Is JJ in EP really that problematic

[Leroy Soesman]

I'd like to direct your attention to a thread I started in the Poker Theory Forum. I'd like some comments on this from experienced NL players.

Pleas visit it here

[pocketdueces81]

JJ is one of the most difficult hands to play in NL holdem.

If I played in a game where there was constant raising going ON pre-flop I would probably limp from UTG or UTG+1. If there was no raise then I would play the flop aggressively (my style) and then either take the pot down or be put to the test. If there was a raise preflop I am almost always coming over the top unless I have a read on my opponent.

There have been many occasions where I have not limped with this hand from EP.

What I do with JJ is dependent on my table image and overall game texture

[fsuplayer]

if i am in a tough game, I end up limping with jacks about 3/4 of the time. i just like to wait and get aggressive with them. if a couple of weak limpers limp and i have position then i will raise. but more often than not i play them more like 99 or 1010.

i also dont like to push QQ that hard either, so maybe its just me. (i also play in a very deep stacked game, which changes things with mid-high PP's a ton)

turnip-
how you playin JJ or QQ these days? from EP and LP and facing a raise or just limpers?

fsuplayer

[Leroy Soesman]

Deuces and Fsu, my ideas of JJ being one of the toughest hands to play are the same as yours. your thinking is right along the lines I was thinking. But I'd be interested in hearing the thoughts of turnip, Flynn, Diablo and Gab as well. Not to forget BK and all the other great posters here

[bunky9590]

Well in a nutshell, sometimes I limp, sometimes I raise, depends on the stacks, who's behind me, how aggressive the game is and my image at the table. If I haven't been raising much, I raise, If I've been raising alot, I limp and call a reasonable raise.

I think Matt Flynn said it best and I quote;

"JJ in limit is a group 1 hand, in NL JJ is group therapy."

[bunky9590]

Its really only a hard hand if you cant play after the flop. Preflop treat it like 99 or TT. You'll do better.

QQ kinda sux too, but I almost always raise that. 95% at least, standard bring in raise, I NEVER reraise with QQ unless its a short stack that raised coming in then I'll just set them in with the ladies.

[fsuplayer]

QQ kinda sux too, but I almost always raise that. 95% at least, standard bring in raise, I NEVER reraise with QQ unless its a short stack that raised coming in then I'll just set them in with the ladies.


this is pretty much exactly how i play QQ, except sometimes i will reraise someone who has been raising with crap to isolate them.

[bunky9590]

If someone is raising with crap, I'll just call as well and make a bunch more off him when the ladies are good. The cold call really disguises the strength of that hand.

Though like I said, I'll set in a short stack for the exact amount he has left and most players behind me have enough respect for my reraises that they will rarely call without solid values.

But thats just me. I actually agree with the way Dolly plays it for once. Thats the one good lesson that payed for the supersystem book itself. Thats suited connector stuff is are the hands that fish pay me off with. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

That book has some really good points on playing hands slowly but the first thing people see is the wild aggressive plays with the connectors and thats all they remember. Rarely are stacks deep enough for those "plays" to have any merit in the online capped max buy in games.

[prop]

the pot limit game i play in is VERY deep stacked. i come in for a raise about 75% of the time regardless so this is an easy raise for me. i almost expect to get rejacked, i almost expect to check raise the flop..yadayada

[Leroy Soesman]

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop treat it like 99 or TT.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is basically the point. My friend argues the same strategie. He suggest always limping JJ and calling raises. On the flop he'll go slowly with it. The point is that JJ out of position is a difficult hand to play, especially when an overcard hits. He'd rather pick a different spot to take a stand and doesn't mind playing the JJ for set equity only.

I argue that that is too conservative. I say there are situations where you just need to come in for a raise from EP, and play JJ for a big pot. Because JJ is a situational hand. Either you treat is as a small pair, or you treat it like a big pair. Depending on the texture of the game and the size of the stacks etc you can choose to do either which.

One distinction might be that my friend only plays online, and I play almost exclusively life on loose tabels. In that sense it might not be profitable for him to play more tricky situations with JJ out of position, because he might compensate it in other ways.

For example, hypothetically speaking; let's say he could increase his winrate by $1 if he started playing JJ more aggressive, from $20/hr to $21/hr. This would require more concentration from him in this game though. However, if he just spread that concentration across 2 tables, he would increase his winrate from $20/hr to $40/hr. That extra edge he gets from improving his JJ play would not be the best choice. (and this is assuming that he would actually improve if he were to play JJ more aggressively).

I however, cannot play 2 tables at once, unless I runaround very fast. And all of a sudden that $1 improvement becomes important.

Also, the way the online 1/2 and 2/4 tables play, it might also be the best strategy to always limp JJ because of the texture of the online games. Sometimes a style of play just becomes right because of the way the table plays; and in online poker the best strategy might be to be weak-tight.