fundemental short handed concept I'm missing

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]

but you have an easy checkfold on the turn IU - that's the advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding 2nd pair HU should not be in anybody's arsenal, except under unusual circumstances (which this isn't).

[mister]

Ya that makes sense spydog. I guess I've never been a fan of the pure math in limit. But really second pair means showing down, and the cheaper the better.

With regards to what % of the time we have him beat, I think that's impossible to say. The range of hands a player would 3 bet there is just so vast.

Now how do the dynamics change with a draw out there ? a flush draw he could be on...

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
why? You should already have an idea of his hand from his PF action.


[/ QUOTE ]

i know that he has 77-AA, AK-AT, or KQ. if you call that an idea then i guess so, but i'd like more than that.

[mister]

"why? You should already have an idea of his hand from his PF action."

I disagree. I've played against a ton of very good players that would 3 bet with 66 here to get heads up with me. And if I don't cap (which with QJs I never do), he now can feast on me with a flop he likes. I'd say I'm good more then half the time with my Q here, that 3 bet to isolate against me doesn't put him in the AQ-AK, TT-AA range

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

but you have an easy checkfold on the turn IU - that's the advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding 2nd pair HU should not be in anybody's arsenal, except under unusual circumstances (which this isn't).

[/ QUOTE ]

what? this forum has gotten so ridiculous.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]

With regards to what % of the time we have him beat, I think that's impossible to say. The range of hands a player would 3 bet there is just so vast.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really. AA-77, AK-ATs, AKo AQo, KQ-KJs.

Also, not to nitpick, and maybe it was just a figure of speech, but in case you dont know. In your original post, you mention that its just as likely for him to have AK as it is 77. It's in fact much more likely he has AK as it is 77. There are 16 ways to be dealt an AK, and only 6 to make 77.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say I'm good more then half the time with my Q here, that 3 bet to isolate against me doesn't put him in the AQ-AK, TT-AA range

[/ QUOTE ]

so then check/call it down. (looks like you have an idea of where you stand from his PF 3 bet to me). A c/r here is an awful play

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

but you have an easy checkfold on the turn IU - that's the advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Folding 2nd pair HU should not be in anybody's arsenal, except under unusual circumstances (which this isn't).

[/ QUOTE ]

what? this forum has gotten so ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

I probably should have worded that differently. Basically, in order for me to make a comfortable fold on this hand I will need to play back at villian to a certain degree. However, by playing back at villian I will be investing close to the same amount of bets (or more depending on villian) as just check-calling the entire way. Check-calling means I never fold the best hand. Plus, it gives me the best opportunity to improve if I am behind. If you are folding this on the turn, you lose out on those chances when you might spike a J or Q on the river.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why? You should already have an idea of his hand from his PF action.


[/ QUOTE ]

i know that he has 77-AA, AK-AT, or KQ. if you call that an idea then i guess so, but i'd like more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Getting a better idea, is only going to lose you money when you have the best hand.

[mister]

I'll put in differently, you're right, I worded that wrong. It's more likely for him not to K big kicker, then it is for him to have it. More often then not I'm not getting 3 bet by a big K here (although the bigger K or bigger Q obviously still makes us lose)

We lose to

AA, AK, AQ, KQ, KK, QQ, KJs

we beat

66 (and lower), 77, 88, 99, TT, JJ, AJs, AJ, ATs, AT

so it's obviously really close