My first 20/40 game: KQ suited

The highest I usually play 10/20 and I'm a little nervous.


Here's the deal:


I pick up Kc Qc in middle position. One limp and one raise before it gets to me. Raiser is aggressive and a little on the loose side. I call along with one other person behind me. Big blind calls and we are 5 handed.


Flop: Kd 10c 3c


To my suprise, it gets checked around to me when the preflop raiser passes. I bet, get 3 calls, and the PF raiser check raises me. I'm not sure what to think of this, as I have seen him check raise AA or AK in a multiway pot like this as well as drawing hands. Since there is $320 in the middle right now, I decide to try to knock some people out and make it 3 bets. The person behind me folds as well as the pre-flop limper. The BB and preflop raiser call.


Turn: 4s


Both players check to me, I bet, they call.


River: My dream card the Ac.


Preflop raiser bets, I raise (I think my hands were shaking a little bit). BB folds and Preflop raiser reluctantly calls. I show him the nuts. He mucks without showing and makes some comment about me getting lucky.


I'm not sure if he was just saying that or if I really did draw out but do you think I overplayed this hand and got lucky?

FWIW I would have 3bet an overaggressive preflop raiser in that spot to narrow the field, but I don't think that calling is wrong. After the flop, I think you played it perfectly.


Clark

No, I don't think you overplayed your hand. As for luck, it is the residue of design.


Preflop, calling a raise, even from a loose raiser, with a bunch of players still to act behind you, is risky. All the more so if the loose raiser is also aggressive, since this means it's going to cost you a lot to draw to your hand. I can make a case for folding pre-flop, and also for re-raising. And also for calling.


I like your flop play. You're not just raising to necessarily knock other players out, but to build the pot when A) you may already have the best hand, and B) you can make a monster with your flush draw. It also allows you the luxury of a free card should you so desire on the turn, since it knocks out the player behind you and gets them to check to you on the turn.


On the turn, when they check to you, you bet and they both just call. So far so good.


On the river, the Ace probably helped the pre-flop raiser (perhaps he had QJ or a poorly played AK) . So I like your raise because I think there's a better chance of him calling the raise than the third player overcalling if you just call.


Nice pot, well played. When he said you got lucky, the proper respone was either to say nothing, or to seem humble and agree with him. Then stack the chips.


As to your hands shaking when you made the nuts, you can use this tell for other people: shaking hands generally mean a big hand, not a nervous bluff.

Your preflop play was a mistake. You are facing an early position player who raised an early limper. This is no place to call two bets cold with KQs. It sounds like a fairly loose 20-40 game, but still, there's not too many flops that will make you feel confident with your hand. You got just about the best flop you could hope for and you STILL weren't in love with your hand until the river.


Once the flop comes, you did everything right.


natedogg

If you are in mid or late position facing an Early Position Raise with KQs or KQ off, do you raise or fold? I tend to 3 bet, and I sometimes think laying it down would be better. Or is it situational? It seems at 10-20 I always end up staring at AK.


Jeff

EP raisers (esp under the gun) generally mean business. Dump KQ unless the guy's totally crazy. KQs can be played if many people are in or if you can get it heads up (with a 3 bet). I suppose from very late position (button or one off), KQo can be 3 bet to get it heads up, but you still have to be careful of big pairs or AK. Even in a heads-up, you don't have an Ace in your hand, which diminishes the strength a lot in a heads up situation. Folding cannot be too bad in any event, and if it's easier on your stomach, you're probably not costing yourself much if anything.

I'd always fold KQo. With KQs, I'd never reraise unless the player was a very loose raiser. If the game is very loose (i.e., I can expect at least five callers to see the flop) I will call the raise and hope to flop a monster or monster draw. Otherwise, I'd drop.

I don't think you overplayed it. It would be hard to slow me down on this flop. I think checking the turn can be considered, but it would have to be against two very specific opponent types. Even then, it would be hard to take my foot off the gas. If you're raised it's not a disaster, since you still figure to have outs.


