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

[newhizzle]

[ 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

[ActionBob]

This should be very standard 3-bet.

-ActionBob

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].

[mterry]

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

[mterry]

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.

[Justin A]

[ 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]

[Jeff W]

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is your best post ever.

[bernie]

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

[hellite]

[ 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.

[bernie]

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