10/20 AQs preflop

[jason_t]

UTG here is 62/5. Behind me are two 30/5s and a 49/19. The blinds are tight. For each of the options fold/call/raise one of Entity/klepto/I think that option is right.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (10 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

Preflop: I am MP1 with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, I

[MarkL444]

how many hands on him?

[PokerBob]

i don't think it really matters all that much, but I think raising may be the worst of the 3 options.

[lil feller]

I call. The 30's especially will c/c along with the 49 with a lot of hands that you have crushed. This is a hand I don't mind playing big pots with, and with the aggressor to your right, you can manipulate the field however you like post flop.

I could also see an argument for folding, depending on how many hands that 62/5 is over. 5% is pretty small, and means that you may very well be dominated by UTG, but even 5% will open light from time to time, even UTG.

I don't like 3 betting, as it gets all the hands you have destroyed to correctly fold, and leaves you heads up (probably) with a hand that might have you destroyed.

lf

[sweetjazz]

I would fold here unless I had reason to think UTG might be the type of player who would limp with AA and/or KK in this spot.

If I thought there was a high likelihood that he would limp with AA and/or KK in this spot, then I would raise if the opponent doesn't go to showdown too often (so in particular has a good chance of folding AK UI at some point in the hand). If he is committed to showdown, then I'd probably prefer to call.

But my default play is to fold here without any reads, assuming you have a fair number of hands on UTG. Even if it is wrong, I doubt it is giving up very much.

[lil feller]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't think it really matters all that much, but I think raising may be the worst of the 3 options.

[/ QUOTE ]

why? I agree with you, but just saying it doesn't help anybody, or help the discussion. Whats your why to go with your what?

lf

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG here is 62/5. Behind me are two 30/5s and a 49/19. The blinds are tight. For each of the options fold/call/raise one of Entity/klepto/I think that option is right.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (10 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

Preflop: I am MP1 with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, I

[/ QUOTE ]

I like making it 3 here. The hand does play quite well multiway and we could try to get some more aggressive players in there that would make a flush a huge win. But, I'd just as soon get HU with the poor player here. And, perhaps another will come along anyway. Would a cap from UTG help define his hand?

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
how many hands on him?

[/ QUOTE ]

100.

[sweetjazz]

Also, some players with 5% PFR raise AA-TT, AK, AQs or whatever it takes to get to 5%. But some players with 5% PFR raise with suited connectors and medium pocket pairs, choosing to slowplay big pairs and wait to see what flops with AK type hands.

That's why having a more detailed read than just stats would be uber helpful.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG here is 62/5. Behind me are two 30/5s and a 49/19. The blinds are tight. For each of the options fold/call/raise one of Entity/klepto/I think that option is right.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (10 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

Preflop: I am MP1 with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, I

[/ QUOTE ]

I like making it 3 here. The hand does play quite well multiway and we could try to get some more aggressive players in there that would make a flush a huge win. But, I'd just as soon get HU with the poor player here. And, perhaps another will come along anyway. Would a cap from UTG help define his hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I suck.

Good thoughts from the others here.

btw sweetjazz. I don't put the go to showdown % on my HUD, looks like this is probably a mistake. It's actually something I've not considered in a spot like this, and I love the thought here.

[sweetjazz]

[ QUOTE ]
btw sweetjazz. I don't put the go to showdown % on my HUD, looks like this is probably a mistake. It's actually something I've not considered in a spot like this, and I love the thought here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's a mistake you should definitely fix, but not so much because of preflop spots like this. The go to showdown % is GREAT for deciding when to make thin value bets or not on the later streets.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
btw sweetjazz. I don't put the go to showdown % on my HUD, looks like this is probably a mistake. It's actually something I've not considered in a spot like this, and I love the thought here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's a mistake you should definitely fix, but not so much because of preflop spots like this. The go to showdown % is GREAT for deciding when to make thin value bets or not on the later streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice. This is exciting. I made a post about this stat probably 5 months ago trying to see how others used it, and I didn't get anything. This makes perfect sense now. I'm always a little slow picking things up in this game.

Since I've not messed with this stat, would you be kind enough to give me a quick example in a river situation where you examine this stat on a player? I'm assuming if the stat is high (I don't know what that # would be), value bets are easier.

