Villain 1: Played 30/10, not positionally aware.
Villain 2: Played 70/5, was getting real lucky.
Villain 3: An above average player, but still limped in alot and raised occasionally. I played with him for around 3 hours and don't remember him 3 betting. He was having a good session and built up his stack to $1000.
Hero: Playing tight, but table wouldn't notice

A $15 opening raise was standard at this table. 3 bets were very rare; and historically they meant KK+ with a 100+bb villain.

$3/5 NL (9 handed)
UTG
EP V1 ($500)
MP
MP+1 V2 ($800)
HJ V3 ($1000)
CO
Button
SB Hero ($480)
BB ($500)

Hero is dealt QQ

1 fold, V1 raises to $15, 1 fold, V2 calls $15, V3 raises to $70, 2 folds, Hero?

What makes this hand any different that you would not put the RR on KK+?

BTW, since this is a live forum using HUD stats is going to be nearly meaningless. You would be much better served using conventional terms, like weak, passive, tight, aggressive, etc.

i think your kinda being too conservative with the 3betting ranges for the WHOLE table only being KK+

this is a kinda tough spot though, i really cant see myself folding QQ. i guess maybe you can flat and play it safe, i myself am 3betting and getting it in versus most opponents. i wasnt at your table, so if you are positive that a 3bet preflop means KK+ i can understand why you would fold QQ here.

I play 1/2 and there are tons of players where if I see them 3bet then I just assume KK+. Who knows, they may have worse but often enough they don't. I'm not gonna call a 3bet for set-mining purposes since in that case I may as well be calling with any pair (the fact that its QQ doesn't change anything)

Small stakes live poker is filled with weak/calling station players... if they're in there raising its more often than not the nuts or close to it. You will make your money by having them call you down with worse and call your valuebets & you will save money by making good folds in spots where fish will still call.

Against 80% of players at 1/2, and with 100BB stacks, I would fold in that spot, since by calling I know that I am essentially set-mining. Plus raises in live poker are generally bigger. It is usually 5-7X open then 17-22X for 3bet, giving me bad odds to set mine.

Poker is all about adjusting. Its pretty easy to figure out peoples raising and 3betting ranges after a couple hours of play.

Just think of it this way, lots of players will call a raise with pairs JJ or lower and tons of people also just call a raise with AKl. Lots of weak/passives will also flat with QQ. So that only leaves KK+ in their 3bet range.

[QUOTE=masaraksh;20608363]Poker is all about adjusting. Its pretty easy to figure out peoples raising and 3betting ranges after a couple hours of play.




i disagree. We dont routinely get enough hands in an entire day to understand 3 bet ranges. And takes a VERY long time to really get the top and bottom of these ranges.

This villain can have AK, simple as that. he can have TT. We dont know at this point. Being OOP, $100 or so already in pot, i am going ahead and making it 240 and force villain to shove or fold with whatever he has.

If villain elects to flat say TT or AK the 240, then he is making a grave mistake, rather than shoving.

[QUOTE=AintNoLimit;20609781] so are you saying against a Vil with some or no real history, we are always better off getting it in with QQ for 100bbs?

[QUOTE=MK7749;20609836] small stakes live poker you're better off folding QQ to the 3bet than getting it in - you're flipping at best.

I mostly play 1/2 (with some 2/5 - but if i play that i really table select) and like i said most people just limp with their weak hands, raise good hands, but then they 3bet its like the nuts and only the nuts. I usually have the widest 3betting range of my table, and I keep light 3betting to a minimum and only do it if I have a good read on villain.

[QUOTE=MK7749;20609836]
OP said above average player. To me, this means he can 3 bet AK. He can 3 bet JJ. So yes, with the info i have to go on, i get it in here.

If I fold QQ here I'd feel really bad for the rest of the session.
Why can't he have AK?
There is a raise and a call before it gets to him and he is winning, feeling confident and all..

There is a big pot in the making and I have QQ?
I can't say no to that, I never could.

[QUOTE=masaraksh;20609984]

this can be where your thoughts originate from. I dont play 1/2 and thus it may be totally valid at 1/2. And decent 2/5 player though, QQ will be ahead of his 3 bet range.

I don't really like 4betting since the range we do beat/are flipping with will fold while KK+ will insta 5-bet shove and we have to call despite the fact that he'd only ever 5bet with one of the two hands that beat us.

Folding is pretty bad too though, since QQ is just way too strong here and villain should have a wider range than just KK and AA.

I think calling might be the best option, although we have a pretty terrible stack-size for it and will be put in some very marginal spots OOP on the flop.

Thats why I said that without any reads I fold there. If you're still gonna be afraid that villain has KK/AA and not be willing to stack off on a 725r flop then you're basically set-mining with QQ and its not worth it with that stack size.

Let's do some pokerstoving.
Let's say his range was QQ+, all AK and 3 combos of JJ (This is pretty generous, I do not quite see him tricky enough to bluff here). If we get it all in everytime, here's what we get:

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

328,762,368 games 0.611 secs 538,072,615 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 55.878% 54.17% 01.71% 178097964 5607651.00 { QQ+, JcJd, JdJh, JhJs, AKs, AKo }
Hand 1: 44.122% 42.42% 01.71% 139449102 5607651.00 { QQ }

Of course, he'll probably fold his JJ or QQ which leaves me in even worse shape. Does this make sense?

If I raise and he calls, I figure the most I'll win is what is in the pot and could lose my stack or a big chunk of it.

^^^ I think thats pretty good analysis. My guess is that tons of people will lay down JJ to a cold-4bet and "getting it in" against {QQ+, AK} is really -EV.

