A JJ hand

[FrogMouth]

Well, my eyes haven't started bleeding yet.

I admit that I misread the OP, and appologize for my hasty advice. I will concede that in many instances pushing is not the best option. But, had the stacks been reversed as I had mis-read I'm sure I could make a solid argument for pushing PF in many situations. Without any occular damage.

Reason #1
[ QUOTE ]
I am relatively new to the table, but my read basically entails...
"-called big all-in reraise with KQo
-loose caller pre-flop
-donk"

Overly passive is not part of the read.



[/ QUOTE ]

[Jason Strasser]

Its the same type of logic where people say 'if I CR to xxx$ with my draw then i'll be priced in to call correctly if he pushes'.

Its just backwards. You should be raising frequently to get the blinds at this level, and you should just make it 2.5x bb or whatever again... Not push with JJ to avoid this problem. A hand like 66 may fold, whereas it may have decided to resteal if you standard open, thats just one of a zillion examples.

-Jason

[Jason Strasser]

Here's the thing.

You are really not getting away from this ever. Maybe you can bet 300 and fold to a raise from some opponents, but for the purpose of analyis I really think versus a majority of opponents you just cant fold here.

So if you get past that hurdle, you can do a little thinking.

If he has an ace oh well you are getting it in with 2 outs probably any way you play it.

Here's the other thing tho, and where I disagree with Fnurt:

[ QUOTE ]
Check behind, and hope he gives you some action on the turn.

If you are ahead on the flop, he most likely has no more than 2 or 3 outs on the turn. That's a risk I am willing to take, so I check behind and call a turn bet if he pushes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, so often in this spot betting is better than checking behind because I think the opposite of what Fnurt said. First of all if your opponent has a worse pair than you, I think you have more of a chance of getting money in on the flop than you would getting money in later. A scary other high card could come or kill your action, and also they may actually be more scared of your flop check than they would of a bet.

Also if you check behind there are hands like KQ and maybe a worse pair that will not call any additional bets unless they improve. In spots like this where its very hard to draw equity out of many hands and impossible to get best hands to fold, the one thing you can do is win the pot now versus hands that will only pay you off if they improve their hand and make a better hand than the one you have.

-Jason

[Elaboration]

[ QUOTE ]
KQ and maybe a worse pair that will not call any additional bets unless they improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do not think these hands push the turn in hopes I am scared of the A and will fold a better hand?

Thanks-

[Jason Strasser]

Perhaps.

But that shouldnt be the basis for your decision IMO. The benefits of betting outway the benefits of checking as I outlined above.

-Jason

[Elaboration]

[ QUOTE ]
he most likely has no more than 2 or 3 outs on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, the potential holding of KQ is not enough to disqualify a wawb line?

Thanks-

[fnurt]

What you say is true, but it's only one specific hand that has 6 outs. Considering he could hold a bunch of different hands in this spot, I don't think it affects the overall analysis much.

Strassa made a good case but I still think when the villain is short stacked and you check the flop, in general, he's going to smell blood and will be very likely to give you action. He could be right, though.

[Stormwolf]

Bet whatever amount makes him commit his chips with an eight or lower pair, $300 sounds good

[Crooked Paul]

Are we overanalyzing the thought processes of a weak player (who is shortstacked to boot)? I can't help thinking the whole situation is simpler than we're making it. Basically I think the rest of his money is only going in the pot when he thinks he has you beat (and most of the cases where he thinks that, he probably does, especially if you let him see more cards).

Either he already hit an ace or a set and is trapping, or you check and let him catch you on the turn or river (big mistake). The only scenario I can see where he puts his money in as an underdog is if he has a pair of 8s or 4s with a decent kicker and reads your bet as a bluff. So basically I'm saying push and get him out of the pot before he can catch anything, since the chance he has you beat already are pretty slim given your read. I'll elaborate a little:

Seems like this is the type of player who calls with a wide range of hands preflop and tries to spike a card. We can pretty easily dismiss most of the scenarios where you're beat here. If he has a PP 88+ he probably would have pushed preflop (yes?). So you're probably not worried about a higher pocket pair or a set of 8s, and you have 99 and 10-10 beat anyway. Even if he was smooth calling with QQ or KK (which seems fantastically unlikely given that he's the shortstack), there's a good chance he'll give you credit for aces if you push.

In fact, there are only two possibilities I'd worry about here. A set of 4s (I can see this guy calling with 44 rather than pushing) or any ace that hit a pair. Given the range of hands this guy is willing to call with preflop, chance of either of those is maybe 20%, absolute max.

I'd just push here and be done with it. If he spiked an ace and checked it, so be it. Your stack is still in good shape and the money was probably going in anyway. If not, he folds and you pick up a decent pot of 6-7 BBs and leave him even more shortstacked; no complaint there. Your best-case scenario is that he hit a pair of 8s or 4s (or he has a smaller PP) and reads your push as a bluff. Then you get paid off and bust him.

To me it's obvious that the worst option is to check and give the fish a chance to hit a pair of kings or queens or a baby set. While I respect the greater experience of posters who counseled checking, I disagree. They seem to think that a check will induce an all-in bluff on the turn, but it seems to me that you're only getting a push here if the guy's hand improves, in which case you're probably beat.

All of this is to say, more concisely: I don't think there's anything you can do to induce an all-in bluff here. The rest of his money is only going in if he thinks he has the best hand. Chances are greatly in your favor that you have him beat on the flop, and you should push to prevent a suckout. That's my point. =)

(I'm basically making exactly the same argument that Strasser did, with more (possibly unnecessary) detail.)


Crooked