Sorry I messed up the alphabet. Apparently I am just learning it or something.
About JJ, I used to think it was an automatic 3bet, but then I watched a Stoxpoker video where Stox and Leatherass are discussing 3betting ranges, and Stox says (and Leatherass agrees):
Quote:
I'm 3-betting AA KK. I'm 3-betting 77, 66, 55, 44. I'm 3-betting strong Aces, weak Aces.... I'm more likely to 3bet 76s than JJ, because it plays good post flop. You play medium size flops with Jacks and you don't need the FE, and you want to get some value out of them.
So I assume they understand poker better than I do, so I tried to understand why they don't 3bet JJ as a default.
The most likely situation when you're in the button and you 3bet a tag who opens from CO is that they will fold. I can't see a decent TAG calling more than about 25-30% of their CO open range, so that means, 70-75% of the time, we are only winning 5.5BB with our JJ (the 4BB raise plus the SB and BB).
I am sure I can average way more than 5.5BB a hand if I just flat call in position. JJ is way ahead of CO opening range, and we will be able win most pots by the turn without improving, picking up at least their cbet, which will be worth about as much extra value as we get when we 3bet PF and they call with a worse hand. Also, if we get 4bet by KK+ and AK, we have to fold, and we give up the chance to hit our set and stack CO, will happen often if we hit our set and they have KK+.
Obviously we will win some big reraised pots when we have JJ, but we also will often wind up being in a lot of tough positions in really large pots. I am happier playing JJ UI for 40BB than for my stack.
The question is whether we win more in the 30% of hands that villain calls with when we 3bet to make up for all the value we lose when villain folds to our 3bet. There can be a lot of value 3betting JJ, but I don’t think it is as clear-cut a decision as everyone else seems to think.