Hey Guys,

To give a background, I'm a relatively new player. I wanted your opinions on this play at the $1/$3 table at my local casino.

I just sit down at the table with $100. Villain has me covered.

I was in late position with J10s, which is check to me. I raise to $10. SB raises to $22, I call.

Board comes J 8 3, and it's checked to me. I value raise to $25, thinking I was probably good with top pair, and two pair was out of range, and he raises me to $60. I put the rest of my chips in xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

Another reason I raised to $25 on PF was I noticed this guy calling a $20 preflop with Q4os.

Did I butcher this play? Was this reasonable? Could I have gotten away?
I felt checking at post-flop would have been too nit, but I honestly did not expect an overpair. His pre-flop 3-bet should have raised alarm bells, but I thought he was bullying since I was new young guy at the table.

Looking back, I probably should observed the table a bit longer as this occurred probably in the third orbit instead of immediately placing him as a maniac all the time.

Any comments are appreciated.

1) you were short-stacked
2) why did you have any J with better kicker out of V's range?
3) what did you believe they raised with out of the small blind?
4) why did you rule out a set?
5) were you at least four to a flush on the board? You didn't show suits...
6) on the flop, what did you raise? You say it was checked but that you raised? Do you actually mean to say that you BET?
7) don't play weak hands when you are short-stacked...it is a quick road to ruin.

Bingo

The flop was a rainbow. There was a heart, which meant I had a runner-runner flush draw, which I ruled out since it seemed unlikely.
I also ruled out a set I suppose because V seemed kind of crazy, I had a J blocker, and thought an 8 or 3 pair were unlikely.

Yes, I bet, not raised.

I guess I need to be more patient especially when I'm short-stacked, but I got excited when I hit top pair, and thought I could scare him off with my PF bet. Additionally, I had just busted $100 in a previous hand.

My 25-50BB game is pretty rusty, but I am relatively sure that JTs is an open raise from LP 33BB deep?

Postflop, your bet basically only serves the purpose of folding out A-high or bluff 3bets. Problem is that once he raises you have half your stack in the pot already which means you’re almost getting the right odds to stack-off if you have a backdoor flush draw to go with your pair. If you’re not willing to get all-in on that flop, check behind.

First point naturally has to be a "why aren't you buying in for at least a minimum of 150bb so that you're playing correctly and not a coward, buy in for what we consider to be acceptable" post, some people either aren't comfortable playing what the 2+2 groupthink considers to be a "normal" stack, or don't find it fun, or simply don't have the roll to. Play the post on its merits.

OP - this is somewhat marginal pre, and goes to the point I made above - a hand like JTs, while it might be somewhat neutral in terms of raising pre for value, is really a hand that plays better a lot deeper when it can get flush or straight draws, which need more potential winnings when you flop well. Your play basically amounts to a steal, someone played back at you, let it go

I suppose, considering my perceived image of the player, I put him on exactly that: a bluff 3-bet or an A high. But I suppose in those cases, my JJ wins out, so I bet in order to build the pot.

My thought process was something like this:
Hands I lose against:
Unlikely chance of 8's or 3's
Didn't really consider AA, KK, QQ (though I should have due to preflop action)
Hands I win against:
Lower Pairs
A high
3-bet bluffs

I suppose I felt the range of possibilities for the latter was greater than the range of possibilities of the former. However:
* I should have: put less emphasis in image until I've been @ table longer and have better read
* I should have: Considered possibility of premium pairs more bc of preflop action.

Would you ever fold once he raised me?

Considering his preflop action, I should have considered more strongly the likelihood and an overpaid, but I was excited in the moment about hitting top pair.

Top pair with crappy kicker is not worth stack-punting over. You've never really even addressed why AJ was out of the range you put him on, especially given some of your descriptions about other hands you saw.

I don't realistically see KJ or QJ in the range, even as described, but until you explain why you don't include AJ in the holdings, it becomes difficult to give much guidance beyond don't short-stack with crappy holdings and don't punt with top pair and less-than-stellar kicker. Never get married to top pair.

Lastly, sometimes blinds wake up with a real hand. It happens. You will see it many times in any sort of a meaningful life of playing poker.

This is probably a raise pre, not 100% sure. Button yes, HJ meh.

Calling the 3bet is meh although you're getting a great price because once you put in 20% of your chips you are kind of committed when you flop TP.

Post OK now you are committed, especially with the backdoor flush.

The whole situation kind of sucks, my guess is he has something like KK or AA that has you crushed. It's easy to see how you got here, I think calling the 3bet is the only decision point that's a clear mistake.

Why so little?


It was folded to you.

You cannot raise because there was no bet.

How does this relate to him raising (not calling) preflop? How does it relate to him check/raising you on the flop?

Demographics can't bully. Only poker actions can bully.

Correct.

First, there are reasons certain things are considered "acceptable" (and they have nothing to do necessarily with being a coward.) Second, you don't know any better than we do why he bought in for that amount, so we need to find out. Third, we are playing the post on its merits, as he said "any comments appreciated." Your rebel spirit is brave, but not really relevant.

If you could beat the J on the board, then you would have shoved preflop, and he knew that.