Also, after how many hands does this stat start to become semi-reliable and what do you consider high or low? Does it get affected by other stats like AF does with VPIP?

Thanks.

Edit: I just pulled this out of CMI's work he did with winning SS players.

Went to SD %:

Mean: 31.73
Standard Deviation: 3.11
Min: 26.74
Max: 37.99
A one-half standard deviation range about the mean: 30.18-33.29

So, I'm assuming if I see a stat with low 20s or something of that nature, value betting marginals is not as good. Then if I see this stat in the upper 30s, low 40s or something, value betting marginals is a much easier decision. Do I have it right then?

[W. Deranged]

Jason,

I personally think cold-calling here is really sexy.

-Will

[gh9801]

Given the other players who will most likely make this a multiway pot I think you can't fold this. Just calling is probably best, and play well postflop

[sweetjazz]

I use the stat once I have about 100 hands on a person, a little less if they have a high VPIP (because they have had the same number of chances to see a showdown). You can tell what it should be based on looking at your own stats. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Definitely over 30% and under 40%. Where in that range often depends on the limit that is being played and whether the game is short or not. Also, it should theoretically go down a tad if your VPIP is higher (because the extra worse hands you see hit the board strong enough to see a showdown less often). I really go after people who see 45% of showdowns or more. That usually means they call down almost all PPs and any pair no matter how much action there is.

I can't think of any specific examples where I have used the stat (though I know I have done it many times). Maybe this is a decent example, though I am not sure.

A guy limps in and I isoraise him with AK. Flop comes K93 rainbow. He checks, I bet, he calls. Turn is 7 completing the rainbow. He checks, I bet, he raises. Let's say that he's aggressive enough that his raise indicates a set, two pair, or a K with a broadway kicker. Without doing the math, assuming he'll play any K9, 97s, K7s, but no other two pair combinations, I think 3-betting has value here. Against a player who could get away from KT or KJ here, the 3-bet goes down in value. But if the player sees 40% of showdowns, I know he isn't folding to the 3-bet. If the player is tricky and capable of folding here, I would probably just call.

Another common situation is when someone donks a river with what appears to be a weak hand (the action is inconsistent with him having a strong hand). If he sees a lot of showdowns, then I suspect his line is more likely to be bet/call rather than bet/fold, compared to someone who sees less showdowns. So I can raise more marginal hands against this opponent.

It's been about a month since I played any limit hold 'em (outside of a few live 3/6 hands), so I have to apologize for being a bit hazy on good examples. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[QTip]

That's great, thanks.

Holy cow! I've recently lost my db, so I only have 60k hands here in which I've run quite poorly. I've had 2 of my largest downswings in this run and another one at 150bb for a total of 1.07BB/100.

In this stretch my:

wtsd% was 28.86%

W$DS% was 52.47%

fold to river bet % was 54.43%

WOW...I've not looked at this for a while. This certainly looks bad.

[sweetjazz]

Seems like you might have been folding a bit too much there. Depends on the limits you are at. When I run bad, my stats tend to be the opposite. The percentage of showdowns I see stays the same, but my winrate at showdown plummits. I am not sure which is closer to optimal. Seeing less than 30% of showdowns in a medium stakes game could lead to being run over a bit. (At the same time, I think fears about being run over are often exagerrated.) You might also have missed a lot of draws lately, which would partly explain your recent stats.

In my last 20K hands (mostly played in October), I felt like I was playing well and running okay to good. I played mostly 10/20 with a little 15/30 added in, a mix of full and 6max with slighlty more 6max. My cumulative stats were:

Went to SD: 37.63%
Won $ at SD: 53.08%
Folded to river bet: 33.69%

I post these only to give you an idea of some stats that are (hopefully) somewhere in the neighborhood of optimal play (though not necessarily that close).

And, as you no doubt know, thinking about particular hands and situations is the key, and stats will usually work themselves out. But if I had datamined your recent hands and had you seeing less than 30% of showdowns, I'd be semibluffing raising you very liberally on the turn and following through almost always on the river until I saw you showdown a marginal hand.

Good luck at the tables. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[MarkL444]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't think it really matters all that much, but I think raising may be the worst of the 3 options.

[/ QUOTE ]

it does matter. 100 hands is way too small to thinnk about his stats almost at all. he could easily be a 15-20 pfr but just had a somewhat slow 100 hands.

edit- i see now you werent responding to me, but whatev

[goofball]

I raise. Even though he's a 5 you only have 100 hands on him and the 65 is still good times. I'm pretty sure I rasie this almost all the time against almost all of the opponents.