As to getting lucky.. Lee Trevino once said, "The harder I work on my game, the luckier I get!" Don't feel bad about it.

Jeff-


I think almost any decision in poker is situational. I like what andy fox had to say. A case can be made for all 3 options )fold, call, or re-raise). It depends on the initial raiser, the texture of the game, and the players types and their tendecies acting after you. Also KQs plays better multi-way than KQo. IMO-

There is one problem with folding hands like KQs to a raise. Observant players will know that if the flop comes Axx, Kxx, Qxx, you simply cannot have hit that flop. They would know that you would always three bet or fold big cards preflop.


Some may "poo-poo" (sp?) this drawback to always folding KQs but I really think that it's not something that should be dismissed lightly in a *tough* game. I say that becaue I knew a couple of on-line players who clearly fell into the category of never calling a preflop raise with trap hands even when suited. Now, they may still raise me on the Qxx flop (after I raised preflop) because (a) they caught something else like a draw or (b) because they are just trying o take the pot away from me. But if I know that they simply can't have top pair, it makes it that much easier to resteal on later streets.


Now, in most games, this drawback simply does not matter very much and folding KQs in this situation is arguably correct.

I must admit, I hadn't seen a hand in a while and boredom might have played a factor into my pre-flop call. Even so, I don't think it was a bad decision because:


a)The pre-flop limper was a fairly predictable player. He usually raised with any AQ or higher, even in early position. I wasn't overly concered with him. I'm guessing he had a small/medium pocket pair, tried to take one off on the flop, and folded when I reraised and made it two small bets back to him.


b)The pre-flop raiser was directly to my right. He liked to raise pre-flop with a lot of hands from pocket 8s to J 10 suited. I don't think a call against this type of player is a big mistake. I'm guessing he had QJ from his check/call on the turn and bet on the river when the Ace high straight got there.


I was worried about the guy behind me. Thankfully, he folded when I 3 bet the flop.


Alex

You played this hand very good from the flop on. I still be tthe turn becaus ethe raiser would have likely 4 bet the flop and lead out if he had a big hand. Even if he's playing strangely and does have you and check raiser you still have outs. The river you should raise hope the other guy can call and really hope the raiser repops it.


The only question is preflop. Generally you are better off mucking KQ to a early position raise. Suited plays a little better. In this particular situation being suited and loose raiser I think a call is ok. KQ off i would still muck. Even suited I might muck because not only could he have a dominated hand to you but there are players behind you that might as well.

Those are good points, skp. In a typical game, there's very little reason to be concerned about that.


I have one question about the point you made. If the game is so tough that you need to be worred about your opponent KNOWING you didn't hit the flop, then isn't this game so tough that you'll mostly either 3-bet and early raiser or fold?


Against a player who is really tough, tricky aggressive, I don't like to call period. KQs CAN be a 3-betting hand against them, but I would either fold or raise, never call. That way they can't ever be sure that a Q high flop missed you, but you also have the initiative and position.


Against a tough player, I would 3 bet with any hand I intended to play against his early position raise.


Are there situations where you would want to just call? And are they common enough to really worry about? I would love to hear some comments about this as I'm spending time lately thinking about proper play vs. VERY tough games/opponents.


(by the way, we all get an F for game selection if we're in this game... lol)


natedogg

"I have one question about the point you made. If the game is so tough that you need to be worred about your opponent KNOWING you didn't hit the flop, then isn't this game so tough that you'll mostly either 3-bet and early raiser or fold?"


Good point. Although I think the situation here is different in that you have an early limper and then an early raiser. If you can count on one or both players to also come in, you have an "okay" situation with your KQs in the multiway sense of hitting a big draw. But ya, your point in general is well taken.

Alex,


I haven't read the other responses yet, but I would likely play the hand the same way. If you don't improve on the river and (in this case)your opponent doesn't enough to suddenly bet out, you can check if you still think that you are up against AA or AK. Betting the turn costs the same as checking and having to call the river. If you get check-raised on the turn and miss you can safely muck...same price as if a blank comes and you are faced w/ calling a bet which you almost certainly should do.


