Did I play this hand correctly or am I just always dominated here?

B

BipolarDonky

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Total posts
20
Chips
0
Sorry in advance but I can't find the HH file to post this hand "correctly".
So I am playing 5NL (6-max) on ACR and the table consists of mostly LAG regs (tough table). Anyhow it’s folded to me on the button and I look down at J7s. I raise 3x BB to $0.06, SB folds, BB tanks for about 8 seconds then 3-bets to $0.17 (which has been his standard 3-bet size). It is important to note that BB is a 35/31 VPIP/PFR reg whose range from the BB is super-wide. I take a few seconds but ultimately decide to call given the info I have on him. Flop comes J 8 2 rainbow. He (almost instantaneously) fires about 2/3’s pot. Now, one thing about this particular reg is that his flop bets were generally ½ pot with few exceptions, regardless of his actual hand. As well, he bet the same amount (on flop) a bunch of hands earlier, after missing, and showed down with AKo against another reg and ended up losing the pot when no A or K fell on the Turn or River. Lastly, he is also a habitual check-raiser when he has/had strong holdings relative to the board. In any event, I tank for not very long before calling. The turn comes an off-suit Queen. Scare card for me to SOME extent. But now he tanks for about 15 seconds and fires a ½ pot bet. Now my thought process was this: given what I know about him, and all the turns I have seen him check-raise against myself and the other players when he did have a strong holding, and due to the fact that he generally would bet higher on the Turn (when opting not to check raise), this was a probe-bet to see where I was at in the hand at that point. In hindsight, the bet really looked scared and I thus should probably raise there most of the time given the fact that Qx is definitely in my range from the button. But anyway, given the info I had on him I decided to call. The river comes and it’s another J. This time he tanks for a while then over-bets the pot by quite a bit. Now he only has done this (that I have seen) once before to another reg but the other reg ended up folding to the over-bet on the river so I have no idea what he had that hand. So now I’m in sort of a tough spot (at least I thought so at the time). Even though his whole betting pattern seemed a bit off my experience tells me that over-bets on the river generally are bets made to look weak when someone actually has the nuts. However, up until this exact point in the hand, it never occurred to me that he could just be taking a really weird line with AA or KK (QQ I leave out just for the fact that he check-raises or at least check-calls that hand almost every time on the turn) or he somehow has a J. But, given the fact that there were now 2 J’s on the board and one in my hand, I deemed this as unlikely as well. In any event I tank for a bit (just really trying to deduce what he’s taking this line with) but ultimately decide to call. He flips over J9s and wins about half my stack. It's also worth noting that 88 never even crossed my mind during the hand. What here did I do wrong and how could I have better played this hand? Thanks guys.
 
vinnie

vinnie

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Total posts
1,208
Awards
1
US
Chips
50
Alright, first off, you are adjusting incorrectly from the button. If you have an aggressive three-bettor in the big blind, you need to tighten up your button raising/stealing range and/or make your button opens smaller. I wouldn't be opening with J7s for 3xbb on the button with this guy in the big blind. I probably wouldn't open it at all with him there. The hands I would open, I would open to 2xbb or 2.5xbb. Some of those hands I might have to fold for the three bet. So, I save money by opening smaller. The smaller size from me also means the three bet might be small enough that calling in position makes sense.

More importantly, I would consider what range to 4 bet against this guy. 99+, AQs+, AK ... and that might even be too tight. And I would 4-bet large, to at least a third of the effective stacks, and be committed to get it in against him pre-flop or on just about any flop.

Given that he could be barreling AK or AT or whatever, I don't hate calling down here against LAGs. I don't know that J-7s would be my first choice to go to war with, but I don't build pots with these people and intend to fold when I hit top pair. The turn is a bit scary, but he's firing all over-cards to the flop because they are supposed to be scary. The river is either a bluff or a strong hand, usually strong, but you block many. I don't hate calling here either. These guys will barrel off chips, generally, I let them do that.

Note: I wouldn't raise the turn. When you raise the turn you remove all his bluffs and continue against only his value hands. If he is going to bet with almost 100% of his range, we want to keep all the bluffs in it. When we raise the turn, he folds A-6s. If we call, he probably fires again with that on the river.

Make a note: river over-bets are strong hands, but maybe not the nuts.
 
B

BipolarDonky

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Total posts
20
Chips
0
Good Advice

This is some really sound advice. Good Stuff.
Thanks again for the reply! :D
 
D

davidhoyle107

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Total posts
182
Chips
0
Agree with vinnies very first statement. If he's 3 betting air to blind steals wait for something worth 4 betting.
 
T

TCashMoney19

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 11, 2016
Total posts
94
Awards
1
Chips
1
I agree with a lot of what Vinnie said above. I would definetly open to a smaller size in an aggressive 6max game, especially when it comes to BUT/SB/BB situations as people will be 3betting a lot more liberally and playing a lot more aggro. I would open to 2x-2.5x here and save some big blinds whenever the blinds do decide to raise me off of my equity, it helps keep my blind stealing a lot cheaper and can really help your win rate in the long run!