Folding sucks, we have too much hand and hopeully gain way too much postflop to fold. Calling is ok, but not really. First, we don't have initiative, second we put ourselves in a position of having to improve to win the pot, third, we don't have initiative.

I think it's raise, call, fold in that order. Maybe 80/15/5

[BigEndian]

Call/raise depending on previous hands observed/involved with. I would usually just call.

- Jim

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
UTG here is 62/5. Behind me are two 30/5s and a 49/19. The blinds are tight. For each of the options fold/call/raise one of Entity/klepto/I think that option is right.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (10 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

Preflop: I am MP1 with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
<font color="#CC3333">UTG raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, I

[/ QUOTE ]

From the gospel according to astroglide: "I 3-bet an UTG raise with AQs unless I have a reason not to".

[Entity]

With only two marginally loose players and one fairly loose one, I'd prefer coldcalling here to 3-betting. But against an EP raiser that hasn't shown himself to be particularly aggressive (sample size beware, which I don't think Jason mentioned when we chatted about this hand) and without prospects of a big multiway pot with me holding absolute position, I think I fold. We're about 60/40 against his range and in general I don't think, unless we have other observations, he's the sort of player that we can exploit folding equity against (either by 3-betting or by coldcalling and raising flops). Our relative position isn't great for a draw but is great for hand protection, but I'm not sure which flops we're going to be particularly pleased protecting when he leads into us.

The crux of this decision would be how he tends to play postflop, but unknown, I think I fold here.

Rob

[TStoneMBD]

i like fold&gt;call&gt;raise but im openminded.

youre behind his hand range and 3 betting preflop allows him to play close to correctly postflop. he will probably checkcall alot like he should and will probably fold close to as much as he should while sometimes chasing incorrectly.

you also have to account for the times that players behind you have hands that dominate you. its more than just playing HU against this guy. by 3betting youre putting in more money when behind and give him a chance to cap it.

which is why i prefer calling. by investing less money your implied odds go up. i also think coldcalling maximizes your postflop edge against him. he will make more mistakes than if you 3bet. i dont think players coming in behind you is a problem especially if they coldcall with hands that you dominate. the only problem is that if the players behind you are aggressive, when the raiser bets the flop you may have a tough time calling a bet to peel the turn beind sandwiched behind players who might raise and having it comes back 2 more bets to you.

[QTip]

I'm sorry, JT, if this is hijacking a bit.

Sweetjazz:

I played with a friend today on whom I have 700 hands. I checked his wtsd%, and it was 26%. So, I asked him to check his db. It was 31%.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, JT, if this is hijacking a bit.

Sweetjazz:

I played with a friend today on whom I have 700 hands. I checked his wtsd%, and it was 26%. So, I asked him to check his db. It was 31%.

[/ QUOTE ]

WtSD and W$SD both take a long time to converge. VPIP and PFR converge much more quickly in general.

Rob

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, JT, if this is hijacking a bit.

Sweetjazz:

I played with a friend today on whom I have 700 hands. I checked his wtsd%, and it was 26%. So, I asked him to check his db. It was 31%.

[/ QUOTE ]

WtSD and W$SD both take a long time to converge. VPIP and PFR converge much more quickly in general.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I was asking sweetjazz about his yesterday. "How many hands before you start to have confidence in the number." I mean, 600 hands is quite a bit to have on an opponent. Do I really need to wait until I have a couple thousand before I start making decisions based on this #?

[QTip]

It always amazes me how things can be screwy over 100 hands or more.

Yesterday was a perfect example. After I got settled in my start, I check my stats at each table. At this point in time I had played 200 hands at each table.

At one of my tables I was a 12/4 over 200 hands.

At another of my tables I was a 28/18 over 200 hands.

[BigEndian]

I routinely check my stats on tables to see how I'm looking to my opponents.

- Jim

[goofball]

[ QUOTE ]
I routinely check my stats on tables to see how I'm looking to my opponents.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe I should know how to do this.

[BigEndian]

I use PA which allows me to click on my name plate and a pop-up appears that displays my numbers for that table. You can also click on any opponents name plate for the same information. This may be a toggled setting.

