think he'd bet TT-88 and maybe take a shot at the pot with AK but I don't think he's raising you on the river with anything you beat. I'm not so sure you'll get called by TT-88 here.

I'm check-calling this river, and if BB sneaks in a c/r somehow, I'm outta there.

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
River: (9 BB) Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif(3 players)
Hero bets with the intention of calling a raise

[/ QUOTE ]

From either player, or just UTG+1? I'd give strong consideration to folding to a bump from the BB.

-McGee

[Evan]

Checking the river would be pretty bad. The average player, even LAGish players, will not bet most of the hands you describe on the river, particularly after the early fireworks. People call with a lot more hands than they bet with, you need to take advantage of that.

[Festus22]

Perfecto.

An aggressive UTG+1 is not checking the turn with aces, kings or queens. You're good here WAY more than 50% of the time and with the BB still in, you only have to be good 33% to show a profit. And I think calling a river raise is also correct.

[bisonbison]

Well, I would definitely fold to a BB raise and a call.

[JinX11]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limp-reraises from LAGs explicitly mean they are NOT that strong

[/ QUOTE ]
This is true.

[ QUOTE ]
No way does he have AA, KK, or QQ

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not, even bad players get dealt good hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

True: I get those cards all the time.

But seriously, I consider those two points to be mutually exclusive: his limp-reraising explicitly says, "I do not have AA, KK, or QQ."

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
you only have to be good 33% to show a profit. And I think calling a river raise is also correct.

[/ QUOTE ]
This statement is flawed in a few places.

1. You're assuming that both players will call with losing hands every time.

2. If you intend to call a raise you need to be good more than 33% of the time.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
his limp-reraising explicitly says, "I do not have AA, KK, or QQ."

[/ QUOTE ]
No it doesn't. I don't see how you can assume that.

[JinX11]

This is kind of a tangent to the Bison's thread, but you agreed that when a LAG limp-reraises pre-flop, it means that their holding is NOT very strong. This is direct contradiction to him holding AA, KK, or QQ and is how I can assume he is not holding those cards. I am occassionally fooled by limp-reraises and this may be one of those instances. In my mind, the turn check nails it down, unless he is really tricky/loony. My money is on 99.

[Twitch1977]

I'm not all that experienced, but when I get limp - reraised preflop in micro limit games my opponents almost always turn over a premium pair, AA-QQ.

I like the way bison played the hand, the check on the turn could mean just about anything.

What to do on the river is a bit more confusing imo, if you check I think there's a good chance he'll bet just to try and take the pot then you can call for a cheap showdown. I'd be leary to bet because like I said, when I see a limp - reraise it's almost always a premium pair.

Weak/Tight
Twitch

[JinX11]

[ QUOTE ]
but when I get limp - reraised preflop in micro limit games my opponents almost always turn over a premium pair, AA-QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

By a good opponent, in a game where limpers are constantly being raised behind, yes, I can see it.

By an aggro guy seeing 70%+ VP$IP, well, it usually means something like KJ or 88. After the hand is over, I'm much more often say to myself "He's a dumbass" rather than "Wow, I got fooled."

I wonder if I can fish this out of PokerTracker.....

[Evan]

I feel like you're assuming omniscience of the turn action before it occurs. After he checks the turn I don't think he has AA-QQ either, but that doesn't make betting the turn right.

[Danenania]

Yes if he had bet the turn then gotten raised and reraised everyone would be saying to check the turn.

I think this is played perfectly except "tending towards aggressive" isn't enough for me to call a river raise. I would have to consider him genuinely crazy to do so in which case I would have put more action in previously.

I think this guy has either a lone PP TT or below, AK, or a monster like quad 6's.

[Evan]

Do we agree that there's no way either of these two are raising TT/AK on the river?

[Danenania]

Yes. At least not often enough given pot size. It wouldn't make sense for UTG+1 to check the turn if he's wild enough to bluff raise the river and I think the only way BB is raising after all this weird action is if he has QQ, 66, or misclicks.

[sfer]

I've started capping limp-reraises that are likely trash. For the same reason I raise the first time around.

[Danenania]

I think with a hand like AJo where your equity advantage isn't that great to begin with it is more useful to let the knucklehead keep the lead so you can manipulate him postflop. I agree with capping if you hold something like TT or AJs though.

