My weakness...middle pairs

[dozer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think that 3-betting is overly aggressive. We are definitely bloating the pot PF, but this is for value: we usually have the best hand here, and are pushing that equity edge. That's a great reason to bloat the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Show me where in SSHE that recomends 3-betting 99 out of the BB. This is not a button raise steal situation. How great is your equity against overcards. Your positional disadvantage in this hand makes up for the slight edge you might have preflop. The players in .50 1. are passive. You could easily be a big dog pre-flop or a slight favorite.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're not here to regurgitate everything that's in SSHE. Also, the recommendations in SSHE are just that: recommendations. There's always a case for more or less aggressive play, depending on the situation. I don't mind pushing edges like this: we're up against weak players, and can make better decisions than most post-flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes situational. No reads were given in this post. So I would go with the standard way of playing the hand. Which is following SSHE. If we had specific reads then saying this is situational makes more sense. So you are 3-betting 99 out of the BB everytime regardless of what type player you are against.

If villain has overcards, he is not making a mistake preflop against your 99 when you 3-bet, how is this pushing your edge.

By keeping the pot small when out of position, you gain more from when the flop comes low and villain makes the mistake of chasing his overcards given the improper odds, by bloating the pot villain is correct to call after the flop with overcard. If the flop is terrible, you can just check fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes situational. No reads were given in this post. So I would go with the standard way of playing the hand. Which is following SSHE. If we had specific reads then saying this is situational makes more sense. So you are 3-betting 99 out of the BB everytime regardless of what type player you are against.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not always, but if it's a MP1 raise, and only the small blind has called, then I think that 3-betting is best. We're going to win more than 1/3 of the time. How large must the pocket pair be before you'd 3-bet it?

[ QUOTE ]
If villain has overcards, he is not making a mistake preflop against your 99 when you 3-bet, how is this pushing your edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a non-sequitur. The villain doesn't have to make a mistake for our raise to be profitable. Betting into someone, who has the odds to call, is not wrong. Your logic would mean that we ought not to bet into someone with a flush draw, since they can call profitably.

If we could see his cards, and he ours, what would the preflop action be?

[ QUOTE ]
By keeping the pot small when out of position, you gain more from when the flop comes low and villain makes the mistake of chasing his overcards given the improper odds, by bloating the pot villain is correct to call after the flop with overcard. If the flop is terrible, you can just check fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's nothing wrong with this approach, but it does mean that you'll lose a pot once in a while to continuation bets. Taking the more aggressive approach is at least justifiable, and I think better.

[dozer]

[ QUOTE ]
How large must the pocket pair be before you'd 3-bet it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would 3-bet Tens, I just like to keep pots smaller when OOP. Heads up I would consider 3-betting.In other positions I would 3-bet 99 to get it Headsup. I have a 12% PFR, and I don't 3-bet 99 in the BB. So I still think this is too aggressive. You should give some respect to MP1 open raise unless he is a maniac.

[ QUOTE ]
This is a non-sequitur. The villain doesn't have to make a mistake for our raise to be profitable. Betting into someone, who has the odds to call, is not wrong. Your logic would mean that we ought not to bet into someone with a flush draw, since they can call profitably.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is probably neutral EV to 3-bet, or call pre-flop. I am not a huge math guy, so I really don't know. I make my plays based more on position and the type of opponent I am against. Either line is fine I guess. I just prefer to play more cautiously OOP with vulnerable mid pairs. Especially against an unknown.

[ QUOTE ]
If we could see his cards, and he ours, what would the preflop action be?


[/ QUOTE ] Since he had AQ it should be reraise, but we don't know what he had, he could have a bigger pair. Are we really that much of a favorite over a unknowns range that 99 should be pushed this hard preflop. I guess if we 3-bet and villain caps, this make the hand easier to play, because we will be certain we are behind villain capping range on this flop. I still prefer seeing a flop first though.