- Jim

[Robb]

I might have missed it but where was UTG's hand range listed?

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I routinely check my stats on tables to see how I'm looking to my opponents.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe I should know how to do this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always have to click on the name plate, hold and drag down. You'll need to have 25 hands (or whatever you set) at the table before it works. Also, for some reason, sometimes it won't work at some tables. No idea what that's about.

[toss]

Is anyone worried that the 49/19 will make it 3 bets a fair amount of the time if we coldcalled?

[AceHigh]

If your not sure you should fold. He seems like a tight raiser so I would fold most of the time. One reason I don't like playing is he will probably be able to play correctly against us if he has a pocket pair.

[ErrantNight]

i'd like to cold call... you're definitely in the bottom range of hands UTG raises with here, but you're not a prohibitive underdog. you've got a chance that you'll get a cold-caller, if not more than one behind you. tight blinds or no, the bb may be influenced to come along.

regardless... you have a strong hand that plays well multiway and position on the preflop aggressor.

i'd rather fold than raise, but i think it's close.

i don't like raising because villain is tight enough and your position is poor enough that you're going to end up in some uncomfortable positions a fair portion of the time. as for folding... you have the advantage of position and the advantage that you're not a moron... but you're in the bottom range of villain's raising hands and i don't think you're giving up a lot, if anything, by making this fold.

[ErrantNight]

5% pfr not enough?

[ErrantNight]

not particularly.

49/19 doesn't mean his 3-betting range is huge.

a 3-bet doesn't mean we're in trouble, and may spook UTG enough to occasionally get him to fold a hand improperly later (assuming action).

if we flop nicely and end up with a decent hand, we'll be able to punish everyone accordingly.

[sweetjazz]

I agree that the stat takes a while to converge, but it can still be useful by 100 hands. Say I sit down on a table against someone in my buddy list and when his PT stats come up, I have 100 hands on him. Now I don't remember anything from those 100 hands. I look and see that he went to showdown 44% of the time. I don't have time to go back through all the hands and see what he has showndown, but I make a mental note to watch what he is showing down. Six hands later, he calls down a preflop raiser who bets all three streets with 98s after the flop came A94 rainbow. Now I know to value bet this guy relentlessly.

How did the stats come in handy? It had me consciously thinking to check what this guy is showing down. I might have made the same read without the stats, but I also might have been distracted by focusing on what the PFR had (which I also use to make a read) in the hand and not noticed villain's hand (or not realized his call-down was especially bad given the way the hand played out).

BTW, suppose you are acting last on the river and you somehow knew that the point at which value-betting and checking behind have the same EV is against a villain who sees 40% of showdowns. (Against someone who sees more showdowns, value-betting is better because you beat the extra hands, while against a tighter player checking behind is better because he would have already folded some of the worst hands you beat.) If you always look at how often he has gone to showdown in your database (say you have 200 hands on him), you will do better in the long run than by just guessing (assume for the sake of discussion that the average went to showdown amount is 40%). Of course, you will sometimes get 1000 more hands on the villain and realize that you would have made the opposite decision because his updated showdown % is different than what it was after 200 hands.

The point where it would be a mistake is if the value bet only works if someone sees 50% or more of showdowns and the guy has a 52% went to showdown after a small sample of hands. Then, it may very well be more likely that he sees less than 50% of showdowns but has skewed stats because of the sample size than that his true long-term went to showdown % is at least 50.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd like to cold call... you're definitely in the bottom range of hands UTG raises with here, but you're not a prohibitive underdog. you've got a chance that you'll get a cold-caller, if not more than one behind you. tight blinds or no, the bb may be influenced to come along.

regardless... you have a strong hand that plays well multiway and position on the preflop aggressor.

i'd rather fold than raise, but i think it's close.

i don't like raising because villain is tight enough and your position is poor enough that you're going to end up in some uncomfortable positions a fair portion of the time. as for folding... you have the advantage of position and the advantage that you're not a moron... but you're in the bottom range of villain's raising hands and i don't think you're giving up a lot, if anything, by making this fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't like the idea that we're saying we're at the bottom of his range. I think this is along the lines of the egotistical falacy.

Someone playing 60% of the hands is apparently oblivious to fundamental values of starting hands. I've seen people limp with AKo UTG, but raise A3s UTG. They like to be sooted. It makes sense to them.