Just my opinion,


Mike

You can be the Lone Ranger, Alex but, I'm with you,


I can't believe so many people are mucking KQs...are my games THAT good? I'm also going to muck KQo, I don't even like trying to isolate a late position raiser w/ this hand, suited or not(though I will sometimes when not and almost always when suited). But KQs?!! This is a BIG drawing hand. The reason is that if you flop anything there are other ways to win the hand. Top pair may be good and backdoor draws may also. It just seems criminal to me to muck this for two bets especially for a loose raiser, do some of you also muck, what, let's see, A-Js for a raise(no I won't play this hand very often for two bets off-suit either)? Also, I would almost never 3-bet in this spot, this hand begs for a lot of players(dominating hands won't fold for three bets anyway), it's pretty bad policy to try to "isolate" an early position raiser (or most others)w/out atleast an ace and again (I can't reiterate this enough)I WANT a big field for this hand. If you guys flop only top pair w/ no other draw and think its beaten you can't lay it down? Might as well not play anything but AA if there's a raise and even that you gotta muck sometimes.


(Maniac?)Mike

"I can't believe so many people are mucking KQs..."


I'm not!


I prefer reraising over calling preflop because that's about the only way I have a chance of winning without hitting. Let's say it comes down to three-handed, with the limper and the raiser, and me in last seat. Sweet! If the flop comes an ace, I'll likely win the pot if the raiser had a pocket pair and the limper doesn't have an ace, two very reasonable expectations. If the flop comes with a king or a queen, it's very unlikely the limper has a better kicker, and it should be fairly easy to get out of the hand for three-small-bets max if the raiser has me outkicked.


If the flop has two big cards, I really like my chances of getting out cheap with a losing one-pair hand, and I really like being in last seat with a straight draw if that's what flops.


The card I really hope to hit is a queen so that the raiser will payoff with his underpair in the hope that I have AK, and (or) the limper will payoff with QJ or Q-10, two typical limpy hands. These are surgical hopes, no doubt, but they happen.


Tommy

Hey Tommy,


Thanks (not that you need it) for not leavin' me hangin' about the KQs. Even with only two opponents I don't like havin' to push (even from late position) with the ace high flop, especially w/ no other outs. It's not that unlikely for one of the opponents to just let me keep betting (I believe I have a very tough image) and calling w/ A-Q,A-J or a big pocket pair, unless I get check-raised on the flop, I don't always know if another bet will just cost me more or win the pot; if I check the turn and make a pair on the river, again I have a tough decision--usually have to call depending on bettor, but this may be a situation of setting MYSELF up to make a second best hand. Anyway, that's why I don't like three-betting the early pos. raiser; I'd still rather call and hope to induce other calls for a big pot if I flop or make a monster--and it's a pretty cheap escape if I miss. While I adhere to the practice of playing hands strongly when I play them, I've recently learned that it's OK to back off a little sometimes--it was costing me to much pushing marginal hands(different hands in different types of games) i.e. 8-8 with an over card and a couple of passive callers. This seems like one of those hands that for ME, atleast, it's better to pull than push. Don't get me wrong, I will usually make the first raise with this hand (except when first in from early position for reasons already mentioned), I just don't like the 3-bet, except to isolate steal-type raises. Again, this just seems to be a good spot for me to ease-up on, what I hope is, my relentlessly agressive game; if it works for you--more power, baby!


By the way, in an unraised pot w/ KQ, I'd rather flop the K as it's pretty unlikely that someone limped with AK but a little more likely that a limper could have AQ. In the situation that you discussed(after 3-betting) I think I'd still rather flop the K now you can beat QQ and AQ; like you said, it's pretty surgical, but hey one more hand you can out-flop(QQ that is, AK and AQ cancel out) is one more hand-it's not like it never comes up.


