Tricky hand observed on stars last night...

[TheRempel]

Was watching a $25 table while waiting for a seat and the following hand came up


Player A raised in the CO with J /images/graemlins/heart.gif J /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 9/images/graemlins/club.gif

The button reraised, CO called.

The flop came A /images/graemlins/club.gifJ /images/graemlins/diamond.gif6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif.
What's your play? The button raiser is very aggro and somewhat laggy.

[jhall23]

Need a little more info. Both pot size raises pre? If so how big is the pot? Stacks all at ~25? Is button aggro enough to re-raise without AAxx?

Make it up if you don't remember clearly. But if stacks are relativly shallow I would probably check to him and call/raise all in. If he doesn't bet then I put some money in on the turn.

[TheRempel]

Both players had at least 120BB stacks, button is aggro enough to raise any four cards in position. The CO potted it pre and the button repotted. Pot would have been approximately $10 on the flop, with both players having at least $50 behind.

[beset7]

CO has 250xBB and the button has 300xbb before the deal. I discussed this hand with rempel already. I think given the size of the stacks CO shouldn't escalate things with a c/r. An argument could be made the button's response to the c/r will help define the rest of the hand but since the button is a LAG i'm not sure how much information this is going to give the CO.

[TheRempel]

You're right, I was thinking about it in terms of $0.25/$0.50.

[jhall23]

[ QUOTE ]
CO has 250xBB and the button has 300xbb before the deal. I discussed this hand with rempel already. I think given the size of the stacks CO shouldn't escalate things with a c/r. An argument could be made the button's response to the c/r will help define the rest of the hand but since the button is a LAG i'm not sure how much information this is going to give the CO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that is pretty deep there. I don't think that the CO should check/raise this flop unless he is prepared to see a showdown. If button pots it even a dumb min-raise would make the pot huge and hard to lay down if the button jams. I don't think it's deep enough for that. You certainly couldn't fold if you made a pot sized c/r.

You guys play this game better then me and I am not sure what the best plan here is.

[autobet]

[ QUOTE ]
CO has 250xBB and the button has 300xbb before the deal. I discussed this hand with rempel already. I think given the size of the stacks CO shouldn't escalate things with a c/r. An argument could be made the button's response to the c/r will help define the rest of the hand but since the button is a LAG i'm not sure how much information this is going to give the CO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, most likely he would raise if bet into with something like AKQJ.

[beset7]

If the stacks were 100xBB vs. a LAG it would be a no-brainer. But it is deeper so it seems like an effort needs to be made to put the LAG on a range of hands. On the button he is raising any four, but if we bet and he raises, does that narrow it down to broadway wraps and AAxx and up? Or does LAG make moves on the flop if he's bet into. I guess with middle set out of position and deep stacks I don't want to get pot-committed yet but it looks to me like the money is going in the middle here.

I guess that's the challenge of playing against players who are LAG and have position on you.

[TheRempel]

Yeah, I'm thinking this is a terrible spot to be in but I think an auto fold is horribly weak. I don't think seeing a turn card is terrible . Even if the button does have AA, there is a good chance you are going to add a draw to your hand.

The CO player ended up checking. The button potted and the CO min-raised (donk move! /images/graemlins/grin.gif). The button smooth called.

What range of hands are you putting the button on? How bad is the CO's min-raise?


Position isn't making a huge difference here. Switch the positions and JJ89 is still going to have a tough decision.
He is going to have to evaluate whether is set is best when the LAG is probably betting out or check-raising the flop a lot of the time.

[joewatch]

Here's an "advanced play" that might work on this LAG player.

Check the flop. If Villain pots it, I put him on 4 broadways like AQJT. On the turn, if a 7 or heart falls, check-raise.

If Villain checks back the flop, I put him on AA. On the turn, if any KQT falls, check-raise.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]

Position isn't making a huge difference here. Switch the positions and JJ89 is still going to have a tough decision.
He is going to have to evaluate whether is set is best when the LAG is probably betting out or check-raising the flop a lot of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the LAGS position preflop is what created this situation [i.e. having to decide whether or not to commit a deep stack to middle set]

I think the smooth call showed a ton of strength.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an "advanced play" that might work on this LAG player.

