[QUOTE=Pghfan987;36819128]If you can't play QQ profitably in position here, then the optimal answer is not "get it in pre" but rather "unreg pre".[/Q

lol

solid reads haha

Because of course, nobody from Canada plays poker recreationally - they're all pros that moved from the US :

Just like when an opponent has a range of hands, weighted towards a certain hand strength, countries can have a range of players, weighted towards a certain skill level.

Are you willing to acknowledge that the average mid-stakes player from Malta is better than the average midstakes player from Russia? If so, when you have a super close decision, is it best to make an arbitrary decision in your mind, or is it better to use the country read?

I probably make a decision based on a country read two or three times a day. So it comes into play much less often than 1% of the time. But it's fun to talk about.

I do agree, but I don't think including Canada in the same category as Malta or Costa Rica is wise

HOF.

This was a pretty lol thread. Anyone arguing staunchly for one way or the other is being pretty narrow-minded. It's clear that both ways can be played profitably (we have QQ ffs). Arguing that flatting an UTG+1 range IP during level 1 is "terrible", is just, well, terrible.

It's like some 180 grinders are allergic to the call btn.

grunching the first like 10 posts but when i 3b pre i'm not really thinking we'll get in stacks, i'm thinking "this donk ghana flat me with 100% of his range and the pot will be so huge he can't fold anything"

Today I learnt what the word 'grunching' means.

If its a turbo i would get it in after 3-betting. ranges are much wider of the villains there.

Normal structure after the 4 betting just fold.

the first levels i like to play the hand post flop. just call the raise and let weaker hands pay your disguised qq of.

gl

I flat here alot but I have really good notes and know the guys who have a close to jjak+ range (like most winning regs) and no point getting it in vs that.
Your hud aint telling you **** just get it in if you dont play these everyday its still +ev just not always optimul

this all turrible...

Wtf is going on in this thread?? A random opens the very first hand of a SNG, we have the 3rd best hand in poker out of 169 hands and we decide to flat because 'he might have a range of top 5 hands'???

Here is a pretty simple guide to playing this hand:
- If villain is random 3 bet 100% of the time. We want to build a pot with a premium hand and avoid getting more calls behind us. Probably getting it in to most 4 bets too, although when villain makes a small 4 bet (rather than shove) folding is an option but even then vs a random I'd still get it in most times. Randoms do random things lol.
- If villain is a reg, flatting is fine but 3 betting is also fine. Depends on your read of the reg's range. Given that you know he is a reg you'll probably have some idea. Flatting is much more acceptable in this instance though.

Let me get this straight. You saw a random get it in with A7o and JJ and the lesson you drew from this was 'I should play QQ more slowly'?? I think you need to rethink the moral of this hand lol.

Thats what i want to know. But the more i think about I am happy with the idea that regs want to just flat QQ vs unknowns here (or fold to the 4bet) just leaves more of the fish's money for me.

Hahah true ^^. It's funny that the way the hand played out a random flatted a 3 bet and then 5 BET all in with A7o. And the moral of the hand was apparently 'just flat a random's UTG open with the 3rd best hand in poker'!

It's a pretty obv 3bet for value. My comments were directed at people that were making out like flatting is burning money. You can play small ball profitably, you know. It can't be "terrible" to play "the 3rd best hand in poker" in position when it is disguised. Is it as profitable as 3betting? I doubt it... doesn't make it terrible though.

Right, doing anything other than folding will be +EV with QQ. The question is what is the most +EV move against a random opening UTG+1? The answer to this is to 3 bet. 'Small ball' poker usually involves pot controlling and playing carefully with marginal hands. QQ is hardly a marginal hand. You also aren't exactly on the button or something and letting people behind you in for cheap also isn't the best option.

An analogy would be that if you someone offered you $0, $5 or $10 and you said I'll take the $5 that wouldn't be a terrible decision but it wouldn't be the best decision either.

Against a random flatting QQ is close to terrible imo. obv its gonna be profitable, open jamming AA at 10/20 is profitable, we are looking for optimal here and flatting vs randoms is not optimal. I see randoms pumped to get in some pretty funny hands early in these and to just flat QQ and deny them that chance is a crime, you are also denying them a chance to call ur 3bet with QJ etc etc and build a big pot in which to stack them.

Yeah, so basically you've just typed out a long-winded version of what I just said, thanks.

Guys, we're in agreement. I've never flatted a random at t20 with QQ in my life.

If you want me to be more specific, my comments were directed at eh777 who was being very narrow-minded.

Probably it's such a simple spot that doesn't really need 90 posts of discussion. The thread should've been:

Response 1: 3 bet pre, get it in
Response 2: +1

OK, so what do you do with the fourth best hand in poker?

Most regs are set in their ways. Then again, most regs aren't good enough to beat the next level of play.

You don't strike me as a very analytical player. You're not supposed to draw conclusions on how to play a hand in the future based off of one anecdote.

Uh, I said basically what the other guys said... We all agree flatting QQ because he might have better is bad.

You seem to have completely changed your argument.

Um no, haven't changed my argument? I'll repost my original post so there's no confusion.