Fine, maybe it's just me. All I'm saying is that when bet sizes are measured in buy-ins, I want to get my chips in with something better than the super-vulnerable 4th nuts.

This is a live 2/5 game, not 25NL online. People aren't putting this much money in the pot with AQ or TT very often.

This is definitely not a 20-buy in game. That's a base BR for NL games, but should be adjusted depending on the game. I think everyone would agree you need more than 20 BI's for this type of game. This plays like 5/10+ and I wouldn't sit at this game unless I had 50 BI's (25k+), unless I was just taking a shot.

You are right about my cavalier attitude towards variance. However, I don't think that constitutes either a brag or an egotistical attitude. I just think that shoving in this one situation is +ev, that's all. I might be wrong, but I'm only going off of the player descriptions and bet sizing. A solid tag/2+2 guy can have many worse hands than JJ here.

Bolded is unnecessary.

First of all I want to thank everyone so far for the input given. I have learned quite a bit so far from most of the posts. So thank you all for for the feedback.

A few important points.
1. Bankroll. I have a sufficient bank roll and was not considering variance in the hand. In fact what disappointed me so much was the fact that I would walk away from a massive pot with a large likelihood of being best going into the pot.
2. V3 ISO Range. Everyone who says V3 range is much wider than I gave credit for is right on the money.
3. Game too big. I was loose-passives biggest proponent and urged him to 'live it up.' If there is ever someone I want at my local 2-5 game, its someone who will blind bet $100. What more could we ever dream of?
4. Correct play is divided between responses between raise pre and fold. My read (very important at the time) was conflicted between meta-game 'this guy is making a move on me' and my more rational side letting me know that there is easy profit to be made $130 at a time by playing small-ball. I opted for the small ball approach because it was so easy. Anyone saying 'just shove' has advanced far above my level of thinking.

I folded, told V3 'My hat is off to you for your bet' and walked away for a little break. When I came back V2 had a massive stack and had won the pot with A5 (a pair of 5s).

Sun Tzu said when you use a tactic that the enemy has never seen before, it always works. In this case I had never been squeezed so deep, and hard. It is a 2-5 game populated by a bunch of 1-2 players.

Your feedback, and the experience, have improved my game.

Cool hand, thanks for posting. Did you find out what V3 had?

I did not ask, I assume it was AK.

I did later ask him WTF he was doing with the $600 raise. He said "I was not worried about them, I just wanted to get you out of the pot because you were the biggest threat. I wanted to gamble it up with those monkeys."

It's a great example how playing solid TAG adds that extra edge to your game. He had maybe 1% additional FE that tipped the scale.

This 100% AINEC. There's $200 of dead money just sitting there so shove and take it.

Any one of the 3 players still left behind to act can decide to gamble and call $100 and then you go to the flop 4 handed (or more!). People love a chance at winning a big pot. Picking up $200 is a pretty nice result to this hand.

The decision point you are concentrating on only occurs because you have already made a mistake earlier in the hand.

My first reaction is to just shove when it gets to us initially preflop.

Basically what quesuerte is saying is with so much dead money in the middle you can show a profit by shoving.

Which means buy in short in games with high blinds, and play fold or shove poker with ATC.

Basically what quesuerte is saying, 10bb effective holding JJ is the nuts.

grunch

wow...umm i think a pretty good argument can be made to just shove when it comes around to you the first time. I mean you are leaps and bounds ahead of a blind raise range and the solid TAG is probably going to iso raise with the top of his range to try and play heads up against the whale right? So that puts us pretty far ahead of solid TAGS calling range. Unless there is good reason to believe that the solid TAG thinks there is a big chance it gets raised behind him if he flats the $100 and is planning to 4bet then i think shove is best on your first option.

As played, i am folding and pissed at myself for how i played it.

Please don't talk nonsense. In many places, 2/5 is the highest game spread regularly.

Learn short stack strategy. You are in a short stack situation way more than you think. If your opponent is short stacked, you are too. Straddles cut your stack size in half - effectively.

When someone blind bets $100 before cards are dealt, the game just became a short stack game.It doesnt matter that the next hand might revert to standard stacks... this hand is short stacked. You must revert to short stack strategy. This does not require a higher level of thinking. In fact, this is the strategy one should learn first when learning the game because it is the simplest and easiest to learn. I know a few short stackers who do not think at a high level but would immediately recognize this situation for what it is and SHOVE the first time it came around.

Of course, the second time it comes around it has clearly become a fold. Sure you got bluffed off your hand, but that is the danger of under repping your hand the first time. Also remember that it is no big deal to be occasionally bluffed because you don't even have to catch half of the bluffs against you to be profitable. Also think of this, you were only bluffed out of one big blind bet. If being bluffed out of one big blind bet is a big deal, you should just skip this hand because you are not rolled for it.