Check the flop. If Villain pots it, I put him on 4 broadways like AQJT. On the turn, if a 7 or heart falls, check-raise.

If Villain checks back the flop, I put him on AA. On the turn, if any KQT falls, check-raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting line. With regards to flop, however, if we check and he pots it, how do you leave AAxx out of the range? I don't think a LAG check behinds with AAxx here because it would be out of character. He's going to represent AAxx here with our without so often that if he checks behind its going to raise eyebrows.

[TheRempel]

Yeah, I don't think a LAG every checks behind here unless he has good reason to suspect the other player has AA.

[TheRempel]

Let's assume that the button will pot the flop here about 75% of the time, regardless of his holdings.

[joewatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Interesting line. With regards to flop, however, if we check and he pots it, how do you leave AAxx out of the range? I don't think a LAG check behinds with AAxx here because it would be out of character. He's going to represent AAxx here with our without so often that if he checks behind its going to raise eyebrows.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I don't think you can leave AAxx out, but LAG player will often check AAxx top set on the flop as a slow-play. After check-raising the turn, if AAxx is still the nuts and villain reraises, call or fold depending on the implied odds.

[TheRempel]

Like I said, I don't think position is really the issue here. Even if the LAG is OOP, middle set is probably going to get bet into or check-raised by a wide variety of hands.

I agree that the smooth call showed a huge amount of strength, and if I held the JJ89 there, I would have a hard time putting another dime in the pot barring a jack, or a runner runner flush. Given that I know both of these players, I know that the LAG is not calling without a good wrap or AA. The LAG is not an idiot, and the call shows a lot more strength than a raise would.

[TheRempel]

The stacks are not so big that there will be any kind of money left if either play check-raises the turn.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
Like I said, I don't think position is really the issue here. Even if the LAG is OOP, middle set is probably going to get bet into or check-raised by a wide variety of hands.

I agree that the smooth call showed a huge amount of strength, and if I held the JJ89 there, I would have a hard time putting another dime in the pot barring a jack, or a runner runner flush. Given that I know both of these players, I know that the LAG is not calling without a good wrap or AA. The LAG is not an idiot, and the call shows a lot more strength than a raise would.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with the second part. With regards to position though, i think its the key factor it what led to this situation. Say we have position on the LAG w/ JJ98, we can smooth call and let him hang himself on a favorable flop, or we can raise and play a big pot. Here, we raised LP, the LAG raises, and now we are in a situation where we either have to get out of the way or commit a deep stack to middle set (barring a turn that gives us a good draw). With position, the pot could have been smaller on the flop and our options would have been more diverse. But surely position isn't a big factor in the flop play, just how we got there (which is why having a tricky LAG on your left = problematic).

After the check min-raise do you think folding a blank turn is an option for CO? I think the money is going in. If he's going to c/r the turn it may as well be all-in.

[benkahuna]

Once min raise goes through, CO has to make a decision. Doesn't look like the LAG is folding (at least not on the turn) and I think there's enough information to make a decision whether it's worth continuing. For me, I probably just say f it and pay off with middle set. If you can't get it all in versus a LAG without the nuts, I think you're going to have a few problems:

1. Not playing aggressively enough with strong hands
2. Getting run over by the LAG guy.

I try to make a decision before the flop how I'm going to handle different flops here. You may lose money in the hand doing that, but it beats the hell out of making a bunch of tricky decisions against an unpredictable player. It seems almost like there are a bunch of dark tunnel bets going down here, largely directionless.

I could totally see a LAG player either having the nuts here or representing them and if he's playing properly, the guy is going to take advantage of position, like he has a very strong chance of doing here.

I prefer to make these decisions and get on with my life rather than agonizing over them and especially with ones like this where there is a good amount of uncertainty. Once I see the outcome, I can learn about the player and adjust my game accordingly.