Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only point I'm trying to make here is we are likely talking about small amounts of EV either way. Calling and raising are way, way better than folding. Raising may be a little bit better than folding. This whole -- CALLING IS OMG HORRIBLE, CALLING BLOWZ, is just not necessary.

20% is not like ridic LAG. I am at like 18% or something and I'd say I'm smart LAG. Maybe he just goes crazy and raises any two from the cut off or button. Maybe he plays straight forward UTG. I really doubt you have his hand range just flat out ridiculously dominated with AJ suited.

How you play the hand after the flop is going to be a lot more important.

[/ QUOTE ]


precisely because we fear a smart LAG is why the reraise is good. if villain was dumb LAG, reraising is actually not so good.

the reraise forces villain to play a narrower range of hands postflop then had you just called which allows us to pick up a substantial amount of unclaimed pots.

The reason I feel calling is bad ( and perhaps my hyperboles were a bit over the top) is because a call is how good lags make money off of us. They take us off best hands when we both miss and when we play back the times we flop something, they won't continue in the hand unless if they have us beat.

your pfr is much higher than mine. so coming from a pseudo smart lag, wouldn't you agree that you would much prefer somebody behind you who reraised with a well defined range rather than somebody who occasionally threw in a well timed reraise bluff?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post.

To answer your question.. yes. One of the more annoying adjustments that I have seen better players make against me is re-raising light with hands like an ace-jack suited.

This forces me to make a counter adjustment. The best adjustment to make here is something that I have been thinking about. I don't really want to re-re-raise light with stuff like AQ or JJ because before I know it I'm all-in and all the play in the hand is gone.

I'm basically resigned to calling the re-raise and then going for a check-raise all in on the flop. Perhaps the best adjustment is just to change gears.

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Uhm no, if villain is a bad LAG, re-raising is great (in this case I think re raising is OK) but if the villain is simply a little looser and aggressive than most, which range of hands do you see him calling with?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I think Amoeba's point is, which I happend to agree with, is reraising a good LAG who can get away from a hand is good here. Reraising a bad, shove it in with any 2 never fold LAG is bad. The key difference...fold equity.

Re: AJs
 

Fold equity aside (I really don't assume too much fold equity pre-flop in the Party games I play), I want to get money in the middle pre-flop when I'm a favourite against our villains range, the only thing calling AJ are hands dominating it from someone with half a brain or like you said, someone whos think they will get paid off post-flop if they hit.

If you re-raise AJ here-call, flop 56Jr, check to you, bet-raise.. you throw up, fold, have just spewed.

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Fold equity aside (I really don't assume too much fold equity pre-flop in the Party games I play), I want to get money in the middle pre-flop when I'm a favourite against our villains range, the only thing calling AJ are hands dominating it from someone with half a brain or like you said, someone whos think they will get paid off post-flop if they hit.

If you re-raise AJ here-call, flop 56Jr, check to you, bet-raise.. you throw up, fold, have just spewed.

[/ QUOTE ]

in your example with the 56Jr flop, are we playing against good lag or bad lag?

Re: AJs
 

smart LAG

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
if you are afraid of reraising because AJs is marginal then considering why you are calling?

if you are afraid of being dominated then you should fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Calling lets you play a pot with position with plenty of money behind. Being dominated is not an excuse to go broke. You can still fold top pair if the postflop action tells you you're beaten. The third player in the pot forces your opponent to stay in line more and give you more respect when you call (or raise?) the flop.

If you reraise preflop the first time you find out you're dominated is when all the money is going in the pot.

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
smart LAG

[/ QUOTE ]

so you are saying smart LAG flopped something that beats my TPTK.

thats fine.

if he needs to flop something to beat my TPTK then it makes my reraise all the better. lets say he has 55.

you are failing to account for the times the flop comes say 2 6 K, and I win more money.

I have essentially forced him to outflop what I'm representing, which is big overpair or AK.

you said earlier that the only hands that calls our reraise are hands that dominate us. Thats fine. thats the way I want it. villain is rising 20% of hands. hands that dominate us are maybe maybe 5%, 3/4 of the time we make 16, 1/4 of the time we drop 25.

Re: AJs
 

Seems like a pretty easy call to me...

Am I missing something?

Ryan

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like a pretty easy call to me...

Am I missing something?

Ryan

[/ QUOTE ]

The call is easy. The thread turned into a question about the merit of reraising a LAG when we have position with a marginal hand.

Re: AJs
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have essentially forced him to outflop what I'm representing, which is big overpair or AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're reraising him with every decent hand you're dealt then you're no longer representing premium hands by reraising him. Or maybe you think you're still representing them, but he's not going to keep giving you credit. And this begs the question: If you're going to bluff, why waste a strong hand to do it with? Bluffing should be done in cases where it's the only way to win the hand. With AJs, you're bluffing out worse hands, and you're going to get stuck in a big pot with TPGK where you've made it tough for anything worse to stick around with you, yet you feel compelled to stick with your hand since the pot is big, you've got a reasonable hand, and your opponent is LAG. (So I guess it would be more accurate to say that you're not bluffing, you're simply overplaying your hand.)