$20+2 Getting frisky with JJ in level 1

[NYCNative]

[ QUOTE ]
Problem with raising is that if you can't get it headsup, you might as well play it five handed. Seeing an expensive flop 3-handed with JJ is horrible. And what kind of raise gets you headsup here (while not getting you in trouble early too regularly)?

[/ QUOTE ]If the standard raise (like to the amount you called anyway) leaves three people, play the flop as if both players have two overs and missed. If the flop is all undercards, come out with a pot-sized bet assuming you have the best hand. If it has overs, be careful. Maybe a 1/2-pot teaser or even check-fold.

Jacks are tricky, but why turn them into 5s? Limp-call turns them into 5s, IMHO.

[NYCNative]

[ QUOTE ]
The big and obvious difference with my JJ preflop and on the flop is that I know much more about how I like my hand on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]I disagree. If you knew so much about where your hand stood, why the min-raise on the turn? What did that accomplish exactly? Did you think you had the best hand and were being cute? Were you scared you were behind somehow? What was your logic?

[waarior]

The problem with playing jj for set value that I see is that if the flop is unders like it his here it is very difficult to not overplay the hand. i.e It is deceptively strong.

Though the hand was raised. It looks like you may be overplaying the hand here because it is overs. Facing a bet, you obviously decided your hand was good as an overpair.

Not saying that it is incorrect to do so but if I play a hand (9s 10s js etc.) for set value I try to play it for set value. If the flop is unders it is a good hand, just not one I like to go broke with.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with playing jj for set value that I see is that if the flop is unders like it his here it is very difficult to not overplay the hand. i.e It is deceptively strong.

Though the hand was raised. It looks like you may be overplaying the hand here because it is overs. Facing a bet, you obviously decided your hand was good as an overpair.

Not saying that it is incorrect to do so but if I play a hand (9s 10s js etc.) for set value I try to play it for set value. If the flop is unders it is a good hand, just not one I like to go broke with.

[/ QUOTE ]

What in this hand says I was willing to go broke here?

[waarior]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem with playing jj for set value that I see is that if the flop is unders like it his here it is very difficult to not overplay the hand. i.e It is deceptively strong.

Though the hand was raised. It looks like you may be overplaying the hand here because it is overs. Facing a bet, you obviously decided your hand was good as an overpair.

Not saying that it is incorrect to do so but if I play a hand (9s 10s js etc.) for set value I try to play it for set value. If the flop is unders it is a good hand, just not one I like to go broke with.

[/ QUOTE ]

What in this hand says I was willing to go broke here?

[/ QUOTE ]

The turn push to a safe card. Not necessarilly broke on the flop. Given the action you still thought your overpair was good.

Your hand is an example of why I don't love the advice of limping with hands like these. I think you aren't giving up very much if you do but it isn't ideal. As is obvious from this post you are still often faced with difficult decisions on 'safe' flops.

I agree raising for information is poor strategy but don't discount the information you glean when your raise for the standard reasons like to increase overall expectation. If you had raised preflop everyone has to respond to that raise. Believe it or not even at the 20's that tells you something. Though I concede often it doesn't seem like it.

Not saying that not raising doesn't have some merit but the passivity seems to contrast with your willingness to pump the pot once the flop comes[getting 1/2 your original stack in before the action even gets back to the initial raiser]. Overall, at the 20's this will work out fine and you will win this hand the majority of the time but I just don't think it is best.

cheers.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem with playing jj for set value that I see is that if the flop is unders like it his here it is very difficult to not overplay the hand. i.e It is deceptively strong.

Though the hand was raised. It looks like you may be overplaying the hand here because it is overs. Facing a bet, you obviously decided your hand was good as an overpair.

Not saying that it is incorrect to do so but if I play a hand (9s 10s js etc.) for set value I try to play it for set value. If the flop is unders it is a good hand, just not one I like to go broke with.

[/ QUOTE ]

What in this hand says I was willing to go broke here?

[/ QUOTE ]

The turn push to a safe card. Not necessarilly broke on the flop. Given the action you still thought your overpair was good.

Your hand is an example of why I don't love the advice of limping with hands like these. I think you aren't giving up very much if you do but it isn't ideal. As is obvious from this post you are still often faced with difficult decisions on 'safe' flops.

I agree raising for information is poor strategy but don't discount the information you glean when your raise for the standard reasons like to increase overall expectation. If you had raised preflop everyone has to respond to that raise. Believe it or not even at the 20's that tells you something. Though I concede often it doesn't seem like it.

Not saying that not raising doesn't have some merit but the passivity seems to contrast with your willingness to pump the pot once the flop comes[getting 1/2 your original stack in before the action even gets back to the initial raiser]. Overall, at the 20's this will work out fine and you will win this hand the majority of the time but I just don't think it is best.

cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the turn it is no longer five handed, it's headsup. Furthermore it is headsup with a guy that just called where someone who has me beat on the flop would have raised 95% of the times.

I thought you meant high risk plays with "willing to go broke". If you mean plays like this, and where I got a set, quads and whatever then yes, I was willing to go broke. I am willing to go broke every hand I see the flop in that case.

I don't see what is confusing about treating JJ as a very good hand when it hits a good flop but not treating is as an all that good hand preflop in level 1-2. For me it is much closer to 88 than it is to QQ in this situation. With four players already entereing a raised pot preflop and being out of position I don't think a preflop raise makes this much easier to play, especially on a tricky flop. With a tricky flop with my way of playing it I can get away from the hand without sinking 25%+ of my chips into the hand before the flop.

In the 55s and above with a bigger starting stack and more information about my opponents, it is possible that another strategy has to be used. I think it is rarer that 5 players enter a raised pot preflop there though.

[jeffraider]

I really like the way you played this hand. I completely agree with how you treat JJ preflop, and I think the only think I'd change is uping the flop raise amount to 400ish.

[beeyjay]

PRE
limp then fold to that raise.

FLOP
Push.

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
PRE
limp then fold to that raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fold for 50 chips?

I don't mind a preflop limp OOP but folding to that measly raise -- with all those tasty implied odds for the set -- seems unreasonable.

EDIT: Hell, he's almost got IMMEDIATE odds to call.

[ilya]

Preflop I think is fine. I don't like raising with JJ in EP at my buy-ins ($22 and $33)...you make a big raise and get re-raised, you have to chuck it even though you're often folding the best hand...you make a moderate raise and you often get just the wrong number of people seeing the flop with you, 3 or 4...

Why aren't you pushing the flop? I like pushing the flop. What the heck do you do if the turn comes an Ace or King instead of a 5?