Gee, I just asked for the name of the book you're reading. I'm always interested in learning.

Great point. While I tried to give him a reasonable range, in hindsight, I was doing this for sure.

Maybe not so much to look smart (or less dumb than usual) on an internet forum. But we naturally incorporate all available info, and part of the info we were given is that this is the V in a big hand. I didn't say to myself, "OK, but we don't know that at the time."

If they take the +1 OTF, I kind of think the correct tactics might challenge the patience of a monk.

I think you probably have to chuck the lower PPs and most SCs and often suited As. Unless there are a lot of limpers, or one of them could easily stack off in a limped pot, or there are multiple very loose/bad players.

On the fun side, you can raise those hands sometimes because I think trying for some unraked pots has to become one of your goals. The ingredients for that might be, you have good reason to believe the initial limper will fold, and/or some players in the pot might also fold, and are notably bad, so that you might stack them if you hit.

After many hours of watching $3 pulled from a pot of $22, or $2 from a pot of $10, some of that money having been put in by the winner, I just don't think any kind of small balling can be good.

So bottom line is, you can only beat the rake 1) when there is no rake 2) when the pots are big and you are a big favorite.

Limp and see what happens is almost never good. Raise, c-bet, take it down is never good. (It's OK if it happens. But your initial aim should be steal or stack. You don't wannna be like, I'm gonna iso a weak player with q-10 off and then c-bet take it down).

So if one guy limps to you in MP, with 78s, or even 44, I think it's probably just a fold. I don't actually do this, which is why I'm done with that game.

I watched a Alec Torelli vid recently in which he said AQoff is an open fold for him UTG in many games.

Here, I do think it would be quite bad. We close the action. Our price is great. There are tons of worse aces and queens out there when we hit, and the people who have them won't fold because they are way worse than the Vs in most poker books.

The other thing is, higher level poker players are not seeing many flops 6 ways after a riase. It's not even that common for us. We cannot play this like a 3 way pot! I think that's what a lot of people are doing.

I think a lot of this goes back to flop play. When we hit, we need to treat our hand for what it is: an above average value hand against tons of random holdings and play it almost like a limit hand. Not as a monster. And not as a bluff catcher, where we wind up in a guessing game with the V dictating how much money goes in, which is your fear. And it's a reasonable fear.

Since nobody countered my argument with actual ranges and stuff, I remain convinced that this is the way to go and we do it by stabing at the flop to get paid by dozens of worse hands, many of which would check, protecting against the borg's 27 outer and then proceeding cautiously from there, knowing Vs are often forced to play face up. We can trap/bluff catch when we flop trips. If you think people will "exploit" you by spewing you off of tptk, do the same with sets and grow rich. And thank the MP spewer when he runs into a LP set and takes the bullet for you. I think it's correct with sets anyway.

Okay sorry I haven't posted results sooner. Been busy with life.

Here are the results...
AP Hero calls, and villain shows AA

This has been a very interesting discussion. I kinda did give away the results a bit, by naming Villain from the start. Will note for next time I do one of these PAHWM threads.

Also some of my hand description was a bit inconsistent over multiple posts. This is due to time, and me forgetting some of the details. I can't remember wether there were 4 callers of villain PF raise, or 5. Also don't remember the suits of the cards.

Neither of those points really matter too much in the grand scheme of things imho. The flop was a rainbow, so there was no way for Villain to c-bet with a flush draw.

I've thought a lot about this hand, as it was a new situation for me, and obviously I wanted to have it analysed. Playing a hand like AQo against a 200bb+ stack OOP is not easy, as the debate on this thread has shown.

I still think calling PF with this hand was the best option. Its a small price to see a multi-way flop, with a hand that we can happily muck if we miss.

3! could be good, but in my experience a squeeze play like this is best when you have a better read on the initial raiser. At the time the hand was played I didn't have a strong read on his UTG opening range. From memory, I don't think he raised UTG once, but we had only been playing for about an hour. The casino has a royal flush jackpot, and I have observed that this does cause players to raise in EP with Suited broadway cards, like QJs. But sometimes they also limp with them. No idea if this guy would do the same.

