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

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...

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

easy 3-bet, if hes aware of position and isolation, hes raising light here

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

Easy three-bet.

AT is in his range. As is AJ. And KQ. And KJ. And maybe even A9s and KTs.

Will

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

If he's fully capable of realizing good preflop isolation plays, blind steals, etc, wouldn't it be likely over 2300 hands that he would do this often enough to push his pfr > 8%?

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

[ QUOTE ]
If he's fully capable of realizing good preflop isolation plays, blind steals, etc, wouldn't it be likely over 2300 hands that he would do this often enough to push his pfr > 8%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's my argument against.

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he's fully capable of realizing good preflop isolation plays, blind steals, etc, wouldn't it be likely over 2300 hands that he would do this often enough to push his pfr > 8%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's my argument against.

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess is there's at least a 3% margin of error in a sample as small as 2300 hands. Just a guess, based on how I've seen myself portrayed over 1k, 2k, and 5k hand samples.

Rob

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

This should be very standard 3-bet.

-ActionBob

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

[ QUOTE ]
If he's fully capable of realizing good preflop isolation plays, blind steals, etc, wouldn't it be likely over 2300 hands that he would do this often enough to push his pfr > 8%?

[/ QUOTE ]

well lets assume hes not aware of position and raising about 8% of his hands here, according to pokerstove, were about even money(53/47 dog) against the top 8% of hands, plus we have the postflop advantages of position and the inititive and can more easily knock out the blinds by 3-betting

and im very confident that hes rasing more hands in this spot than he is on average overall, making this an easy 3-bet

if he opens UTG, we have an easy fold because he is raising less than he is on average overall

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If he's fully capable of realizing good preflop isolation plays, blind steals, etc, wouldn't it be likely over 2300 hands that he would do this often enough to push his pfr > 8%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's my argument against.

[/ QUOTE ]

so... do you think he raises the exact same hand range from any position or situation?

i think he raises less than 8% of his hands from UTG right?

this means hes going to have to raise more than 8% from somewhere to even it out at 8, i think hes definatley raising light from this spot and we have an easy 3-bet

edit: see my post directly above for more on why

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

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].

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

Damn you must be nuts to cap when there's only been one raise.

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

One more thing:
Pokerstove is still chugging away, but when you add in a third person limping with a wide range (40% minus premiums), equity looks like it drops to about 34% preflop. I suppose with position and dead blind money this equates to a slight edge. This plus the near unanymous vote to 3-bet makes me reconsider folding here.

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

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

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

We are essentially just debating a read here right? Jason thinks he is a tight/passive PF player with relatively static raising standards.

You belive he is capable of making adjustments based on position and table texture.

I guess the real thing to be debating is where the information for your read came from...ie what have you observed?

Because the statisical information seems to favor Jason's read.

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

[ QUOTE ]

Because the statisical information seems to favor Jason's read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you get the impression that a 13/8 is unduly tight with his PFR standards after a limper?

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

The more poker you play the more you should realise that AQo is virtually never fit to cold-call with.

Only on extremely rare occasions and under perfect conditions would I even consider an isolation 3-bet with it and even then it's marginal at best. If ANY limper and ANY raiser are already in front, forget it, even if one's a fish and the other a donkey. The hand is weak, vulnerable and you're paying too much to even try. You do have a positional advantage, however. You get to see what's going on in front of you and that is precisely what enables you to MUCK IT without getting involved ass-backwards to begin with!

This opinion, of course, will get me branded as a weak-tight nit. But I don't care.

Do yourself a favor. Muck first and ask questions later.

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

Given our position and the action thus far, this hand is far to big not to 3bet.

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

[ QUOTE ]

My guess is there's at least a 3% margin of error in a sample as small as 2300 hands. Just a guess, based on how I've seen myself portrayed over 1k, 2k, and 5k hand samples.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

A 95% confidence interval is plus or minus 1.3%, assuming his true PFR is .12

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

no love for the coldcall? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

3-bizzle!

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

[ QUOTE ]
Only on extremely rare occasions and under perfect conditions would I even consider an isolation 3-bet with it and even then it's marginal at best. If ANY limper and ANY raiser are already in front, forget it, even if one's a fish and the other a donkey

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't take perfect conditions at all. Auto-folding this, especially if it's a loose raiser in front of a loose limper is losing money. Especially if you can fold everyone else out behind you with a 3 bet with position.

I'd suggest practicing postflop play with this hand if you're really that worried about it against weak players.

[ QUOTE ]
The hand is weak, vulnerable and you're paying too much to even try.

[/ QUOTE ]

In many cases, you may also have the best hand.

b

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

IMO this ain't close.