Like I said though, this comes from playing a lot of 1/2 2/5 where at least 50% of the players are very passive and their raising and 3betting ranges are pretty easy to read. Especially 3betting ranges - most weak/passives only 3bet KK+ and thats all there is to it.

[QUOTE=AintNoLimit;20610047] Yeah I agree... get it in

somebody who 3 bets to $70 is rarely folding to 170 more pre imo... if he has tt-jj good spot to commit him to pot, if he has ak good spot to take away pot on a missed flop... if he has you crushed, go for the 20% suckout!!

I don't know, I've played a lot of pots in similar situations as this, and players of the general caliber as villain in this hand will either shut down completely if his AK whiffs, or check the flop back/bet small with JJ or TT even if their hand is an overpair to the board (or at the very least check the turn if they do bet the flop). This is aided by a.) we have just barely a big enough stack to peel off a flop cbet of $100-120 or so, and still have some FE on the turn if he does auto-shove and b.) he'll slow way down with hands that aren't KK or AA on the turn anyway. Live players might be very unaware most times but a cold-call of a 3bet will still ring some alarm bells if they're not a total moron and they're going to tread very cautiously without the nuts in a 3bet pot.

Also live reads help in this kind of spot, a LOT. You'll generally be able to get a better idea of how happy they are with their hand based on their flop action.

Why do you say that?

Does not look like a bad size to me.

Pot is $38
Open is $15

Seems fine sizing to me.

I am not really loving cold4betting QQ myself.
Just dont think when it is vs an EP open and fishy player - that it is going to be too light to begin with.
I am not trusting that TT and AQ are there very often from 3/5 live players.

Sure I accept it is good spot to widen for value to isolate fish here.

yeah loving the $110 of dead money ~ out there.

Considering the sexiness of calling and playing for stacks on favourable boards
given we have two bad players sandwich between us and the 3bettor - in a bloated pot.

Just trying to guestimate QQ equity MW vs their ranges........and how often we go into a bloated pot.

With a plan of leading into the field on low boards and putting PF 3bettor in a suckey spot if he has to overcall or overshove on the flop.

How can this be anything but a fold if this is OPs read in this game? I mean come on guys, its great to analyze and all but sometimes it is a pretty simple decision

Sounds like a pretty easy fold to me, especially given player descriptions. We'd be OOP with no plan if we call but if we raise we isolate his range to KK and AA and lose $500. Flatting means we check/fold K or A high boards and still lose to KK or AA if baby cards come. If we call we are pretty much hoping to flop a set and this is not a spot to be set mining.

This is what I was getting at with the first reply. I asked but the OP has failed to reply. So I can only assume the answer is "nothing different".

I think too many times in live play, because of the slow nature of it, that when we see a BPP we start talking ourselves into something that we can easily rationalize but is pretty hard to justify. We get caught up in the heat of the moment and ignore or minimize the facts.

Sure this villain can have a wider range than KK+, but we have no significant information to argue that he has to have a TT+/AQ+ range. The OP only has 3 hours of table time with the villain, so about 90 hands. Villain has not 3-bet PF during that time. With all the information the OP has provided we have to place a lot of weight on the KK+ range and very little on the TT+/AQ+ range, so little that we really should not even consider it.

IMO when we 4-bet here or call here we are just giving into the heat of the moment and desire to win a big pot when the facts just do not justify it. Got to fold here without more information, larger sample size, longer history on this villain.

Sorry, I thought this was a rhetorical question. The only answer is that the raiser was a slightly above average player. I guess it just felt weird to fold QQ, and I wanted to see 2+2ers views. I folded and he had JJ. He caught his set OTF and won a big pot. I feel JJ was barely in his range, so I feel good about the fold. Would KK would be a fold in this situation too?

Cool, now you have a valid sample point on this villain for the next time you sit with him.

I would have a lot harder time finding the fold button with KK without seeing the results of this hand. But yes the thinking has to be similar. The difference with KK is we now have a hand that is included in the villains range, aka blockers. With KK I am more likely to go into pot control mode, try to keep it small and get to the showdown as cheaply as possible. Maybe its a leak of mine but I am rarely folding KK PF unless I am truly deep (500BB+).

im a little miffed that you gave results this early, since i was about to retort
that it would be completely offbase to judge players to be KK+ only after this short a period.

I have players that i fold KK to their 3 bets. More than once. This to me was nowhere near the read to be able to do this.

I stick with what i said earlier, and that is we flat out give away cash by folding QQ to a player this earlier (one days play). Now that the results are in, i guess you can see why. 6 or 7 hours playing with a person isnt a scratch to how long you have to know a person to put him on that narrow a range.

IMPORTANT: I hope the repliers here take special note of this thread, because from what i see, at 1/2 and 2/5 there is a ton of misapplying ranges both ways based on insufficient evidence. We have to resist our desire to place villain on certain hands for wrong reasons and realize that they can and will usually play in standard fashions even though we havent seen it yet.

An example would be that we must give villain ability to 3 bet JJ or AK here. A ton of players will, and so there is enough evidence then that he likely would. The 3rd best hand in the deck cannot then be folded because we decide the table is tight, so he must be AA. And furthermore, if villain showed up with AA this time, everyone would be oh yeah, we knew it blah blah. When in reality the range DID include JJ. That is what im talking about. Being results oriented makes incorrect thinking even more embedded.

Breaking out of this incorrect thinking is hard to do, but its very hard to rise levels at NL until you do, because at even 5/10 there are much thinner spots that if you keep giving up because you put them on tighter ranges all the time, then you cant win.