|
|
#41
12-14-2005, 04:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
I don't understand how people are saying this "isn't close". I think three-betting here is fine, but this hand is just over the threshold of profitability with worse hands being losers in this spot. If you are one of the people who said this is super easy and not close to unprofitable, then where do you consider the borderline to be where a three-bet in this spot tips towards -EV? AT? KQ?
|
|
#42
12-14-2005, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
I can do the math if this is challenged, but I think you are behind raiser's range. I think PFR converges very quickly and would give that 2300 hand read some weight. Since we are getting pretty exact in this thread, it is pertinent to know how the 13/8 stat is filtered. Even though you are behind raiser's range, I think there is a case to made for 3 betting, and it is what I would do. [/ QUOTE ] The stats were filtered for 10/20 data from tables with eight or more players. I would love to see what you come up with because I'm pretty sure I'm behind the pfr's range.
|
|
#43
12-14-2005, 05:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how people are saying this "isn't close". I think three-betting here is fine, but this hand is just over the threshold of profitability [/ QUOTE ] This is about where I see it. It seems some think that just because you will 3 bet here you will just blow chips postflop along the way as if one had blinders on. If you do see the flop, you do have to be a little careful. b
|
|
#44
12-14-2005, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
then where do you consider the borderline to be where a three-bet in this spot tips towards -EV? AT? KQ? [/ QUOTE ] That's a good question because it should be +EV if he was just a naked raise, but the presence of the limper should firm him back up, but it also sways the hand values a little, a cold call with KQs should be profitable here right? Especially if we can expect a call from the BB. AJo is clearly a loser, AJs possibly ok, but I'm willing to bet it's on the edge of negative. AQs liekly healthy, AQo, not so good. These are all by feel and not by simulation but I'd be interested to see were the break over is. It would also be interesting to see were the break over is for pairs. Around 88 I would think.
|
|
#45
12-14-2005, 05:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
but the presence of the limper should firm him back up, [/ QUOTE ] Should also consider the 'type' of limper we have here. If the raiser is 'decent' he is likely aware he isn't just raising anybody here. b
|
|
#46
12-14-2005, 05:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] then where do you consider the borderline to be where a three-bet in this spot tips towards -EV? AT? KQ? [/ QUOTE ] That's a good question because it should be +EV if he was just a naked raise, but the presence of the limper should firm him back up, but it also sways the hand values a little, a cold call with KQs should be profitable here right? Especially if we can expect a call from the BB. AJo is clearly a loser, AJs possibly ok, but I'm willing to bet it's on the edge of negative. AQs liekly healthy, AQo, not so good. These are all by feel and not by simulation but I'd be interested to see were the break over is. It would also be interesting to see were the break over is for pairs. Around 88 I would think. [/ QUOTE ] I'm 3-betting 99+, calling with 77 and 88, folding 66-, raising AQo+. I'm still on the fence about AJs. The difference between AJo and AQo is clearly demarcated enough for me to consider AQo an easy 3-bet. I don't think AJo is a "clear" loser here, but it's enough of a marginal 3-bet that I'm not making it without postflop reads. Rob
|
|
#47
12-14-2005, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
Definitely, and the fact that player is a fish in front of him would make him more likely to raise with hands such as KJ,QJ etc... in order to isolate rather then limp behind.
|
|
#48
12-14-2005, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
If you do see the flop, you do have to be a little careful. [/ QUOTE ] Bingo. Chance of being outplayed, as well as being behind to begin with. If the 13/8 guy is weak post-flop, then maybe I'd try it once in a while.
|
|
#49
12-14-2005, 05:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
easy 3-bet IMO as the villains range to isolate the fish is wide.
|
|
#50
12-14-2005, 06:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I\'m turning jason into a LAG. The AQo test?
[ QUOTE ]
The more poker you play the more you should realise that AQo is virtually never fit to cold-call with. [/ QUOTE ] I teach my wife that she should never coldcall as the 1st one in. Then, when she's not looking, I coldcall raises with AQ all the time. You can play this hand to fit or fold profitably under almost all table conditions. I only fold against the tightest raisers, and only 3-bet against the loosest, and feel that, after struggling with this hand for ages, I finally have AQ figured out... -Eric edit: just realized that this is not the OP, but the "first unread" post in this thread I'm visiting for the first time... In teh hand, I like a 3-bet, calling next, folding last.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