I'm just saying that to assume that because we have 60/5 over 100 hands doesn't mean a lot. And it certainly doesn't mean that the 5% of hands he's raising is the 5% of hands that we think it is.

I guess I do like a call here better, but I certainly like a 3 bet before a fold.

[ErrantNight]

the fact that he might play a messed up 5% doesn't convince me

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
the fact that he might play a messed up 5% doesn't convince me

[/ QUOTE ]

These combines factors convince me:

1. This is only 100 hands.
2. His 5% can be messed up.
3. He sucks at poker.

I'm not ready to muck this hand to this player. Especially with the other players in this game.

[MarkL444]

[ QUOTE ]
These combines factors convince me:

1. This is only 100 hands.
2. His 5% can be messed up.
3. He sucks at poker.

I'm not ready to muck this hand to this player. Especially with the other players in this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is my view exactly. if we had a million hands and knew for SURE his PFR in a full game was 5, the i fold

[Shillx]

My UTG PFR is about 75% of what my total PFR is. I have no idea what the average UTG PFR/PFR is, but it is certainly &lt;100%. Probably by a significant amount. If this guy really is a 5% PFR (it seems silly to debate if he is or not, it is what we have so let's go with it) we figure to be anywhere from a 2:1 to a 3:2 underdog. Obviously these figures aren't the end all at a LHE table, but going in as a 2:1 dog seems to be too much to overcome vs someone who we probably have little folding equity against.

If push came to shove and you just had to see a flop, I would certainly not reraise here. Call and hope more people come into the pot. If you can get a few more coldcallers, your equity will creep back toward a number that you can hopefully overcome.

Brad

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
My UTG PFR is about 75% of what my total PFR is. I have no idea what the average UTG PFR/PFR is, but it is certainly &lt;100%. Probably by a significant amount. If this guy really is a 5% PFR (it seems silly to debate if he is or not, it is what we have so let's go with it) we figure to be anywhere from a 2:1 to a 3:2 underdog. Obviously these figures aren't the end all at a LHE table, but going in as a 2:1 dog seems to be too much to overcome vs someone who we probably have little folding equity against.

If push came to shove and you just had to see a flop, I would certainly not reraise here. Call and hope more people come into the pot. If you can get a few more coldcallers, your equity will creep back toward a number that you can hopefully overcome.

Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, we're assuming his range changes with position. For someone playing 60 out of a 100 hands, I'm not sure that's a good assumption.

[ErrantNight]

if you'd rather raise than fold, fine, i can see that. in fact, i said in my original post that i thought those two were pretty close.

but i think calling is clearly better.

edited to add: ok maybe not CLEARLY better, but i still think it's better.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the fact that he might play a messed up 5% doesn't convince me

[/ QUOTE ]

These combines factors convince me:

1. This is only 100 hands.
2. His 5% can be messed up.
3. He sucks at poker.

I'm not ready to muck this hand to this player. Especially with the other players in this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're letting your ego decide your play rather than fully considering the situation. Yes, he sucks at poker -- in general this is going to mean calling down more than folding improperly, especially in the hands of a 60/5 unknown. That diminishes our folding equity. We have no evidence whatsoever to support that he is raising A3s or 75s rather than what is, in general, the top ~4-5% of his hands here nor do we have any guaranteed dead money in the pot to subsidize our call.

There are a lot of factors that could normally swing me to 3-bet this, or to coldcall with it, but none of them are here right now.

Given how much of a dog we are against a standard ~4-5% PFR (that's all we have to go on) and with no knowledge of the action behind us, even with a postflop skill edge I'm not happy tangling here.

Just to satisfy my curiousity, I ran an equity sim on AQs here versus one random hand (BB), one coldcalling top 40% hand (loose player behind us), PFR's range, and our AQs. We have exactly "fair share" in that situation. PFR's range of hands really prevents us from ever really having a huge edge preflop (against the field; we're a HUGE dog HU to his range), and we'd need quite a large field to help guarantee that we can realize our postflop edge when it comes down to it.

