|
|
#11
09-06-2005, 09:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
Go Broke w/ur "F'ing" QQ...Be a man about & stop ur sniveling...These people that keep trying to get better bug the pluperfectfuck outa me...Chistsakes = Ask Yugo / he doesn't know anything...Hansome young people that are going to succeed also bother me...ALOT [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]
edit: call "NonStop" (collect) I'm sure he has an opinion; or three thousand+ 
|
|
#13
09-06-2005, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
My gut tells me pair here (88-AA, except 99) or AK/AQ. Pre-flop KK or AA wouldn't want that many people calling cheaply (although they're both still possibilities). On the flop, UTG pulled the trigger a little earlier and a little higher than I would think a 9 (and definitely two 3s) would want to, especially with two, potentially three other players and a ragged board. He would want action with those hands. I probably check call (trying to induce a bluff for the times when he does only have a small pair or AK). I would probably lose my stack here if he does have a nine or KK/AA for all the times you're beating him. My $.02
|
|
#14
09-06-2005, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
Unarmed, preflop strategy question.
When you play the ladies this way preflop, what is your general plan of attack postflop? I know you are a very thoughtful pokerplayer. So when you just called, I'm sure you must have had a plan of attack postflop. Do you care to discuss?
|
|
#17
09-06-2005, 10:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'd min raise the flop because then you know almost for sure whether you are beaten if someone suddenly check raises you, as opposed to guessing. If the original bettor to 95 raises you, then I'd probably be willing to put all my chips in. Basically min raising shuts out everyone the large majority of the time unless they have QQ beat, except for the 95 chip bettor. [/ QUOTE ] i agree w/ this, especially the second paragraph. Playing QQ like this PF is difficult when a flop like this hits. does the guy betting 95 have a lower pocket pair or is he ahead? I stopped playing QQ this way after a few similar situations. Here, since the PF set up this tough decision, I fold here probably. I might call though and try to play it cheap from there. Raising is the most risky play in my opinion and I think the worst option of the 3.
|
|
#18
09-06-2005, 10:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I think I'd min raise the flop because then you know almost for sure whether you are beaten if someone suddenly check raises you, as opposed to guessing. If the original bettor to 95 raises you, then I'd probably be willing to put all my chips in. Basically min raising shuts out everyone the large majority of the time unless they have QQ beat, except for the 95 chip bettor. [/ QUOTE ] i agree w/ this, especially the second paragraph. Playing QQ like this PF is difficult when a flop like this hits. does the guy betting 95 have a lower pocket pair or is he ahead? I stopped playing QQ this way after a few similar situations. Here, since the PF set up this tough decision, I fold here probably. I might call though and try to play it cheap from there. Raising is the most risky play in my opinion and I think the worst option of the 3. [/ QUOTE ] Very confused why you claim to agree with my post yet say that raising (and note that I said I'd make a small raise) is the worst possible option!
|
|
#19
09-06-2005, 10:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
No likey the preflop cold call. I'd re-raise PF. Give the cold call, I'd raise the flop. The check-raise after a limp/call looks like a medium to small pocket pair or perhaps T9s. You're either way ahead or way behind. Seems less likely that he has a pocket pair other than threes as there was a bet and a call prior to his check-raise and if he didn't have a big hand he'd be afraid of the caller. So, I think the right play is a fold.
|
|
#20
09-06-2005, 11:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: $109s - QQ Hand
Thoughts:
Preflop: I don't reraise because: - I don't want some tard repopping me with AK - I can get away from ace high flops cheaper - I can attack c-bets from strong aces on all unders flops - I allow JJ/TT to think they are good on all unders flops (key point, IMO) Flop: I'm good here most of the time. I flat call the weak bet to see if PF raiser is sandbagging AA/KK. UTG raising is completely unexpected. Folded to me. Great. He has A9/K9 or TT/JJ the bulk of the time, and 55-88 some of the time. I don't really know what sort of percentages to tag on these possibilities though. As many of you know, I have a bad habit of fearing the worst, and making folds based on what exact hand he's most likely to have, even if that hand represents just 20% of his range. So anyway, I think Jman's comments (before he told us to disregard them) are great. I like a flat call here. Hopefully no-one wants to re-raise/push here, so I'll just ignore that option. Folding gets more attractive the stronger MP1's initial bet is. As it played out, it was pretty damn weak, so UTG can have a wide range here. If the turn is an ace and he bets out, I will fold, because I could easily be holding a stubborn AJ/AQ from his perspective. If the turn blanks and he bets, I'll call if he's not pot committed, and push if he is. There's no point in just calling if he's pot committed, because I'm calling any river anyway so I should get the money in now against JJ/TT. If the turn blanks and he checks, I think I check behind to try and induce a river call/bet from JJ down, and save some money against a stupidly played 9. Anyway, I think the inital flop call is probably the error here. If MP1's bet wasn't so frigging weak, I wouldn't have to worry about UTG having a wide range, and I wouldn't feel like such a pussy for folding this, meaning none of you would ever have seen this hand. Skipper, does all of that make sense? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