[Evan]

I think capping here would suck. You're going to have to throw a lot of chips into the pot when you whiff because you've made it so big and playing like that out of position is not fun.

[Aces McGee]

Natch. Nice hand, then.

-McGee

[sfer]

How often in this exact spot do I have to induce the BB to fold to make capping worthwhile? How often will I whiff and still have the best hand, or be able to shut the BB out with a checkraise? And who says I have to spew if I miss?

[sfer]

I see like zero difference between AJo and AJs here.

[Danenania]

Seriously? The difference is pretty large. Do some twodimes tests if you don't believe me.

[sfer]

I'm against two very bad players, one with LAG tendencies. The Ace with a face card is enough.

[Dangeresque]

With a 2 flush, a semi-co-ordinated flop, and serious vulnerability to over cards, I would have bet the turn against our agressive 3 bettor, This makes it wrong for him to have raised with the expectation of a free card, which I could see him doing with 89 9T Ax/images/graemlins/club.gif of for that matter 2 over cards. He has too many hands where you are giving him 20% of the pot (Exp. -1.8BB) vs. a bet where there is a chance he may fold which is a error with a hand like KQ (6.7-1) or he may call, (an error if he is dominated or reverse dominated i.e. KJ or AK) I don't like playing into a free card play. If he's been known to 3 bet only w premium hands here than the check is a better play, but being a loose agressive player here, I'd have to put him on any pair or Big Broadway and a re-raise for value, hoping to bet the flop. I think he's either drawing to 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, or 41 cards, and the former far more often then the latter. If you bet he will let you know if he has an over pair. and if the BB has 6x, he'll call next time and miss.

[Dangeresque]

[ QUOTE ]
The six had almost nothing to do with my decision to check the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

The six if anything means that the multitudinous possibilities that he was semi-bluffing have just missed. The six should be an inducement to bet, if nothing else because it makes it even more incorrect for BB to call w 7(T-), a dry ace, exploit waht pot equity you do have and make a drwing hand pay to see the river. I have seen a 3 bet semi-bluff many times when pot equity allows, which makes me think that the raiser had at least 9 outs on the flop, but of course he could have a weaker jack and put you on over cards or a flush draw. There are too many hands he could have, and too many hands the BB would call with, that are way behind to make checking a good play

[StellarWind]

I'd like to see his exact stats but I am inclined to cap preflop. I think this type of player open-raises all hands that are better than my AJo. When the spirit moves him to insert a backraise he has to choose from the leftovers. We also know that BB didn't 3-bet us. So the cap seems to offer more value than the original raise. It's also very confusing postflop and good advertising.

I play the rest the same as you. I think calling a river raise by the LAG is mandatory. He is obviously unstable.

General observation: the frequency of "ridiculous" river raises at Party appears to be increasing.

[Dangeresque]

Getting 13-1 after being raised, I think an AJ would simply have to call that raise, given the liklihood that your check on the turn is interpreted by UTG+1 as weakness. He could think you're drawing (too) and now representing J,K,A/Q maybe if BB raises, but at the same time you can't (with certainty) say you are beaten 94% of the time. I wouldn't value bet the river either, hoping to induce a bluff. Your re-raiser will bet some of his missed draws, because he interprets your check as an indication that you think he is best or that you were on a draw. I can't see him calling with anything other than KJ that would lose on the river. Check and call there, he'll call with KQ, KK, AA, AQ and raise or / bluff raise if he thinks you're weak or he has QJ, QQ, or maybe just a lone Q. He won't call enouch times with heak hands to make this a profitable bet. Woud you call here w 88? No. QT? Yes. Your bet has a negative expectation.

[bisonbison]

For some further context, here are the stats I knew about this guy during the hand:

UTG+1: 150 hands
VPIP: 71%
PFR: 8%
Postflop agg: 2
Went to SD: 37%
Won at SD: 50%.

Very loose. Not a big preflop lag, very aggro postflop for a guy in 70% of his hands, but also (as seen by Won at SD), running hot.

[SCfuji]

hopefully this hand cooled him down a bit

[StellarWind]

This guy is under better control both preflop and postflop than I expected. He's actually a very good player compared to your usual 70% VP$IP. Cancel the preflop cap and definitely don't bet the turn.

