Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

So "dumb" is probably strong language.

[ QUOTE ]
you have position, you have initiative, and you've got a terrible player subsidizing any losses in the form of dead money.


[/ QUOTE ]


These are the good reasons for the re-reraise. But the OP says that the raiser is aggro, so I'm assuming that he'll be difficult to play against post-flop. I suppose if you think you can take it down on the flop unimproved fairly often than this might be profitable. But then you have to contend with limper who may hang on with any pair when you have Ace-high. I think it is very hard to be profitable in this situation especially when you are behind a large fraction of the time pre-flop.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Given the opponent description, this is a real easy BEEEP! :We interrupt this response to say the answer is somewhere in the beginner/small stakes forum. Now back to your regularly scheduled response.: and I'm sure the voting will reflect that.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Against a legitimate raise this is an easy fold. It is not close. Against a tight raiser with one limper there is really no reason to put 3 bets in here. The fact that your opponent knows about position and isolation says little if anything. Most decent players that have played any significnt amount of poker understand these concepts. By the way, your 3-bet is not isolating anybody here. You are guranteed to have 3 people playing here. As to the quote above, point me to one two plus two limit holdem book that states that this 3-bet is a standard play. I GUARANTEE you will not find it. Further, of all the best limit holdem books, you won't see any authors saying to 3-bet AQo against a legitimate raise. This player DOES NOT raise enough to think he is "raising light".
If you 3-bet AQo regardless of the player as a standard play you will lose money. Don't take my word for it: miller, sklansy, yao, bob ciaffone, mason malmuth etc. etc. etc. all are against this play. Insert your favorite author here and paste the quote.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Do you ever cold call here or do you think it's raise or fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never cold call here. Raising was worth thinking about for a second. Folding is the best choice.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

[ QUOTE ]
this isn't a test. this isn't even a [censored] homework assignment. this is the first day of pre-k when you learn how to tie your shoes and hang up your [censored] coat.

cap that [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

You guys suck. Pokerstove this and you see that even if you only give the raiser an 8% range, which is ridiculous after 4 folds and a fishy limper, you still have ~35% equity against the two hands. This is enough to play a 3 handed pot anyway. Add in the dead money that is the blinds, your huge positional and initiative advantage against a fish and a suspected weak-tight player and this is such an easy 3bet it's making me sick that people are actually saying you should fold.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nice. I think either i.e. or e.g. would work here, though (i.d. = id est, "that is to say..."). E.g. probably would have been better, though. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty sure you want e.g. there. Also pretty sure you are right about the hand.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

If he knows anything about position then he raises less hands up front and more hands from back. His PFR is not 8% here its at least 10% minimum. Thats like 77+,ATs+,KJs+,ATo,KQo and your 50/50 against that range and your definitely ahead of the fishy limper. Reraise to give the blinds and anyone else an incorrect price to call.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

I can do the math if this is challenged, but I think you are behind raiser's range. I think PFR converges very quickly and would give that 2300 hand read some weight. Since we are getting pretty exact in this thread, it is pertinent to know how the 13/8 stat is filtered.

Even though you are behind raiser's range, I think there is a case to made for 3 betting, and it is what I would do.

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Party 10/20, full ring. 4 folds, and then a terrible fish limps. A 13/8 player (Jason says over 2300 hands, but my read is that he's aggro and decent but overaggro in the wrong spots and definitely capable of realizing his position and concepts like isolation etc) now raises. Next player, a TAG, folds. You're OTB with AQo.

You...

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just reading "inside the poker mind." The question is whether or not a player who raises in EP should be reraised with AQ. In the book he explains why it is wrong. However the player in this case is in Middle/Late position so I think that reraising is a good play.

So if you believe he pays attention to position, raise. If not fold.

Greg

Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
 

I'm basing it off the OPs read of the player. Not just on his stats. If during this session, regardless of stats, he thinks this persons raise in this spot could be a little light because of the limper, it's not an auto-fold.

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that your opponent knows about position and isolation says little if anything. Most decent players that have played any significnt amount of poker understand these concepts. By the way, your 3-bet is not isolating anybody here.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's actually designed to keep the pot shorthanded, not just HU. In fact, in some ways, it can be advantageous to take the pot 3 ways with a bad player involved.

[ QUOTE ]
As to the quote above, point me to one two plus two limit holdem book that states that this 3-bet is a standard play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a raise/fold situation. Feeney's book goes into this and explains it well. It's a standard read-based play that could go either way, read depending.

[ QUOTE ]
Further, of all the best limit holdem books, you won't see any authors saying to 3-bet AQo against a legitimate raise. This player DOES NOT raise enough to think he is "raising light".


[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on who's read your following, doesn't it? You're right, against a legitimate raise, it's a fold.

[ QUOTE ]
If you 3-bet AQo regardless of the player as a standard play you will lose money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who ever said to just auto-3bet here? The situation itself, in regards to adjusting for the raiser, is a standard and basic concept.

b