QQ hand -- advice sought

[jwp]

Playing .10/.25 NL on Stars ($25 buy-in). I am not sure how I played this hand, and would welcome any advice or criticism. I'm not sure I'm happy with my pre-flop min-raise, but it's a heads-up hand so I'm trying to trap a little.

I'll leave off the results for now and post them later.

Thanks.



*********** # 65 **************
PokerStars Game #xxxxx: Hold'em No Limit ($0.10/$0.25) -
Table xxxx Seat #4 is the button Seat 3: VILLAIN ($24.35 in chips)
Seat 4: HERO ($35.35 in chips)
ONLOOKER will be allowed to play after the button
VILLAIN: posts small blind $0.10
HERO: posts big blind $0.25
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HERO [Qd Qs]
VILLAIN: raises $0.25 to $0.50
HERO: raises $0.50 to $1
VILLAIN: raises $0.50 to $1.50
HERO: calls $0.50
*** FLOP *** [9d Td 4d]
ONLOOKER leaves the table
VILLAIN: bets $2
HERO: calls $2
*** TURN *** [9d Td 4d] [Ad]
VILLAIN: bets $5
HERO: calls $5
*** RIVER *** [9d Td 4d Ad] [7h]
VILLAIN: bets $10
HERO: calls $10

[muzungu]

Let's see here...

Preflop: Why so cautious? If you were first to act, an initial min-raise seems ok, but he raises into you (twice in fact), so I'd be more aggressive. A pot-size bet in either case seems fine. I'm also less of a fan of slowplaying QQ than AA or KK b/c of the 2 overcards that they could pair on the flop.

flop: Again, I'd make a raise here. One idea here is that, unless they have KK, AA, or a flush, you either are ahead now or have a better draw. So I'd pop them for 8 or so here to see where they stand. They might fold now, you can probably fold to a reraise (set or flush), and if they call you should be able to get an idea of which side of the fence they are on when the next card comes. Your raise can represent either a flush draw or a good non-drawing hand (since you have both [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])

Turn/river- your read is as good as mine here... I'm thinking he's got the king. One other possibility is to perhaps min-raise him on the turn and see how he responds. If he raises or calls and bets the river he's probably got it. In this case, you save a little $ if the villain does have it. (You lose $10 vs $15).

Main idea- since you have position and a good hand you should be raising and putting the villain to the test instead of calling all the way- if he has a monster hand you will start to gain info by how he responds.

Cheers,

Dan

[tewall]

I think this is a complex hand, and a case could be made for playing it the way you did, but it would depend on what you were thinking. If you posted your thought process as to why you made the calls, you might get some useful feedback. Overall your play reeks of passiveness, but that isn't necessarily bad in and of itself. It depends what you were thinking.

Pre-flop, your re-raise was small. Twice what you raised would be a good amount.

[ripdog]

With the second nut hand I'm not too thrilled at the $10 raise. If it's a really tight player, I call and expect to see the Kd a good percentage of the time. If it's a wild man, I put him in for the rest of his ~$6 and hope for the best. As to how you played it, I think a bigger raise pre-flop is in order. I have watched as other players limped or min raised with big pairs and am totally convinced that it is a losing play (at this level anyway). I get a nice warm feeling when someone shows down AA or KK and didn't bet out until the turn. With QQ versus a bunch of limpers, I'll just call and be ready to lay it down, but in this situation I raise at least the pot. Hope you won.

[jwp]

Thanks everyone. I agree with what everyone's been saying, especially about the pre-flop raise (which I alluded to in my original post).

The problem I had during this hand is that my thought process kept coming back to the semi-random nature of NL at these limits. That is what caused my extremely passive play.

When the flop hits, I am thinking: 1) small chance this guy *could* already have the flush, but I still have a decent chance at a reasonably high flush, and I have an overpair. I am willing to see another card here (for good reason), but if an A or K offsuit hit, or possibly even a low diamond, and he bets strongly, then I might be out of there -- too many ways to lose. This would of course be giving the other guy credit for being a solid player. Something I am not sure I am willing to do yet.

When the flush A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] comes on the turn, my thoughts change entirely (of course): does he have the K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]? At this point, and with the stacks we have, I mentally commit to seeing this hand through wherever it takes me. Had he bet weakly on the turn, I would have raised him strongly. As it is, he make a reasonable bet, so I call it.

River's not a factor, and since I decided I'm willing to go all-in, I merely call his (almost) stack-sized bet. Yes, it's pretty passive, but I half expected to see the K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].

As it was, he turns over K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] and I take the pot. I still feel wishy-washy about how I played it.

Thanks to everyone who posted.

[tewall]

Given your thought process, I think you played it fine. A lot of hands lend themselves to different strategies. The strategy you followed is one that could lead to your maximizing your gains and minimizing your losses, which is often the aim of a passive strategy.

I was concerned with the passivity of your play perhaps indicating this is your normal way of playing, but it looks to me that you were looking to raise, but the situation didn't present itself, so you played the way you thought would work best.

The problem with playing more aggressively is you might chase away a worse hand and just give more money to a better hand.

[jwp]

Pre-flop: agreed.

For the rest of it, I agree with you 100% *if* I am playing a reasonable opponent. My experience at these low NL games is that generally that's not who I'm facing. So, I still think I probably have the best hand all the way throughout.
Although, that's perhaps another reason for not being so passive...

If I raise on the turn and he re-raises, I'm still not sure I lay it down (see above) unless he re-raises really high (all-in in this case).

Perhaps it would be more prudent to err on the side of caution in the future.

[limon]

[jwp]

[ QUOTE ]
The strategy you followed is one that could lead to your maximizing your gains and minimizing your losses,

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you! That is exactly what I was doing mentally, but I could not find the right words for it.

Passively is not how I want to play (nor do I think I do play that way generally), but this hand really had me in a quandary and that is precisely the way I was thinking, even if I could not put it in words.

If I thought he'd shown any weakness on the turn or even the river, I would have pounced even if it was a fancy trap.

[tewall]

One other thought on the flop. If you had a little smaller stack, you would have had the opportunity of going all-in yourself, because you have a good hand and a good non-drawing hand (as muzungu points out) meaning it's difficult for a non-nut hand to call as if it's a draw, he won't have odds (if you're laying him less than 2-1) and if it's a made hand, he might be afraid of a better made hand. If you're called, most likely by a better made hand, you still have quite a few outs. This gives you the equity of getting the other guy to fold in addition to making your hand if you're behind, or being called by a worse hand.

However, with the bigger stack you had, all-in is too big a raise as you'll only be called by a better hand and you will have in effect killed your own odds to draw to beat a better hand. (If your opposition is bad enough to call with a worse hand, however, going all-in is certainly an option.)

If you make a natural sized raise, that gives your opponent a chance to put you all-in, which you don't like. You're now in a position of perhaps laying down a better hand to a semi-bluff, or having to call a large bet when you'd rather be the one moving the money in. He has the fold equity instead of you.

So I think I'd lean towards calling with the deeper stack, as you did, unless I knew my opponent was a weak player, in which case I'd be more likely to raise.