[blumpkin22]

This hand illustrates the importance of position in limit holdem. In all likelihood, you have the best hand on the flop. While the LAG may have AA-QQ, his most likely holding, I think, is A/images/graemlins/club.gif K/images/graemlins/club.gif (maybe even worse like K/images/graemlins/club.gif J/images/graemlins/heart.gif). I think that is extremely unlikely that he has a set here. Few goofy call-reraises are medium pairs; they are mostly monsters or Ax. A bet on the turn is +EV.

That being said, the possibility of being raised on the turn and feeling like you "have to" call down with TPTK causes most players (including myself) to check-call the turn. Perhaps the best play is to lead the turn and fold to a raise: tip your hat if the aggro bought the pot with his AK and pat yourself on the back if you folded to an overpair (of course, you won't know which!).

After the turn was checked through, though, it is almost impossible for you to be behind. He probably took a free card to hit his club or overcards. Is he really scared of the 6? Ha.

What to do on the river? I think it is hard to make the case of checking to induce a river bluff. If it were heads-up, then by all means you may get the unimproved AK to bet, but with the BB still in the hand, it is unlikely. Bet the river. If you get raised, calling depends on whether the third player is still in the hand. If you bet, the BB folds, and the aggro raises, I would call, though probably think I got sucked out by AQ. I would predict that the BB will call with a second best hand and the aggro will fold.

blumpkin

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Postflop agg: 2
Went to SD: 37%
Won at SD: 50%.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think these stats combined with a flop 3-bet are at all funny. He's clearly quite selective with his postflop play. Contrary to your dismissal small pocket pairs like 77/66 are common backraise material along with the suited connectors and suited aces. Plus he could just have the giant overpair after all. It's not good practice to completely rule out the possibility that your opponent has the exact hand he says he has.

Bisonbison had the right idea. Avoid another raise when drawing thin/dead and rely on your aggressive opponent to bet his worse hands for you.

[Danenania]

Would you still call a river raise in light of the new stats?

[J.R.]

He's clearly quite selective with his postflop play

I'm not trying to undercut your point, which I generally agree with, but this guy isn't selective based on these numbers.

This guy VPIPs over 70% of the time, and he sees the flop more than this (assuming free BB plays), yet still sees 37% of showdowns. Its obvious he is on fire in this small sample size given that he wins 50% of the time at SD (and that will effect/inflate his WTSD stats), but, assuming he sees a flop with about 75% of the hands he is dealt preflop, he is taking 37% of these hands (almost 28% of the hands he is dealt preflop) to a showdown.

Most tight players with VPIPs around 1/4th of this guy's VPIP don't WTSD 37% of the time, and the tight players are holding, on average, a much stronger set of hands that this guy. This guy is taking more hands to showdown that most 2+2ers will even VPIP with. I can't see that as being selective. Sure this guy folds @ 2/3rds of the hands he plays before the showdown, but these hands have to be utter garbage given his super-high VPIP number.

[Tosh]

Every move so far seems good. I doubt I'd call a raise on the river though.

[bisonbison]

Resulterinos:

I bet, SB folds, UTG+1 raises, I call.

UTG+1 shows KK.

I thought his l-rr was an acceptable choice, given how tight the table and aggro the table was, but given my likely range of hands, his turn check is pretty bad.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you still call a river raise in light of the new stats?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. But I'm not a fan of the extreme river bet-folds advocated by some.

I've won several pots recently with river bet-calls that would not be well-received by this forum. I don't trust unpredictable-looking players like this one. Certainly not after he started the hand with an apparently bogus backraise.

Often bet-fold arguments overlook the applicable mathematics of conditional probability. A common argument for folding is "You are getting 9-1 on this call but bluff raises in this situation are very rare. Your hand is nice but it only beats a bluff. Therefore you don't have a 10% chance of being good."

The fallacy of this argument is that nothing is said about legitimate raises. The proper question is not whether bluff raises are very rare. All river raises are rare in many situations. The question is are bluff raises more than nine times rarer than legitimate raises. Often when you examine a hand and ask what a legitimate raise would be, that becomes a very difficult standard to meet.

This hand is a good example. Villain just took a free card. Now he spikes a queen that doesn't connect to anything and suddenly his hand is worth a raise versus a PFR. I'm sorry, but what hand does he have again? And why is this hand more than 12 times as likely as him taking some random shot?

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
but this guy isn't selective based on these numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't disagree with your post.

My point is that compared to his preflop peers he is very selective postflop. The flop 3-bet needs to be taken seriously and not simply ignored due to its source.