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

Welcome to the forum. I'd like to ask you to please stop reading strategy posts and also to never change your mind about this poll [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


[ QUOTE ]
Muck first and ask questions later.

[/ QUOTE ]

hmmm...my motto is to raise first and think later; it makes my thinking easier.

-WT

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

So he could actually be a much tighter raiser then?

Lost Wages

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

[ QUOTE ]
So he could actually be a much tighter raiser then?

Lost Wages

[/ QUOTE ]

Not much tighter, but tighter, yes (in the same way that he could be a looser raiser, but not incredibly loose). I figured he was likely around a 6-10% PFR.

Rob

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

This is just a dumb iso-reraise. 6-10% means he's not doing this much. Fold and move on. You made a mistake. All the posts point to the same thing.

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

[ QUOTE ]

This is just a dumb iso-reraise. 6-10% means he's not doing this much. Fold and move on. You made a mistake. All the posts point to the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post wasn't all that helpful -- but I'm not sure if it was meant to be.

Your equity is very rarely bad in this situation (it takes him being much less than a 6% PFR for your equity to ever be a lot worse than "fair share"), you have position, you have initiative, and you've got a terrible player subsidizing any losses in the form of dead money.

Even if you disagree with a 3-bet here it's very rarely a "dumb" isoraise. AFAIC you've got a pretty strong holding here and the opportunity to use it to your advantage.

Rob

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is just a dumb iso-reraise. 6-10% means he's not doing this much. Fold and move on. You made a mistake. All the posts point to the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post wasn't all that helpful -- but I'm not sure if it was meant to be.

Your equity is very rarely bad in this situation (it takes him being much less than a 6% PFR for your equity to ever be a lot worse than "fair share"), you have position, you have initiative, and you've got a terrible player subsidizing any losses in the form of dead money.

Even if you disagree with a 3-bet here it's very rarely a "dumb" isoraise. AFAIC you've got a pretty strong holding here and the opportunity to use it to your advantage.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

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

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is just a dumb iso-reraise. 6-10% means he's not doing this much. Fold and move on. You made a mistake. All the posts point to the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post wasn't all that helpful -- but I'm not sure if it was meant to be.

Your equity is very rarely bad in this situation (it takes him being much less than a 6% PFR for your equity to ever be a lot worse than "fair share"), you have position, you have initiative, and you've got a terrible player subsidizing any losses in the form of dead money.

Even if you disagree with a 3-bet here it's very rarely a "dumb" isoraise. AFAIC you've got a pretty strong holding here and the opportunity to use it to your advantage.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

I 3-bet because I think initiative is going to be at least somewhat helpful in folding 6 outers incorrectly on the flop and occasionally folding better hands (i.e. folding 88 on a KT4 board).

Rob

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

[ QUOTE ]
I 3-bet because I think initiative is going to be at least somewhat helpful in folding 6 outers incorrectly on the flop and occasionally folding better hands (i.e. folding 88 on a KT4 board).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ray "Bones" Barboni: "Let me explain something to you. Momo is dead. Which means everything he had now belongs to Jimmy Cap, including you. Which also means, when I speak, I speak for Jimmy. E.g., from now on, you start showing me the proper f[/i]uckin' respect."
Chili Palmer: ""E.g." means "for example". What I think you want to use is "i.e."."
Ray "Bones" Barboni: "Bulls[/i]hit! That's short for "ergo"."
Chili Palmer: "Ask your man."
Bodyguard: "To the best of my knowledge, "e.g." means "for example"."
Ray "Bones" Barboni: "E.g., i.e., f[/i]uck you! The point is this: When I say "jump", you say "OK", okay?"

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

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I 3-bet because I think initiative is going to be at least somewhat helpful in folding 6 outers incorrectly on the flop and occasionally folding better hands (i.e. folding 88 on a KT4 board).

[/ QUOTE ]

Ray "Bones" Barboni: "Let me explain something to you. Momo is dead. Which means everything he had now belongs to Jimmy Cap, including you. Which also means, when I speak, I speak for Jimmy. E.g., from now on, you start showing me the proper f[/i]uckin' respect."
Chili Palmer: ""E.g." means "for example". What I think you want to use is "i.e."."
Ray "Bones" Barboni: "Bulls[/i]hit! That's short for "ergo"."
Chili Palmer: "Ask your man."
Bodyguard: "To the best of my knowledge, "e.g." means "for example"."
Ray "Bones" Barboni: "E.g., i.e., f[/i]uck you! The point is this: When I say "jump", you say "OK", okay?"

[/ 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]

Rob

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