I'm siding with John Feeney on this one. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Rob

[thejameser]

i like a call and pray for spades. a 3 bet seems spewy to me. you can psychologically get away easier, you are usually behind, and there are several still to act. against a 10/20 Lag I would call. i don't mind inviting others in because my hand plays well mulitway. creating a monster pot that may be capped pf would allow any hand to properly draw. we have just a strong enough holding to call, and besides that for me, it is closer to a fold than a 3 bet. closer to a fold because i have reservations about a possible reraise behind me.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
i like a call and pray for spades. a 3 bet seems spewy to me. you can psychologically get away easier, you are usually behind, and there are several still to act. against a 10/20 Lag I would call. i don't mind inviting others in because my hand plays well mulitway. creating a monster pot that may be capped pf would allow any hand to properly draw. we have just a strong enough holding to call, and besides that for me, it is closer to a fold than a 3 bet. closer to a fold because i have reservations about a possible reraise behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate any line preflop which requires me to hope for cards to come, or to hope for cards not to come, or to hope at all.

This is partly toungue-in-cheek but mostly honest.

Rob

[thejameser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like a call and pray for spades. a 3 bet seems spewy to me. you can psychologically get away easier, you are usually behind, and there are several still to act. against a 10/20 Lag I would call. i don't mind inviting others in because my hand plays well mulitway. creating a monster pot that may be capped pf would allow any hand to properly draw. we have just a strong enough holding to call, and besides that for me, it is closer to a fold than a 3 bet. closer to a fold because i have reservations about a possible reraise behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate any line preflop which requires me to hope for cards to come, or to hope for cards not to come, or to hope at all.

This is partly toungue-in-cheek but mostly honest.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

i was being facetious, i don't hope for anything when i play a hand. my only desire is to play it appropriately given the circumstances.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like a call and pray for spades. a 3 bet seems spewy to me. you can psychologically get away easier, you are usually behind, and there are several still to act. against a 10/20 Lag I would call. i don't mind inviting others in because my hand plays well mulitway. creating a monster pot that may be capped pf would allow any hand to properly draw. we have just a strong enough holding to call, and besides that for me, it is closer to a fold than a 3 bet. closer to a fold because i have reservations about a possible reraise behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate any line preflop which requires me to hope for cards to come, or to hope for cards not to come, or to hope at all.

This is partly toungue-in-cheek but mostly honest.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

i was being facetious, i don't hope for anything when i play a hand. my only desire is to play it appropriately given the circumstances.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand, but I was attempting to underscore the fact that when we coldcall with AQs against a currently-unknown 5% PFR, we have to hope for a few things, don't we?

Rob

[thejameser]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like a call and pray for spades. a 3 bet seems spewy to me. you can psychologically get away easier, you are usually behind, and there are several still to act. against a 10/20 Lag I would call. i don't mind inviting others in because my hand plays well mulitway. creating a monster pot that may be capped pf would allow any hand to properly draw. we have just a strong enough holding to call, and besides that for me, it is closer to a fold than a 3 bet. closer to a fold because i have reservations about a possible reraise behind me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate any line preflop which requires me to hope for cards to come, or to hope for cards not to come, or to hope at all.

This is partly toungue-in-cheek but mostly honest.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

i was being facetious, i don't hope for anything when i play a hand. my only desire is to play it appropriately given the circumstances.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand, but I was attempting to underscore the fact that when we coldcall with AQs against a currently-unknown 5% PFR, we have to hope for a few things, don't we?

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

which is why this is closer to a fold than a 3 bet IMO. the only reason i said call was due to the apparent crappiness of those involved/potentially involved. if he was 12/5 i would automuck.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]


I'm siding with John Feeney on this one. /images/graemlins/smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

John Feeney refers to AQo.

[QTip]

Are you referring to the AQ test essay? Cuz I think that centers on AQo, not AQs. Maybe I'm off somewhere here.

My ego? You mean when I think about me vs. a 60 vpip I guess.

I don't know where else to go with this I guess. I just look for every opportunity to get involved in hands with very poor players. Mucking this makes me feel dirty. Perhaps I'm imagining things here or whatever...

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I'm siding with John Feeney on this one. /images/graemlins/smile.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

John Feeney refers to AQo.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, but suitedness primarily makes a difference in multiway pots which you have no guarantee of. Just a bit of hope.

If you had very very loose players behind you who all played badly or you had a better read on this guy's postflop tendencies it could be a really easy coldcall or perhaps even a really easy 3-bet. And I don't really hate any option you choose here, but until I know what I'm up against, I prefer to fold.

Rob