I'll shut up for now,


Mike

Mike-


You make very valid points. Hope you don't mind my picking your brain a little.. I assume you will still make it 3 bets at times with KQs and even QJs in multi-way pots and even once in a while against legitimate raises? Not a lot, but enough to where you're not just making it 3 bets with AKs and your big pairs... Otherwise, aren't you giving up too much against the better players when you do make it 3 bets? In my games this is almost never necessary. But in games like yours which can have more than a few tough players, isn't this sometimes necessary? Thanks.


Kevin

Mike why do you feel its criminal to muck this hand. Because it looks pretty? I agree playing the hand in this situation with the loose raiser. And i like the way you would play it. But you said its criminal to muck, especially against a loose raiser. I take that to mean that you call with this hand agaisnt solid players too. If your not getting the odds to draw then why play this hand against someone who may have you dominated? You would muck KQ off but not suited. The suited only has a litle extra value. Would you call with Axs, QJs, J10s, 910s in pots that you weren't getting the odds to draw with? By the way the 910s would be the best hand to take up agianst the solid player becuse its the least likely to be tied onto his hand.

Kevin,


Yes, I will sometimes make it 3-bets with the hands you asked about, not often and more often against better players on whom the play will have some effect when it works and sometimes when it doesn't. I didn't mean to imply that I never make this play but the hand in question referred to a loose raiser who may get a lot of action and with KQs I welcome the action. While my games tend to be a little tougher than your games there's almost always a few if not a lot of goofballs who are itchin' to play raised pots (sometimes seemingly w/ hands that they might not even play for only one bet) and if I can help them come in by CALLING w/ KQs, not reraising or folding, I can, I believe, maximize my expectation for this hand.


I'm home, exhausted, starving, just got a pizza delivered and I'm gonna go eat it. See ya later,


Mike

Mike,


Can I come over to get a slice? I'll kill the light on the way out. Like that Roy West guy always says in cardplayer.(check roy west's articles in cardplayer if you don't get it)

pokerguy,


I can't think of too many situations in which I won't call only two bets with this hand, probably only if facing two bets from a very solid and very tight raise and reraise if I've limped or am in the BB. I tend to try to play slightly on the loose side of very tight. I hate to bring S&M's hand groupings up--I realize that even they are disdainful of people who want to bring up hand-groups to validate their play; but KQs is not a Group 2 (albiet the weakest, especially head-up) hand for nothing. I know the approximate odds of making a flush and realize what little value being suited is in general but in this case I believe there is a synergistic value in suitedness, the rank of the cards combined with their connectedness and suitedness (please forgive my liberties with grammer) create many opportunities to win a hand even against one that dominates it. If you flop only a straight or flush draw you might back into the other or a pair, two pair or trips; if you flop a pair you may back into a straight or flush. It occurs to me that if I knew I was going to be playing this hand head-up against a very solid, tight player I might not love it...but if I'm calling his early position raise there is a decent chance of drawing others in for a big pot and if the raise is coming from mid to late position--well, if others have limped, I have my volume and if no one has limped then a "solid" player is likely to be raising on a wider range of hands, some of which I DOMINATE (i.e. KJs and QJs).


I'm not always married to this hand after the flop(even if a flop a pair or two) and can muck it if I believe that I'm in trouble. Yes, these situations can be expensive, but its expensive to get any big hand beat. The other hands that you mentioned are not Group 2 hands (again with the hand groups) they range from 3 to 5 if I remember correctly (I'm not going to look it up) and I will rarely be the first or second cold-caller with any of these hands, I will, however, atleast call most "solid" players' raises w/ A-Q a "Group 3(?)" hand. After reading Feeney about this hand I asked the tightest winning player(a.k.a. mannequin, drugstore wooden indian, dead-seat, etc.) I know about this hand and even he could only think of one or two players that it might be wrong against, I believe he'd agree with me about KQs, but maybe I'm wrong, I'll ask him (not that that should make any difference to you but it would for me). As to the other suited-connectors, if or when I'm playin'em I'd prefer them to be higher rather than lower head-up...QJs is not dominated by 10-10; 10-9s is.