Think of it like this... you are on the button playing 2-5 with 50 bucks. One guy (big fish) comes back from a break and has a forced blind. Everyone folds except one person who limped in and the guy who posted blind. You see JJ. Do you shove your $50? The only difference is that you are playing 50-100 with $1000 at risk. Your bankroll has to be 20 times bigger to comfortably handle the variance. IF it is not that big, the advice to leave the game (or just wait for the next hand) is appropriate.

Add: I also do not understand you logic behind calling. You are afraid that the good player will stay and the bad player will fold. But your description of the players is just the opposite. The bad player is loose pre flop and the good player is tight

"V2 MP. Is the loose passive ... He will call just about any bet... He also tends to call $50-$80 bets easily. Chases draws and over values top pair, weak kicker.

V3 is a solid TAG.... Villain reads 2+2. I have perceived him squeezing a noticeable amount of time..."

V2 is the blind and v3 just called. Which one is more likely to fold a pretty good hand like AK or QQ to your allin? which one will call with a marginal hand like 9T? Raising gets stronger players out of the game. That is exactly why 2 other players raised once you limped into the pot.

Folks advocating going all in with Jack and Jill, really don't understand standard deviation and the ultimate importance of protecting your bank-roll. Yes, sometimesyou have to pass up+EV if the risk is too great. If you were a 2/5 player with a 10k br, and one day you walk into the casino, and you see a 10/20 with a bunch of drunken tourists, would you "take a shot" at the bigger game? Too many pro players will say "yes" to that question; which is why so many talented gamblers wind up going broke eventually.

Thats because they don't excercies proper BR management. If they did they will never go broke.....unless they suck.
Here we are talking about having JJ with 10bb effective stack. Not having JJ with $1,000 effective stack. If you can't differentiate the difference, then you need to move down in stakes.

I know what you are saying. I have a friend who folded AA preflop in a high stakes game because his entire roll was on the line facing 4 all-ins.

Read the posts from the OP. His bankroll is sufficiently large and he was not concerned about the variance. He is not moving up to a bigger game with better players. He is taking advantage of a bad player making big bets in his game where he is comfortable with losing the buy in appropriate for this game. This situation is more of a mathematical problem than a variance problem. It should be evaluated the same way as you would with a set vs a wet board. Should we get it in or not? Variance should not be part of the calculation. IF it is we are playing too high.

BTW this was also pointed out in many posts and the OP assured us that he did not want to consider variance because he has sufficient bankroll.

IF you consider variance and standard deviation in your decision making for specific hands, move down because you have a leak.

Wow. This is the most flaming that I've ever seen in a thread where all of the posts by OP were perfectly sound in logic, while demonstrating both an openness towards learning and an immediate recognition that his line was likely sub-optimal.


PS: Though I didn't comment on our first action in my first post in the thread, I'm now in agreeance with those saying that shoving the first time is likely our best line. We have everyone covered and are risking a maximum of 1100 with a high likelihood of winning 210 or so when everyone folds. (Any 3 buy-in talk ignored that we have everyone covered)

You got that right. I was pissed at myself.

Last night the game saw a few $400 blind bets. It's an awesome, soft game. I want all the betting possible to be blind, and as large as possible. My problem is not fully understanding the position I am in from an equity standpoint because I have never encountered these situations. I am messing with Poker Stove and can see the error of my ways.

Last night I folded A10s, incorrectly, to two $400 blind bets (same pot) with me on the button. That should have been a call all day long. But I figured A10 is a dog to two players (it always is in normal play).

Anyway, the main character, rich millionaire, is why the game really plays. I hate going home because the opportunity is so great. It is truly the best game you can be in. And you want to be as deep as possible to take advantage of it.

Thanks for this post. You are dead on with short stack philosophy.

My rationale in flat was I expected a good chance that millionaire would shove/raise. What threw me off was nit to my left. Then TAG got hyper aggressive.

I made a mistake pre.

But consider the fact that hard learning like this is what makes us better. I adjusted my game last night (same game dynamic) and aggression level. A lot of it due to learning from these posts.

We have to remember that when we encounter new situations it is rare that we do the perfect thing. In this JJ pre question it was sub optimal. But $100 is chump change and can be made up in a few minutes at a game like this.

This 2-5 runs once a week and is the best game within 150 miles. There is a 5-10 that plays weekends 110 miles away and is far tougher. Then there is a 10/25 in Tulsa that plays every two weeks. Waiting list the day before is 20 people long.

Around here it's really all 1-2 with the same people who play 2-5 and 5-10.

Okay, his first post mentions that he's being a little "skittish" after a cooler and now being down two bi's from his peak. But yes then in a later post he mentions that he feels comfortable in this game. BTW, if it had been me I would have shoved right away.

I would have raised PF (300 ish), mainly to isolate the fish who will call your raise from your description.
Once you pass on this oppportunity you passed the batton to the guy ready to go home. Fold to his shove.

You know that feeling shortly after you get set over set against you for your stack. I call it skittish.