partypoker - €1 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

CO: 67.45 BB (VPIP: 74.07, PFR: 14.81, 3Bet Preflop: 7.14, Hands: 27)
BTN: 100 BB (VPIP: 21.24, PFR: 15.77, 3Bet Preflop: 6.44, Hands: 717)
SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 35.29, PFR: 35.29, 3Bet Preflop: 40.00, Hands: 17)
Hero (BB): 166.08 BB
UTG: 208.5 BB (VPIP: 27.97, PFR: 20.76, 3Bet Preflop: 4.88, Hands: 240)
MP: 119.71 BB (VPIP: 23.69, PFR: 15.13, 3Bet Preflop: 4.47, Hands: 489)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has J J

fold, fold, fold, fold, SB raises to 3 BB, Hero raises to 9 BB, SB raises to 19 BB,

No infos on vilain, would you prefer to just shove here or call and why ?

Just shove because I have no infos on how Villain plays postflop and Jacks kinda suck in a 4betted pot against a who-knows-what range

Theoretically I believe it is a shove, but readless I'd say to call since people are a bit tighter than they should be when 4-betting here.

Fortunately you do have information of Villain. The stats say he's played about 35% of hands and each of those have been raised by him so I think shoving here is good.

edit:
Actually I've changed my mind since I see he has 3-bet 40% of his hands when given the option. Make a small 5-bet and prepare to snap call his 6-bet all-in.

shove, as you would do with bluffs.

JJ is too vulnerable to flat + by flatting loses value against TT, 99 once in a while.

Trve, but what's an appropriate flatting range here?

against that sizing i'm probably flatting a pretty imbalanced range, consisting mainly of AQ, AA, and then some other hands with potential. Basically just taking advantage of pot odds. I will also take a note and 3b more hands i can comfortably flat a 4b with, if villain 4bs this small.

Not sure, how good it is though.

GII, gj if he's got QQ+ and 4bets to 19BB. So much AK, AQ and other crap there

clear shove. You have some fold equity and you also get it in against TT and AK/AQ or others some. And you don't get bad boards like AKx or QKx where you have to fold. Or really any Axx board where you can't call down.

I filtered for JJ specifically in this spot and the number of times I got in a spot to 5bet shove, which I always did, isn't big enough to prove anything. Just 6 times I got into the spot to shove but at -149.50 evbb/100, and you need to know it just needs to be better than =900bb/100 to be profitable cause that's the money you've invested already with the 3bet.

To make the range include more hands I put in the 5bet range you should have here even readless, which is AKs, AKo, AQs, AQo, TT-QQ and it's doing well at +249evbb/100. (Of course KK and AA are a 5bet too, but I didn't want them in the filter to make the results look even better.)

Much better to 5bet this hand pre than try to figure it out post.

Top post!

tytyty!

I've got a little quiz/riddle that I've asked two friends who should know the answer but didn't. I think it's pretty easy but I'm seeing how easy it is.

So in this spot when I 5bet against a 4bet I lose at -149.5 evbb/100. If i just folded pre to his initial open I'd just lose 100bb/100. Why should I not just fold pre to his first open? Everyone obviously knows not to fold pre to his open to 3 with JJ, but why would this spot have worse results than folding pre to the open?

clue: don't think about sample size or variance or stakes or reads on villains.

Well, he's no nit, and even though you have only 17 hands I think you should be able to say he'll have plenty of bluffs here. So I'd prefer a call and use position, but a shove is still +EV. It's going to depend on how comfortable you are post flop, but both call and shove are profitable.

Am I an idiot or is this obvious? He folds some of the times to the three bet or calls it. This is where you make the dough.

Because you need to include every other branch in the game tree. Ie he folds to your 3bet = profit.

Sent from my SM-G925I using Tapatalk

lol nah, I guess it's the other people I asked who are idiots. They just asked all these questions about variance and reads and stack sizes and all this other irrelevant crap when it took me 2 seconds to know it.

