10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

villain is TAG, 25/17/2, over 237 hands. Solid - maybe 2+2er.

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is Button with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img].
UTG calls, MP calls, CO calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">SB raises</font>, BB calls, UTG calls, MP calls, CO calls, Hero calls.

Flop: (12 SB) K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(6 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, BB folds, UTG calls, MP folds, CO folds, Hero calls.

Turn: (7.50 BB) Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets</font>, UTG calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB 3-bets</font>, UTG folds, Hero folds.

Surf

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

Raising the turn allows both players to get off worse hands. Yes you'll lose the same if behind, but you'll make less when ahead. I think the best line is call both turn and river, although I'm sure you're beat if the TAG bets again on the river, you can't fold because he could be value betting a Q or AA or something too.

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

I am not sure what a raise would accomplish in this spot. All it could accomplish is getting a worse/drawing dead hand to fold and a better hand to 3 bet. Just call down, it is the same amount of money and this way you have a chance to catch your 1 outer (Q) and win. I cannot imagine how this move would be +EV against a thinking TA, but you probably aren't going to extract anymore against him if he has a worse hand anyways. Basically this spot is like having a 16 in blackjack against the dealers A. No matter what you do you are probably screwed, so in this case at least get to showdown to give yourself a chance, since a worst hand will not call your raise anyways.

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

I hate QJo. I fold preflop.

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

flop call is dubious even closing the action. this guy's AF is kind of low so I'd find it pretty unlikely he's betting jacks into 5 people.

as for the turn I don't know why you raised. maybe UTG is drawing to a straight or flush or something. don't let him realize he's drawing dead. also if he's at all decent he should be mucking AA. why would you be raising a bet and call with a flush draw?

if the river went bet-fold then I'd raise and fold to a 3-bet

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hate QJo. I fold preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]


some of the posts you make really concern me

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hate QJo. I fold preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

what?!

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hate QJo. I fold preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the button after 3 limpers? That's terrible, you have a stronger than average hand and position throughout the hand.

Surf: I call down here, if anything to keep UTG in the hand. The times that SB is betting a Q here will leave UTG making you money, though I suspect you're beat as well if he bets the river again. I hate spots like this, but its a larger pot...

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

I think this is a fold on the flop. 13:1 isn't good enough because the 2 queens are my only outs, and I'm unlikely to have the best hand often enough to take it to showdown if he keeps betting.

The turn was a spaz of sleep-deprived multitabling "oh...I improved. Probably raise then." Immediately afterwards, looking at the board "crap. why the hell did I do that."

Anyway, I was talking with another 2+2er about it and he was shocked by the turn fold(after my atrocious raise)...anyone care to weigh in on this?

Surf

Re: 10/20 6max: sure to cause a ruckus - QJo
 

[ QUOTE ]
13:1 isn't good enough because the 2 queens are my only outs

[/ QUOTE ]

If the Queens are outs then the jacks would often be too. Right? I mean, in both cases you need villain to not have a king.