As a rule I'd rather 3-bet a raiser if I'm next in but there are certain situations which dictate otherwise and I believe that this is one of them. I believe that at the very worst this hand won't too often be taking so much the worst of it as to make it unplayable even against the most "solid" players and it is made up for by the times I cold-call (rather than three-bet) with medium pocket pairs, flop a set and get big action (starting on the flop) from a big pocket pair or top pair top kicker. To bring up another very respected authority(certainly by me atleast), Mike Caro often encourages "gamblin' it up" with $0 EV hands to get better action on good hands. I can't believe that this hand could possibly have any worse than a zero long run EV under these circumstances. For players who don't play well after the flop (and I am not at all trying to imply that you don't) maybe this hand can be trouble; if I don't play as well as I think I do then I guess the last laugh is on me.


Again, I realize that calling on S&M's hand groupings can be considered very amaturish even by them, but their validity is undeniable. David and Mason have probably been very well and very deservedly compensated for all their work and I for one could probably have never become a professional poker player without having been "taught" by them how much thought and information and discipline etc is required to be successful. If you happen to read this, guys, I humbly thank you. I hope that I was able to do justice in explaining the value of this hand.


I'll shut up now, again,


Mike

pokerguy,


Of course I get it. Come get a slice, Harrah's East Chicago, Indiana. The rake's high ($5) but the action is usually great, especially at night. If you come introduce yourself, I'll be the guy in the sunglasses(duh!) in the 20-40 main game, often the 8-seat, unless there's a better seat or I'm playin' 30-60 omaha/stud/8 (also a great game) or tryin' to work my way into 50-100 HOSE(also a good game but I'm still not comfortable with the stakes or my skills in 0SE for those stakes).


Mike

I play professionally also and I find it not to be easy to let KQ go in a short handed pot if I flop a K or Q. Sure there are times but more often than not its hard to let go. And if its good you probably don't make much in the long run because if your hand is good means that they can't have a good enough hand to continue a decent amount of the time. If your against a solid player like we're describing he will not pay off when your hand is good for the most part. Less often than you have to pay him off at least. My point is why get involved with a solid player with hand that may be dominated. Not worth it imo. Same with AQ, They are both close calls, but what out weighs it for me is why get involved with good players with hands that may be dominated. Wait i'm online right now with KQs.... I won. For real. That was a coincidence. Okay now I love that hand lol.

I live in vegas. A bit of a trip. I play 15-30 and occaisonally 30-60 when the games are good at the bellagio. What's great about the 15-30's is that there are always multiple games to choose from so you can always find a good game.


But i'd still like a slice maybe you can fed ex it to the bellagio.

pokerguy,


I respect what you're sayin' and will think about it some more but I still think at worst these hands are about zero EV and don't mind enhancing my image by playing these "weak" hands (like the fish know the difference anyway). I do like the KQs more than AQo against better players for it's deceptive value, AQ being a more likely hand. Well I think I'm finally out of breath on this subject--glad you won with the KQs, that's funny.


Good Luck,


Mike

Haven't been to Vegas for quite a while, buddy of mine just bought a house out there... Joel: shaved head, goatee plays bigger than us...no comment on his game. I'll probably get out there sometime soon so maybe you'll get a shot at my cold-callin' with AQ and KQs loose-ass, just kidding. I suppose if you get my name or meet Joel, see me with him and put two plus two (pun intended, sorry) together you might have the advantage on me if you don't introduce yourself, that'd be OK, if unneighborly, guess I'll have to win my money against everyone else, I suspect that'd be the case anyway.


Take it easy,


Mike

Mike,


Sorry buddy but showing KQs is not gonna cut it if you want players to see you as the fish lol. I'm sure that's a premium hand to most other players in the game especially the actual fish. Try it with 72 off and you might get a few looks. lol.