3betting JJ here is a clear crush for the reasons you and threadD said. It just turns into less of a crush when you face a 4bet cause 4bets are typically fairly strong and you get coolered a fair bit, but the obvious best response to this spot is to 5bet shove (flatting the 4bet isn't terrible in some spots as FreakDaddy clarified, but I do prefer a 5bet shove).

What do you guys think about 5-betting to like $32? Then we get 6-bet all-in with 76s and A5 or whatever. The guy 3-bet 40% of hands when given the option in the 17 hands that he's played. If we 5-bet small it will likely get him to 6-bet all-in. I'm not really a HUD guy, but if you look at the stats it does suggest that we can take an unconventional line and get more money out of him.

I don't think he'll call often, but if he does there will be a pot sized bet left. The game plan could go something like this on most boards; if he shoves the flop we call. If he checks, we bet 1/4 and snap call a shove. If he calls the flop. We shove the turn and hope he calls an all-in.

If we 5-bet all-in, we're leaving money on the table that we could have collected.

shove. villain likely has a fair amount of 4-bet bluffs given he is raising from the SB. If you flat, you allow him to realize equity.

1. its 17 hands sample for gods sake, stop fixating on this "he 3bet 40% of hands he opened!!11", its so small its irrelevant
2. im yet to see someone 6bet 76s vs min5b
3. after min5b you're still getting it in against the same range, but let him call and realize his equity with hands like A5s, that have 33% EQ against JJ
4. after seeing a lot of your posts I'd advise you to move down, you're definitely not good enough for NL100 and you'll find it out soon

ps i'm not against having a min5b range, because i've never done any work on it in the lab, but just mentioned some reasons why I think it's not so good.

1)
I never said "he 3-bet 40% of hands he opened." That doesn't make sense. I said "he 3-bet 40% of hands when given the option." Though the sample size is small doesn't mean we should discredit it. The stats converge faster than you may think.

Mathematically speaking we can conclude with a 95% confidence interval that his 3-bet range is +24 or -24 from 40. (Between 16 and 64). However, in the real world it probably isn't that high since we are more likely to run into a player with a 18% 3-bet than a 60% 3-bet. The bottom line is, we can assume that it is highly likely that our opponent is 3-betting loose here rather than just catching cards.

Of course he could be just getting good cards, but let us take the chance that he's just loose because he probably is. To discredit the information we have before us because we want to feel more comfy with a read is leaving potential money on the table. You use what information you have rather than playing it safe and missing out on an opportunity to make more money.

What we can deduce from our opponent thus far is that he has not called preflop ever. (note that a percentage close to 0 converges much faster than percentages closer to 50%). Also he probably 3-bets very wide.

2)
If you never 5-bet small then how can you ever expect to get 6-bet?

3)
Using preflop hand equity is not very good for postflop calculation. I agree we don't want him to call. We want him to push and since he never has called yet this is the more likely scenario. I think A5s is a perfect example for this spot. If he gets 5-bet shoved he probably will muck A5s. If we make a small 5-bet, he may end up pushing. (we're never really folding with that much of our stack committed, but our opponent may not know that or he may know but just can't help himself and put it in.)

Though our goal isn't for him to call it isn't the worst thing in the world if he does. If he has 76s and calls, there is a decent chance that he may feel obligated to bluff at the pot. That is extra money that we would not have acquired if we shoved preflop.

4)
This reason isn't viable and is unrelated to the thread. Contrary to popular belief, I've done very well at 100NL over many many hands. I am actually rolled for 200NL, but am taking it slow, plus the competition is much tougher there. I do post some weird stuff sometimes, often the hands where I feel I played poorly, so it isn't too far fetched that you may think that.

I appreciate your views on the hand, though I respectfully disagree.

After villain reraises from 9bb to 19bb, our reraise (if we minraise) will be to 29bb; over 1/4 of effective stacks will be in the middle at this point (with a little more than a PSB behind going to the flop)--I believe this is the most important variable that makes your 4-bet sizing sub par. I think that you're being a bit too optimistic about how much your sizing will induce from the villain. With the information given, we know that a jam is a clear +EV spot; utilization of your sizing however, results in our expectation becoming murkier postflop--stemming from our diminished edge due to villain being out of position with only ~one pot sized bet behind.