Completing the SB

[Spicymoose]

67/0/.6 Button over 50 hands open limps. BB is a 23/17/4 TAG after 50 hands.

I have J4s in the SB in a 1/2 blind structure.

My plan is to complete/fold.

Good?

If not, how low do you go?
If so, how low do you go?

[Zele]

I like the plan. Off the top of my head, I'd complete down to Txs, 96s, all suited 1-gappers down to 53s, all suited connectors except 32s. As for unsuited cards, Q8+, J7+, T7+, 97+, 86+, connectors down to 54.

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the plan. Off the top of my head, I'd complete down to Txs, 96s, all suited 1-gappers down to 53s, all suited connectors except 32s. As for unsuited cards, Q8+, J7+, T7+, 97+, 86+, connectors down to 54.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your range is way too loose. First of all, what do you see as the difference between 32s and 42s is here? Second of all, while J4s has 32% equity against 2 random hands, 54o only has 25%, and 54s only has 29%. I am not sure what all this means, but J4s is good not only because of its suitedness, but also because of its highcardness, and the fact that since our opponents limped and checked, that high card has a decent chance of being good if it hits.

I would hesitate to complete vs that BB. Its quite likely he would raise imo. I need around 76s,97s,109 to complete there. Vs a passive BB Im completing any suited cards.

[stoxtrader]

well, what is the difference between any 1 pip hands?

42s vs 32s specifically; 42s makes more straights and gets counterfeited less.

you have to draw the line somewhere, the trick is deciding where and why.

I think the range is pretty good - without looking at it too closely.

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
I would hesitate to complete vs that BB. Its quite likely he would raise imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you say "quite likely", what percentage of the time would you estimate that this is?

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]

I think your range is way too loose. First of all, what do you see as the difference between 32s and 42s is here? Second of all, while J4s has 32% equity against 2 random hands, 54o only has 25%, and 54s only has 29%. I am not sure what all this means, but J4s is good not only because of its suitedness, but also because of its highcardness, and the fact that since our opponents limped and checked, that high card has a decent chance of being good if it hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Not much, but you have to draw the line somewhere, and the marginal differences only decrease the lower you get. Anyway, I wouldn't complete either of those hands.

2) Hot-and cold analysis has even less than normal value out-of-position in an uncontested pot. 76s and T6o both have roughly 32% equity against 2 random, but I'd much rather have 76s.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would hesitate to complete vs that BB. Its quite likely he would raise imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you say "quite likely", what percentage of the time would you estimate that this is?

[/ QUOTE ]
10%, maybe I overestimated the effect it has on the limping hands.

[Zele]

For a unknown TAG, I'd say a liberal range would be Axs, A8o+, K9s+, KTo+, Q9s+, QTo+, 98s+, and all pairs. That works out to 22% of the time [somebody check my math, I almost always double-count something.]

So it happens, but particularly given our option to fold our worse hands to a raise, I don't find that number to be large enough to tighten up significantly.

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
For a unknown TAG, I'd say a liberal range would be Axs, A8o+, K9s+, KTo+, Q9s+, QTo+, 98s+, and all pairs. That works out to 22% of the time [somebody check my math, I almost always double-count something.]

So it happens, but particularly given our option to fold our worse hands to a raise, I don't find that number to be large enough to tighten up significantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

That range looks pretty LAGGY to me. I guess my read isn't too solid, but I think more often then not, the range is a bit smaller then this. Specifically with the low PPs, stuff like 98s, A2s.

[ QUOTE ]
For a unknown TAG, I'd say a liberal range would be Axs, A8o+, K9s+, KTo+, Q9s+, QTo+, 98s+, and all pairs. That works out to 22% of the time [somebody check my math, I almost always double-count something.]

So it happens, but particularly given our option to fold our worse hands to a raise, I don't find that number to be large enough to tighten up significantly.

[/ QUOTE ]
He isnt raising so many hands with 17pfr. I would say 77,K9s,A8s,KQ,AJ,Q10s is more resonable which is 11% of the hands.

[Zele]

Agreed, I meant this as more of an upper bound, and my point was that even with this range we're not all that worried.

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed, I meant this as more of an upper bound, and my point was that even with this range we're not all that worried.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you mean that you are completing with 107o and folding to a raise? I can see not folding, come to think about it, since we arent really dominated by any cards BB raises. I got to think about this more. Seems like we can complete pretty much everything excepted unsuited trash. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Zele]

It's dangerous to think of him as 17pfr. First of all, this is only over 50 hands, so we should at least call him 17+/-4 pfr. Second, raising two limpers from the BB, including one very desirable opponent and one that might fold for an extra bet, is a very different situation than, say, opening UTG.

The only mental label I'd feel comfortable using for the guy at this point would be "TAGish."