So because of the read I think its okay to assume a conservative opening range from Villain and play accordingly. A squeeze won't fold enough of his range and when we do get called, his range will crush mine, and I will be OOP in a big pot. Imagine if I 3! bet this PF and he decides to get tricky with AA and just call. I would be stacked on this board guaranteed. At least I had a chance to fold on the river here.

Its a tough spot to fold on the flop, since its one of the best for our hand. Its even tougher on the turn, as we are blocking all the really good hands he can have. But then again, what else would he be betting each street with? AQ seems like the weakest hand he could have. I don't think he would bet the flop with AK, although I was putting him on that, as the hand was happening.

The key mistake I made was on the river. That was the opportunity for me to get away from it, as I don't think this guy was capable of a huge bluff in this spot. As one of the other posters mentioned, this is where you use your live read, and make a laydown. I called too quickly, and should have taken more time on this decision.

What did he have?

Pocket rockets, bullets, American Airlines, pocket Aces, whatever you want to call them.

OP, I dunno bro. I think you might want to read the thread again (or I should). My takeaway is to 3 bet or fold. You said you still think calling was correct play.
If I’m correct with my takeaway, then why post if not going to listen to those better than us?
Just my 2 cents.

Calling isn't terrible, this would have ended better if hero had 3bet and then folded if villain 4bet but kinda results oriented. Only terrible decision is a preflop fold.

OP,
I just read your post again. I was playing cards and basically stopped when you said you thought calling pre was best. I like your analysis now that I’ve read the whole post of yours.
Disregard my last post and I’ll let the better players opine if they feel so inclined.
(Btw, I’m glad I’m not the only one who can’t remember details of HHs. I’m the absolute worst at replay.)

I guess Im terrible because I would 3 bet or fold. When the raise comes from UTG, Im folding most of the time.

Id rather have T7s in this spot than AQ.

Once in a while a little nugget I read sticks, and I remember Harrington in HoH saying something to the effect that he looks for players who overplay TPTK. This hand would certainly have been easier if the turn A hadn't come.

I still think aggression at some point in the hand would have given you more information so you can find the fold on the river. I like a flop bet, because a) you are ahead a lot if not most of the time, and b) if you get called you have been put on alert.

I'll just provide two other perspectives, which lead to opposite conclusions:

1) If you take 8s and 3s other than 88 out of V's range, you are losing to 3 combos -- 2 if you take out 88. To find a fold you would have to eliminate any non-pair combo and V's entire bluff range. I wouldn't beat myself up too much for not being able to do that.

2) If you ignore the actual cards and just look at the betting, in the history of poker, when the betting goes bet-call, check-bet-call, check-bet-call, check-shove-call, how often do you think caller wins? I would suggest only when caller is trapping with the nuts, and even then value betting the river is more likely.

Thanks for the presentation. Now all I need to do is figure out what PAHWM means lol

P*ay a h**d w*** me.

Thanks. I was on "Played A Hand With... " and couldn't come up with an "M". I guess I am just living in the past.

Final comment... I play mostly online MTT and little deep stack cash. To me this is a great hand to illustrate the difference in the approach to hands pre-flop, and in assessing opps range.

This is the bottom line in my game, imo. I equate it to sitting at a kitchen table where a big plate of chocolate chip cookies is placed in the middle. You and your opponents will sit there for 10 hours. The winner is the one who doesn't go for any of the cookies. Pretty sure ~90% of my winrate is based on this tactic alone.

Gand,fortherecord,I*love*chocolatechipcookiesG


AJo has always been an open fold for me in EP, so really AQo isn't that far off. If there are lottsa big raises for decent chunks of stacks or difficult players in position, I also typically open fold it now. But mostly I limp in and see what happens.

I really think we're being fooled by the great price we're getting preflop. It's fine if we're able to ~nutmine and release TP to little action on early streets. But if we're not able to do that, then the preflop price is a mirage that risks our stack (as it did here). One of the things I've really come around to lately is the benefit of open limping in LP; opening limping ensures the BB sees a flop (and possibly the SB due to the "great price"). This is a really good thing if the SB and BB don't play well postflop, as their "great price" now puts their whole stack at risk OOP to better opponents (not exactly as good a deal as they might think).

GcluelessNLnoobG