Two Plus Two Older Archives

Two Plus Two Older Archives (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Mid- and High-Stakes Hold'em (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   AQ in SB (http://archives2.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=126940)

Philuva 09-22-2004 04:11 PM

Re: AQ in SB
 
Seems like the perfect spot to CR the flop since the aggressor is on your right and you can force 3 limpers to call 2 bets on a gutshot or 2nd pair rich board in a not-so-small-pot.

Senor Choppy 09-23-2004 04:11 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
Jimmy alluded to this already, but there isn't a hand that's really dead vs. AQ here. The best you can really hope for is something like Ax, but they still have 3 outs, and they're getting nearly correct odds to chase if they get paid off by multiple players.

Whatever play someone in this hand decides to make, it shouldn't be based on trapping anyone, this hand is simply too vulnerable vs. too many types of hands.

SA125 09-23-2004 08:40 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
Andy - "Ignite would seem appropriate since you'll probably be flamed for this hand"

That's funny. And true. Hey Tommy, you know c/r was the default play there, and everyone knows you know it, so que paso?

Steve A.

nykenny 09-23-2004 10:04 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
is the button SUPER-WEAK-TIGHT? if so, you play is fine (not that I try to judge); if not, i'd had C/Red either FLOP or TURN.

button could have had AA, AK, AQ, AJ or ATs, remotely A9s, A8s...

nykenny 09-23-2004 10:05 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
[ QUOTE ]
but tommy, under the conditions you describe, calling is almost never correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

btf? i think calling is FINE.

JimmyV 09-23-2004 10:29 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but tommy, under the conditions you describe, calling is almost never correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

btf? i think calling is FINE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better than fine.

I agree with nykenny and intend to bear his children ectopically.

JimmyV

nykenny 09-23-2004 10:32 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but tommy, under the conditions you describe, calling is almost never correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

btf? i think calling is FINE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Better than fine.

I agree with nykenny and intend to bear his children ectopically.

JimmyV

[/ QUOTE ]

you never said you loved me yet [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

1800GAMBLER 09-23-2004 10:59 AM

Re: AQ in SB
 
Knowning so much about his postflop play must be worth 2 outs?

WarmonkEd 09-23-2004 06:46 PM

Re: AQ in SB
 
[ QUOTE ]
is the button SUPER-WEAK-TIGHT? if so, you play is fine (not that I try to judge); if not, i'd had C/Red either FLOP or TURN...

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't he still c/r the flop or turn in an effort to kick out the other players? If he had a stronger hand, such as a small set, but was afraid the button had a larger set, then calling down would be better since there's a much smaller chance of the other players drawing out.

skp 09-23-2004 08:37 PM

Re: AQ in SB
 
Doesn't matter how tight the button is, the play is still to checkraise the flop. It reduces the field (while also perhaps cleaning up your Queen outs i.e. KT might fold assuming the flop was AJx ...by now I have forgotten what the flop was). Then, if the button 3 bets, you can reassess and perhaps fold on the turn assuming you don't improve or pick up a gutshot draw.

I simply don't see how chcekcalling 3 streets in this spot is superior to showing some aggression on the flop.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:50 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.