Straddle Topic from Wednesday Discussion Group

[Dynasty]

There was a poker discussion group on Wednesday afternoon which was attended by many 2+2 posters including myself, Mason Malmuth, Jim Brier, Clarkmeister, pokerbabe, skp, MBE, Vince Leporem, Howard Burroughs, and a few others. (See Al Schoonmaker's post in Psychology forum for more information about the group).

While discussing another topic, Mason presented a situation and asked the group for what they thought the proper play was. Here's the situation: the player on your immediate right is UTG and posts a straddle. You're next to act and have AA. What's your play?

Jim Brier was quick to respond and said 3-bet. A couple other people in the group agreed as if it were the obvious answer. Mason also seemed to agree that raising in that spot with AA was clearly the best play. Before Mason started using that example to illustrate an idea he wanted to present, I had to jump in and have my voice heard.

I've thought about this before Mason presented the problem and had already reached the opposite conclusion. I said when someobody straddles and you're next to act with AA, simply calling is the best play. I also think it's much better to call than to 3-bet. Unfortunately, the group didn't get into this issue because another topic was on the floor.

What do you think?

[Al_Capone_Junior]

If the straddler has a tendency to raise his live straddles no matter what he has, then I don't think you can be faulted for giving consideration to a limp-reraise, especially if it's a four-raise limit instead of three. There may be clear reasons to immediately raise, but shouldn't the ol' limp-reraise at least be given some thought?

al

[Robk]

It depends on the table. If it's a bunch of turkeys that are coming along for the ride no matter how many bets are in the pot and what cards they're holding, I'm raising. If coldcalling will attract other players to join who would have folded to a 3bet, calling is the play. If no one will coldcall without a legitimate hand, 3betting is the play since they will probably play for 3 what they would have played for 2 when you raise a straddle. If the game is "crazy" and I "know" it's going to be capped behind me no matter what I do, I would just call for deception. I guess that makes my answer:

Tight table: 3bet
Loose weak table: call
Loose terrible table: 3bet
Crazy table: call
Default play: 3bet

[Bob T.]

Without thinking about it, I would say three bet, but when you ask me, as if there were some things to think about, I start to see some reasons to call.

If the straddler is going to raise his straddle, I think that calling might make for a very big pot preflop if I reraise.

If the table is aggressive enough that someone else might raise after my call, and maybe the straddler will reraise, then I can cap it for form, and I must be a big money favorite, in a huge pot.

The problem I see, is that I would more likely three bet to enter the pot after a straddle, than call, and it might look suspicious if I just call. I think that that is the case for a lot of players, who will play aggressively to isolate the straddler, so there is also a case that three betting is inherently deceptive, when you do have AA.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[brad]

its closer than it looks and i think in a very aggressive game calling can be much better.

interesting in a low limit high rake game it might be better to call and build a big pot somehow maybe, but problem is that chances go way down someone else will 3 bet.

[Phat Mack]

Dynasty,

I agree that raising isn't mandatory. What would your reasoning be for smooth calling? AA is always a nice hand. If you smooth call, many players will smell a big pot being built and come along for the ride: you can't help but build up equity. If the straddler exercises his option, do you re-pop it? I think that AA gives you a lot of options that a hand like, say, AQo doesn't.

[Mikey]

bob I agree with your analaysis and I think that 3-betting is better too especially because someone may think you are trying to isolate him with a worse hand.

I agree also that just calling looks very suspicious as well.

RERAISE BABY RERAISE!!!

[bernie]

it does look suspicious to do it....especially if players know that dynasty doesnt cold call....what would he be doing it with here? hmmm

it may work better if your known more to cold call at times....

image is a factor in the decision. if youre in a different gear, and raising alot, go ahead and raise...if youve been playing a very tight game, maybe call. but a good point was made about others thinking you may just be isolating a straddle...which actually may work better against players who know this move. thus you may get some of the better players on the tables' money.

i raise quite a bit, so id tend to 3 bet it....but i can see some situations where a smoothcall may work out nicely...

b

[AceHigh]

If you think a raise will isolate the straddler and get the hand heads up you should just smooth-call.

If you think some players will cold call 3 bets, you should raise.

So, most of the time I think smooth-calling is better.

[PokerPrince]

If the straddler is the type who nearly always raises when it comes back to him I would consider limp reraising with the aces in that spot.

PokerPrince

[Zeno]

Some consideration must be given to type of game, type of players plus your present table image, but my opinion is that 3-bet is not mandatory nor the best play in all situations. Smooth calling is a viable option.

An interesting follow on question would be, if you go with the 3-bet option, at which pocket pair do you not 3-bet with and only call. 3-bet with KK, QQ, JJ, down to TT's ? Lower? Smooth call with middle pairs? Would anyone ever 3-bet with pocket duces? What about a pair of Sevens?

-Zeno