By the way I respect what your saying as well. And I'm sure you play the hand very good post flop so I think maybe you can get away with it. Maybe!

Oh baby! Easy money coming to town. I can't wait. lol. If I recognize you I'll probably say hi. Unless you put a bad beat on me. That's why I don't use my name on here. I don't want people I play with everyday to know what I'm thinking.

pokerguy,


Fair enough, I'll let you keep the last word on the other thread 'cuz I'm such a magnanimous guy, lol.


Mike

"After reading Feeney about this hand I asked the tightest winning player(a.k.a. mannequin, drugstore wooden indian, dead-seat, etc.) I know about this hand and even he could only think of one or two players that it might be wrong against,"


If I understand, this tight guy is saying you should usually play AQ versus a solid early raise. But look at your description of him. He doesn't sound like someone who really plays that well. And that likely has at least something to do with not understanding the game quite as well as he should. I'm not sure he's the best choice for advice. Just as another comparison, you might want to read Sklansky and Malmuth on the same topic in HPFAP-21. You might also look up what Abdul has written on it here and on rgp. You may find yourself convinced Feeney is right.


Those who doubt the observation which underlies the AQ test [1] might benefit from thinking seriously about the nature of playing against raises in front of you. What hands will the raiser raise with? What hands should you therefore call or reraise with, and why? Sklansky has written some relevant essays. Also, consider what Mason has written about the differences between hold'em and lowball, and why the lowball champs did not typically make a successful transition to hold'em.


[1] Note that the test itself is the topic of the essay. But reaction to the essay tells me that the test is probably much more selective than I had previously guessed.

John,


I definately appreciate YOUR input (hope I'm not being too obsequious), not to minimize the input of others, including pokerguy. I respect your opinion and miss being able to read you in the periodicals.


After reading ITPM, I can now let go of AQ for two bets against some opponents, where I routinely played it before. I've been playing for about four yrs, two and a half professionally. In the beginning, for me, it was a long, hard struggle developing the discipline and putting enough of the right thought into the game to play "well." I suppose that I'm fortunate to be playing in Chicago where there are few very good players and alot of loose action. I know that I was "getting away with" playing less than "very solid" for a long time. Still, periods of "running bad" and a dedication to always try to learn and refine my game have "forced" me to continue to improve. I believe that the fact that myself and the player to whom I referred do not feel that we are much the worst for calling (or reraising) w/ AQ may be function of the softness of out games. Of course we could be deluding ourselves, I know that I am capable of that and as I said above, it has sometimes taken me quite a while, much to my chagrin, to see the "errors of my ways." BTW, the player to whom I referred is not exactly the tight, unimaginative rock that his nicknames would indicate and I for whatever reasons am fortunate to have an image that sometimes gives me much more action than I feel that I should get. Again, our definition of "solid early raisers" probably differs due to the differences in the quality of our opponents. This other player is one of those with whom I would NOT want to go after w/ AQ under the above conditions; I hope and believe that I'm the same type of player, in fact I know a few players who will not call our raises w/ with this hand, and I'm positive that these players are still not nearly as sophisticated as either of us.


Again, I appriciate yours and others opinions, will look to read the other sources and continue to think about this and other situations. I've definately been known to keep banging my head into the same walls both in poker and in life, but when I do finally learn a lesson, I learn it well. I'm grateful that there are people like you, S&M et al and for the ones in my personal life to set good examples and teach, no matter for compensation or not(God-this sounds like a lot of "sucking-up," but I am sincere).


Thanks again for your input,


Mike

Well I appreciate your more than civil response. I hadn't really read the rest of the thread, but thought that on this point I might be in for tussle. /images/wink.gif But I may have slightly misinterpreted your previous comments as well. Anyway, the thing to remember about the now all too well known "AQ test" is just this. First, realize that if you were to play perfectly otherwise, but played AQ against solid early raises, it's not like you'd lose a lot on it. It would really only come out to a tiny amount over time. The idea of the essay was to identify a play that only a very small percentage of players knew was right, as a way of identifying those few very "well schooled" players. Or more typically, it would allow you quickly to spot those who don't fall into that category. (More evidence would of course be needed.) It's quite possible that in your games there are few players with tight enough early (or middle) raising standards to make folding AQ necessary. It is, after all, the best hand you would generally think of folding, against a fairly solid player. But if there are some reasonably competent players who follow standards roughly like those in HPFAP, then even if they're a bit looser in their raises, you wouldn't go far wrong to fold AQ when position or other factors don't look good for you.