And now we get down to why you should not buy in for $100. It limits the types of hands you can play and play well. If you're on this forum, you're trying to play good poker and be better than the players you play against. It makes no sense to get better than your opponents, then shoot yourself in the foot by picking the wrong stack size so that you can't leverage your advantage. Hitting top pair is easy (and correct) to play when you only have less than 20BB. When you have 30-40, this hand and this flop become unplayable basically. In this range you're looking for big pairs and big cards. With a suited connector you can play if you can see a flop cheap, especially if it gets multiway and people pay off, or if it is a small heads up pot where your opponent tends to fold in small pots and you can c-bet and take them down often. Getting 3-bet preflop and then check/raised on the flop is an absolute disaster.

He’s getting 3:1 and has position. Even if calling is a mistake, I am pretty sure it’s a marginal mistake at best and not a clear one?

Trying to convert the situation to a standard shortstack spot with 20BB stack with a minraise by hero from CO and a 2.2x 3bet from villain in the SB, I actually think the hand is pretty standard played by hero.

To reiterate the obvious, ‘rules’ like “don’t stack off top pair” are made for 50BB+ games. Playing a 30BB stack with relatively big openraises or 3bet pots, you need to find reasons not to stack off with top pair. Not the other way around.

Yeah you could be right, I don't play 30bb stacks and I just don't know. Thing is the shallow stacks negate a lot of the benefit of being suited. So we have J-high, face a range we're crushed by, and are committed when we hit but still probably behind.

So it seems to me to be a spot where it looks like we're priced in but it's actually a trap because we need to hit much harder than the implied odds we're getting.

But yeah disclaimer I could be wrong, I'm not dogmatic about this.

"Buy-in full" is garbage advice for beginners for the same reason it's good advice for advanced players. Beginners are much better off buying in short and learning basic pre-flop and flop play.

I don't think JTs is a fold at any stack size from LP. In theory the hand is probably played close to optimally. Against real world 1/3 opponents who have mega-nit 3-bet ranges it's probably a fold to the 3-bet pre and a 1/4 pot bet/fold on the flop. Now that we've bet too large on the flop we are pot committed and can't really fold given the odds we're getting to stack off with two cards to come.

Basic pre- and flop play changes based on effective stack sizes. If you learn how to play short, that's all you've done.

I mean if we face a range that actually “crushes” us, things look way different.

But I don’t think we can assume that in a spot where SB should mostly play a 3bet/fold strategy against a wide LP range.

So maybe the question boils down to our perception of SB. Do we think he has zero understanding of the game and 3bets JJ+/AK while calling hands like 33? Or do we give him some credit for knowing that calling from the SB against a LP shortstack is horrible with almost any hand?

^^^

True, so now we're back to 'be more experienced at poker, then you know what to do'.

With zero info I tend to assume villain has a very strong, somewhat inelastic, 3bet range because that's my experience of the general population.

Hero is not opening, because presumably when it "checked around" that was other players limping. Raising against a field of limpers with JTs on a short stack is a mistake, and assuming that SB has anything but a very narrow value range is another substantial error.

Where did OP say that and who makes it 3.3x after 5 limpers?

Besides that, if it was limped around, he’s getting 4.25:1 on the call against the 3bet and folding would be a clear mistake. That’s basically the hot-cold equity he needs against overpairs and based on him having position we can assume he’s winning additional money when he hits against AK. That would also significantly alter the odds postflop in his favor. 6.5BB dead money is a huge deal when you have a 33BB stack and top pair become even more nuttted. Again, a 33BB stack with larger openraises or dead money is not too different from a 20BB stack with 2.5x-ish openraises. And for that, the game is pretty much solved. Back in the day my WSOP roommate was a shortstacking coach and that’s basically the definition of “easy game”.

The differences seem glaring to you because you're a relatively advanced player. For someone starting out the differences are pretty subtle. Learning to play pre-flop and the flop short-stacked does translate to full-stacked play. Not perfectly, but significantly. Playing full stacked is just going to make a beginner torch money faster.

This is a pretty common mistake that player make. You notice that a bad player is making very loose calls. When he bets or raises, you think that maybe he is making a loose raise and your top pair is good.

However, a lot of loose players are passive and only take aggressive action when they think they have the best hand. He may call with Q4 preflop, but if he isn't raising with it, then he is likely a passive player who wants to see a flop and hopes to make a hand. Maniacs aren't passive. A loose-passive player often isn't three-betting preflop without premium hands (and may not 3bet with AK) and usually isn't raising on the flop unless he can beat top pair. Different players have different degrees of looseness or passivity, but I think one of the fundamental errors of this hand is not understanding what kind of player your opponent is.

Please see above ... There's 'a book's' worth of information shown. Take the time to understand each sentence.

Also notice the raise was 'only' to $22 total ($12). Take some time to think about other 3-bet raise sizes at this table. They should be a little different. Although the urge is to 'get value', what hands are calling you here? Lots of other Jx hands have you beat and the rest include at least one, if not two, overs. How do you handle the Turn if you get called and an over-card comes out? It's two-sided ... Your opponent knows 'how much' when facing a short stack and they also know you should be operating from a smaller range because you are short.

Buying in short is fine .. it minimizes your losses from mistakes and for the most part keeps your decisions pretty straight forward. I started out at 80-100, then 120, then 160 before I would go full stack at 200 or 300 depending on the location. It's an odd combination, but you need to have more patience while incorporating a higher level of aggression when short. GL

Actually, I advanced NO position on the decision to PLAY short-stacked. It WAS a premise upon which other observations and opinions flowed.

The simple reality is that playing short-stacked IS a style that requires viewing hands from a different perspective than 'buying in full.'

There are other flaws in the play that the OP still has not addressed and are things that hopefully they will give pause for thought about in future live endeavors.