CP8 TPTK on a monotone board

[ninefingershuffle]

Have you thought about slapping him, stepping on his glasses, and reminding him of how he was treated in high school?

[Lagitup]

Originally Posted by nonsimplesimon

No it was AQo... it was a typo. I'd have a real a tough time folding this vs the limpers which I'm scores above and overall ahead villian's range equity wise. If I feel I'm ahead preflop ill raise or reraise.

Originally Posted by Chasqui

With limpers in there you should 3bet for value when they are coming in with junk hands. We want them to put in 2BB when behind. If HU you can just call for balance/deception.

I'm all for 3-betting in position. In general I don't like 3 betting oop with AQo - especially in the SB. Pretty sure I read that in SSHE and I agree with it.

[Chasqui]

Originally Posted by Lagitup

In general I don't like 3 betting oop with AQo - especially in the SB. Pretty sure I read that in SSHE and I agree with it.

What do you mean by "not liking it"?. It's either higher ev (or not) to 3bet the AQ with two other limpers putting in 4 extra bets with junk hands.

Which do you think has higher ev?

[DougL]

Those of you suggesting that 3 betting AQo is wrong are confusing a modern LAG with a ToM of yesteryear. The advice to be careful with AQo was based on ranges and isn't just a magic formula.

[nonsimplesimon]

The Magic formula is if you think youre behind then fold. If you think youre ahead then 3! Lets put away the hand charts and play some Poker already!

Btw what's a TOM?

[Slide]

Not sure I agree we should be Ch/Folding if it checks to HJ who bets, especially after villain has shown he's capable of bluffing and aware that we are capable of folding. We still have a reasonable strength hand in a large pot and MP hasn't shown any aggression to indicate a made hand.

I agree that betting this turn is a mistake.

[Lagitup]

Originally Posted by Chasqui

What do you mean by "not liking it"?. It's either higher ev (or not) to 3bet the AQ with two other limpers putting in 4 extra bets with junk hands. Which do you think has higher ev?

Originally Posted by DougL

Those of you suggesting that 3 betting AQo is wrong are confusing a modern LAG with a ToM of yesteryear. The advice to be careful with AQo was based on ranges and isn't just a magic formula.

Originally Posted by nonsimplesimon

The Magic formula is if you think youre behind then fold. If you think youre ahead then 3! Lets put away the hand charts and play some Poker already!

When I read the OP it wasn't clear that the HJ (preflop raiser) was the laggy kid who has a wide opening range. Assuming that's the case I'm fine with a 3-bet.

Against most SSLHE players I don't think this is a 3-bet pre. I get that we're way ahead of the limpers, but there are plenty of situations where you're ahead of the limpers and still far enough behind the PFR to fold vs raise.

For example, AJo is ahead of limpers ranges, but if it's raised to you pre and you have AJo OTB against most players that's a fold in my book - even with 2 limpers. AQo is only slightly better and you're in the worst possible position. I think most of the posts on this forum don't take position into account enough.

I only referenced SSHE because I remember reading it there - not because I play with hand charts (or training wheels).

Starting a new profile is a real pita.

[DougL]

Originally Posted by Lagitup

Against most SSLHE players I don't think this is a 3-bet pre. I get that we're way ahead of the limpers, but there are plenty of situations where you're ahead of the limpers and still far enough behind the PFR to fold vs raise.

You just aren't thinking about ranges. Stove this against JJ+, AK. Then, work down to more normal ranges that you see in modern games. It is just hard to be crushed with AQo against someone who jams it up with KQ, QJs, JTs, or 88. You have a dominating hand more often than a dominated one. If your first thought is "OMG, fold" it is because you are up against a nit or because you have MUBS issues. Disclaimer, it has been a long time since I played this low. Maybe 8 games are still really nitty HPFAP games. I doubt it, but if they are then the AQo test still applies.

