Hi 2+2ers!

Got a concept to think about here, re-squeezing preflop when you sense weakness to pick up the dead money. I'll start off with a hand history I played earlier today to illustrate my point.

Playing £1/2.


UTG+1 (£250 stack): Open raised to £10
Button (£300 stack): Calls £10.
Hero - SB (£250 stack): Calls £10 with AQo
BB (£600 stack): 3-bets to £41 -> Have seen villain do this a few times in the past 2 hours with KQ, AJ, etc.

UTG+1: Calls the £41
Button: Calls the £41
Hero: Ships it for £250 total

BB snap folds. UTG+1 snap folds. Button tanks for 2 minutes and calls with TT.


Board runs out clean and he scoops a big pot.


So the reason this should've worked is because we suspect the BB squeezer is full of it, the OR can't be strong because he just flatted the 3-bet and the button must be even weaker because he just flatted behind twice.

My re-squeeze with AQ is definitely NOT to get premium hands to fold; AK, AA, KK, QQ, JJ should not be folding here. I can possibly get JJ and worse pocket pairs to fold, which is good because I don't beat them obviously.

So my question is, if I'm shoving my AQ here and praying everybody folds, then why am I also not shoving junk here and hoping the same thing? Is there something inherently useful about having a reasonably good hand just in case I DO get called?

Looking forward to the discussion.

The difficulty with this move is that you can't rep a premium at all. I'm surprised Button had to tank before calling with TT. I would assign mostly mid pairs to your range if I were an opponent in this hand; it looks like you flatted initially to setmine and then thought you no longer had odds, and just tried to jam to pick up dead money. (Granted, I don't know what % of your typical opponents will think that.) Doing this with junk seems megaspew.

However, provided BB is squeezing really often, you have decent enough equity with AQo against calling ranges given dead money after UTG+1 and Button flat the 3bet.

Line is terrible. call reraise naw don't like it all. Maybe if you are in the blinds you can resteal.

I'm pretty sure you've answered your own questions. UTG+1 and button aren't strong, BB is suspected of making moves. Shoving AQo is + EV

Shoving AQ is better than shoving 24o because when you're called you have loads more equity.

I don't know why you think having more equity when called ISN'T useful. It's the same reason why semi bluffing with draws is better than bluffing with air.

You could reasonably claim that QJ/KJ/KQ/AQ are similar in value here, because you expect all similar Qx/Jx hands to fold. Other than that you're stretching it pretty thin. It should be beyond obvious why jamming AQ might be fine but jamming 76 would be terrible.

Given the line you represent more a medium sized pocket pair or two overcards than any premium hand so TT should be easy call here.

Considering that you got the money in for a flip with lot of dead money in it. It's not horrible situation to be. But naturally you need the equity in case someone calls, like this time.
And therefore the big overcards with blockers like AK, AQ and KQ work better in this situation than any junk.

There are two problems with this.

1. BB isn't squeezing every time. If he were then it would be a pretty easy play and the right one, but most of the time you'regoing to end up multiway OOP with no initiative.

2. This is the bigger problem. You represent pretty much nothing good. You'd never do this with your premium hands and risk the above situation which means you have a semispeculative hand that would have been content to see a flop. AQ would have surprised me really as I'd epect tosee mid pairs a lot, which means you're usually getting called by dominating hands/flipping hands and rarely folding out better.

This is so wrong that Ahrrrrrrrrhrs! my head. All this re-squeezing not going to bring you any extra money. Actually is just useless.

I for myself, am playing an alternative theoretical model of NL poker that flies in the face of traditional TAG or LAG style. This unique strategy, is the result of analytical efforts of Jimmy Downtown along with few others. It wasn't stumbled upon, it was in fact consciously constructed. The only traditional concept we use is Balugawale Theorem for turn play.

Care to elaborate?

Sorry, but what to elaborate?

He's squeeze is horrible and useless

This is so wrong that Ahrrrrrrrrhrs! my head. All this re-squeezing not going to bring you any extra money. Actually is just useless.

I for myself, am playing an alternative theoretical model of NL poker that flies in the face of traditional TAG or LAG style. This unique strategy, is the result of analytical efforts of Jimmy Downtown along with few others. It wasn't stumbled upon, it was in fact consciously constructed. The only traditional concept we use is Balugawale Theorem for turn play.

Thanks for the discussion.

Thanks especially for confirming what I thought about why we don't just do this with junk - the blockers are very important and so is our equity just in case we are called.

To the people that said the guy with TT should have snapped me off, I completely agree, however I don't think there are many hands in his range which can call me. At worst he has 99 and TT here - I think 88 and below fold and I'm unlucky if he turns up with AK and played it this way. Even if he does call me with 99 or TT I'm flipping with loads of dead money.

Definitely cannot call the 3-bet OOP with the stack sizes - it must be a raise of fold.

In this situation is AQ any different to having AK? The K blocker is irrelevant as I doubt somebody has KK here ever.

AK is better than AQ because of BB's calling range (probably QQ+/AK, maybe JJ AQs) then we do much better.
Also if any of the V's are liable to flat QQ instead of 4-betting but are happy to call you off.

Obviously, I'm wrong, because the consensus of knowledgeable posters before hand disagree. If I explain myself, you all can poke holes in my logic.


I love this play! Especially at 1/2 I find that player's wear their hand on their sleeves, and in these instances you're really only worried about getting through the BB, because he is the only player whose range could potentially have you crushed. So its really just dependent on your read, if you think he is squeezing light here and FOS then ship-ity-do-da.

You may find yourself dominated by AK of another player in the field on the occasion, but for the most part when you're looked up it'll be by 88-JJ, any other hand we would have hear from before this or finds itself in the muck. While you're a dog in those situations, look at all the dead money! More than enough to make up for being behind, and make up for the times you are called.

My argument against 3betting is that we bloat a pot that is likely to be multiway OOP, a difficult circumstance to play well.

What do you think UTG+1 and Button's ranges are after flatting the 3bet? imo AK/88+ are a pretty damn big portion of them. You're getting called here way more often than you think. (BB can also have the top part of his range this time.)

That said I still think this move is fine in this particular spot for the reasons described earlier. But you really don't have that much FE if these guys are even remotely thinking.

FPS