BTW, are you one of long time Chicago contingent here? (Kevin J, Soccer Sucker Mike...) It seems to be a growing group. But if any more show up you'll soon be sitting at a table full of 2+2 posters. Then you'll have to muck that AQ for sure. /images/smile.gif

John,


Thanks again, I have no intrest in "tussles," I only want to exchange ideas with the so many thoughtful players of this forum--to learn and contribute whenever I can. Yes, I know Kevin, Soccer Mike and don't forget Rounder(plus RHWBullhead who's also begun to post here). I respect all of them, though I don't play against the first three very often (Kevin and Mike, I know, play mostly at Hollywood in Aurora, rather than Harrah's East Chicago, my home away from). And yes, I will more seriously consider mucking A-Q against them(can't say for sure, that would be giving away too much info /images/wink.gif ).


BTW, it seems to me, one very small problem (almost not worth mentioning but, as you can see, once you wind me up, you can't shut me up /images/smile.gif ) with the "test" is that it might take a very long time to realize who WON'T play A-Q for WHOSE raises unless they are willing to volunteer the info, but I guess that's for them to know and me to find out. How can anybody ever say that holdem's a boring game?


Thanks again,


Mike

"...it might take a very long time to realize who WON'T play A-Q for WHOSE raises..."


True. That's why I sneaked in that line about more typically spotting those who don't pass the "test." In truth, to me that essay was just a somewhat unknown little tidbit to write about. It doesn't really make for a very fruitful way of assessing another player. I hope my essay, "Quick Indicators" does better in that regard.

"Quick Indicators" is definately very useful and practical for anyone who is not already aware or doesn't look for these traits as a matter of habit.

As someone with an academic intrest in psychology as it applies to both poker and real-life, I have found your takes on holdem very interesting and relevant (I know....more brown-nosing). I'll look forward to seeing you in print again soon (or atleast posts).


Mike

Don't use big words like that. I'm just a poker player.

Mike,

I was surprised to read that you play AQo and KQs against early position raisers. I must admit that I don't do it too often. Cigar Larry raised in early position on Saturday, and I mucked KQs. Funny thing is that he raised the next hand in early position and I saw that he had raised with KQo. After seeing that, I felt that I should have called with KQs in the previous hand.

As for AQo, I've always been wary about calling early position raises with that hand because I remember S&M using that hand as an example of a hand to release against an early position player. I am more likely to play it against the looser players. Today I called a raise with AQs and felt stupid doing it. (It turns out I was good on the flop, but the guy hit is set on the turn. Oh well).

After reading these comments, you'd think that I'm pretty tight player. I guess I usually am, but then I make stupid calls or plays at times. That's probably how I got busted up Sunday night /images/frown.gif I need to teach myself some better dicipline...

I'm glad I read this post, as it has gotten me thinking about these two hands. Until I read this thread today, I had always figured that these two hands were almost automatic folds against early and even middle position raises! I guess I should factor in how loose the players in our $20-40 game can be!

Ted,


Larry raises, reraises and/or caps with far too many hands. He may own many poker books but my guess would be that he's never read any of them even more than once. Lay you odds that he's calling your raises with these and worse hands, you CAN out-play him...he is NOT one of the players that I would consider mucking these hands for, but I wouldn't get much looser against him or many others. Course if Larry by any chance happens to be reading this....he'll be wising up and may not get the last laugh, but, atleast the next one.


See ya,


Mike

Whadya mean, JUST a poker player?