[Lagitup]

Originally Posted by DougL

You just aren't thinking about ranges. Stove this against JJ+, AK. Then, work down to more normal ranges that you see in modern games. It is just hard to be crushed with AQo against someone who jams it up with KQ, QJs, JTs, or 88. You have a dominating hand more often than a dominated one. If your first thought is "OMG, fold" it is because you are up against a nit or because you have MUBS issues. Disclaimer, it has been a long time since I played this low. Maybe 8 games are still really nitty HPFAP games. I doubt it, but if they are then the AQo test still applies.

Hi Doug - full disclosure: I took 2 years off playing poker. I used to play very regularly and posted on here under username 'scarmiglio'. Just jumped back into the 8/16 within the past month in California, and play mostly at HG or Comm.

Based on personal observation, most players in those games won't raise 88, QJ, JT, or KQ pre. Vs. the players that are capable of this it's an easy 3!, but the typical loose/passives still have a much tighter range - JJ+, AQ+ and plenty have an even tighter raising range - QQ+, AK.

Vs villain described in OP I agree with the 3-bet, but vs. typical SSLHE players I still disagree with the 3, especially oop.

[Lagitup]

FWIW, Assuming villain is raising TT+, AJo+, AJs+, KQo, KQs

Our AQo is still slightly behind that range - 47% to 53%.

If we add in the 2 limpers with standard ranges - any pair, any broadway, any suited, any ace, then we have about 29% equity pre vs. villain at 36%. We still have a relatively small edge vs. even money (25%), but I get it - small edges are what profitable poker is all about.

If villain is as tight as is common in these games - QQ+, AQs+, AKo, then we are absolutely crushed even with 2 limpers.

[Chasqui]

Originally Posted by Lagitup

If villain is as tight as is common in these games - QQ+, AQs+, AKo, then we are absolutely crushed even with 2 limpers.

It's understood that if the opener is the godfather of all nits then you'd have an easy fold with AQ in the small blind.

[Lagitup]

Originally Posted by Chasqui

It's understood that if the opener is the godfather of all nits then you'd have an easy fold with AQ in the small blind.

So you're saying that vs. 98% of players AQo is a standard 3-bet from the SB?

[Chasqui]

Originally Posted by Lagitup

So you're saying that vs. 98% of players AQo is a standard 3-bet from the SB?

No, I didn't say that. I'd 3bet against non nits with 2 bad limpers.

[kennydawgg]

Originally Posted by Lagitup

If villain is as tight as is common in these games - QQ+, AQs+, AKo, then we are absolutely crushed even with 2 limpers.

come on now this is Canterbury park we are talking about, no way the openers range is that tight. Who was the original raiser? I might have missed it, was it the kid with glasses?

When did this hand go down? I know one kid with glasses and an iPad that plays 15 and 30 regularly, name starts. With a R. Just tr ying to get an idea off m y past history.

Going off standard play, obviously we have a past history with the qj hand(well played by him IMO) but this hand is irrelevant as the presence of a third party makes bluffing nearly impossible in this hand. He has at least the Qs to raise here and I wouldn't be surprised if the other caller had the Ks and was playing mubsy.

As the hand plays out I would 3! For value and isolation as it might be possible (not probable) to get a two or three way flop. Depending on the original raiser you should be able to win this with a two barrel on dry boards a good % of the time. The one thing you will end up do ing from time to time is taking yourself to value town when you don't hit and laptards call you down with any pair stating "I knew he had ak,aq . . )

Your involvement in this hand ends when the fourth spade hits unfortunately. I check and call glasses boy. But if the third calls behind you your dead and if glasses is bluffing he won't bet the river ip without a hand that beats you.

[Lagitup]

Originally Posted by Chasqui

No, I didn't say that. I'd 3bet against non nits with 2 bad limpers.

You implied it. You said "It's understood that if the opener is the godfather of all nits then you'd have an easy fold with AQ in the small blind."

I'd guess that 'the godfather of all nits' makes up less than 2% of the poker population.

So what percentage of the poker population do 'nits' make up?