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

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
AJo is clearly a loser

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it.

[slavic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AJo is clearly a loser

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I stated in my post this was done by feel but we have a fairly tight raiser who we suspect is maybe playing a bit looser with the limper. Well AJ doubles our domination chances, I suspect that our villan is not much looser than ATo and maybe KQ KJ ish and of course the pairs and I'll say down to 66 on those. That's about 12% of hands and I don't see him getting to much further out of line with at least the BB likely to play also. (Remember he's only making it 2 bets)

With that hand range AJo is at an equity disadvantage to the raise, plus we have the nice added position of having to pay off with our dominated hands.

AQo it's close it really is and it could really hinge on one or two hands that the guy might raise with. Now if your going to tell me he raises with 1/3 of all hands here yea it's an easy 3 bet, but he's not going to widen his range that much if he only has an 8% raise score overall.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AJo is clearly a loser

[/ QUOTE ]

Prove it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I stated in my post this was done by feel but we have a fairly tight raiser who we suspect is maybe playing a bit looser with the limper. Well AJ doubles our domination chances, I suspect that our villan is not much looser than ATo and maybe KQ KJ ish and of course the pairs and I'll say down to 66 on those. That's about 12% of hands and I don't see him getting to much further out of line with at least the BB likely to play also. (Remember he's only making it 2 bets)

With that hand range AJo is at an equity disadvantage to the raise, plus we have the nice added position of having to pay off with our dominated hands.

AQo it's close it really is and it could really hinge on one or two hands that the guy might raise with. Now if your going to tell me he raises with 1/3 of all hands here yea it's an easy 3 bet, but he's not going to widen his range that much if he only has an 8% raise score overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

More simply our equity drops from about 34% with AQ to about 28.5% with AJ against a fishy limper and an 8% raiser.

[slavic]

Ok I ran PS (yea I know showdown stuff) for AQo with a 60% player followed by a raisers hand at the 12% range I defined earlier. Our equity is on the plus side at ~37%, however most of our equity is comming from the bad player, not the raiser.(Really that's not suprising) As that bad player tightens up or the good Lord forbid folds correctly it shrinks our edge. It also doesn't take much of a tightening from the raiser to kill our edge, with that said given the players I like the 3 bet.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I ran PS (yea I know showdown stuff) for AQo with a 60% player followed by a raisers hand at the 12% range I defined earlier. Our equity is on the plus side at ~37%, however most of our equity is comming from the bad player, not the raiser.(Really that's not suprising) As that bad player tightens up or the good Lord forbid folds correctly it shrinks our edge. It also doesn't take much of a tightening from the raiser to kill our edge, with that said given the players I like the 3 bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you run the raiser with a 12% range, AQo is ahead of his range, so it's profitable no matter what the limper does.

Even giving the raiser an 8% range, we have 47% equity heads up. So if everyone folds including the limper, we've got 1.25 BB's in dead money to fight over. I think position alone makes up for the slight equity disadvantage we have with a 8% raisers range.

So what I'm saying is that we're in a profitable situation whether the limper folds or not. Also, loose limpers don't fold for two more bets after they've put a bet in the pot.