As for the hand itself with J7s, you'll be finding yourself in a lot of tough situations post flop. I would probably call J9s, JTs, but I think J7s is a fold here as its definitely near the bottom of our button opening range. It's hard to see any flops we LOVE, because we can't flop any strong straight draws since we're three gapped and we'll only flop a flush draw roughly 12% of the time. As much as we hate letting such pretty hands go against aggrotards, our hand plays even worse when we know he's 3betting hands like J9s from the big blind, so I think this is just a fold pre. Something you could consider is a 4bet bluff, to about 2.5x his 3bet size. Having a hyper aggressive big blind/small blind dynamic, we should open up our 4betting range as this becomes extremely profitable when the blinds are 3bet bluffing us too much. We should 4bet bluff with hands that have good removal and play well postflop, such as Ax suited and Kx suited type hands. We also want to 4bet bluff hands that we can't really call a three bet with, but can flop decent equity as a 4bet bluff. While I wouldn't ALWAYS use J7s here as a 4bet bluff, it makes a good canidate because we don't really want to call considering how weak the hand is but also considering the big blind has to fold everything but premium hands (which he only has a very small percentage of the time), I think it makes it profitable if we do it every once and a while, especially if the blinds have been punishing your openings consistently. This is assuming, however, that the blinds won't flat your 4bets wide and will only continue with the top 5-8% of hands.

As for the hand, it's an easy call on the flop considering the action. Cannot fold top pair to this type of opponent after we call preflop. The turn gets interesting when the Q hits, as it completes the 9T straight draw which I'm sure he could have as a 3bet bluff and probably gives a good amount of his hands that are bluffing a little bit more equity and also incentive to bluff as it is an overcard to the board. I would not raise this turn ever though, as we're folding out all bluffs and only allowing his hands that crush us to continue. From a GTO perspective though, you can definetly considering folding this hand and not be too exploitable, as you should have a lot of stronger jacks, some two pairs, sets and straights in your range flatting on the BUT.

As for the river, his betting line doesn't make a lot of sense for the most part and as played I think you just have to call this one down once you call the turn and get that river card. I don't think you're ALWAYS outkicked here, but just ask yourself what hands our opponent could be bluffing with and if you think he's bluffing too much in this spot then it's a clear call. On that note however, I haven't seen a TON of opponents willing to overbet bluff a river that heavily favors the BUTs range. But I guess against a LAGtard you just have to call it off and hope for the best.

tl;dr - probably should just fold pre or 4bet bluff, standard flop call, might consider folding turn sometimes and standard call on the river imo.
 
atlantafalcons0

atlantafalcons0

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Total posts
3,713
Awards
1
Chips
4
No stack sizes, don't reveal the outcome of the hand.
 
HennieP

HennieP

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 30, 2017
Total posts
186
Chips
0
BipolarDonky said:
What here did I do wrong and how could I have better played this hand

What you did wrong was to play J7 at all. What could have done better was to fold after the BB re-raised.

What happened here was that the BB correctly read your intentions to steal the blinds and decided to defend against it. None of that "I had this read or that that read on the guy" stuff. We just tell ourselves that to make us feel better after making stupid mistakes. If you had any read on the BB then you would not have made the play here knowing that he was likely to start a fight with you using a wide range of hands.

So your plan to pull a fast one on the BB failed and unbeknownst to you you both have J's with him having a slightly better kicker. You both have top pair here but given the range the BB could be playing I would still be worried. A lot. In fact, if he started betting into me I'd probably fold, although many people wouldn't.

So my advice to you would be to stop playing marginal hands because they only lead to tears. Yes, sometimes we get lucky but most of the time we get our fingers burnt. Never raise with a hand you do not want to get called on unless you're in a tournament and desperate to get some chips.
 
Joe

Joe

99.98% Kiln dried
Bronze Level
Joined
May 28, 2016
Total posts
8,333
Awards
10
GB
Chips
116
Loads of sound advice here not just for this specific hand, but poker in general. Hats off to you.

Given the information on the villain, when deciding to play this hand against him my decisions go down a similar path to yours so if anything it's a perfect example of how frustrating mediocre hands can be when you hit and why when making a move with them and coming up against resistance it's best to get out of Dodge..

Just about to start an online tourney and this thread has put my in a great headspace for it- thanks peeps!

[emoji48]
 
S

SafetyMark

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Total posts
56
Chips
0
Never raise with a hand you do not want to get called on unless you're in a tournament and desperate to get some chips.

Disclaimer: Do not take this as me being mean or trolling, I am very sincere in my response to this very specific comment.

That is, I find this to be one of the absolute worst suggestions I have ever read or heard in my entire life. I am opening this up for a dialogue so I can better understand if maybe this was only specified for the context of this hand situation. Because, taken as an independent thought, it just strikes me as atrocious.

I'm not sure if you're making a statement that just seems to take even further the prevailing sentiment of "don't bet here because you're only called down by worse" which, I should state at the outset, I regularly disagree with that analysis, too, regardless of if it is on here or by Antonio at the wsop ME Final Table.
 
S

SafetyMark

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Total posts
56
Chips
0
Alright, first off, you are adjusting incorrectly from the button. If you have an aggressive three-bettor in the big blind, you need to tighten up your button raising/stealing range and/or make your button opens smaller. I wouldn't be opening with J7s for 3xbb on the button with this guy in the big blind. I probably wouldn't open it at all with him there. The hands I would open, I would open to 2xbb or 2.5xbb. Some of those hands I might have to fold for the three bet. So, I save money by opening smaller. The smaller size from me also means the three bet might be small enough that calling in position makes sense.

More importantly, I would consider what range to 4 bet against this guy. 99+, AQs+, AK ... and that might even be too tight. And I would 4-bet large, to at least a third of the effective stacks, and be committed to get it in against him pre-flop or on just about any flop.

Given that he could be barreling AK or AT or whatever, I don't hate calling down here against LAGs. I don't know that J-7s would be my first choice to go to war with, but I don't build pots with these people and intend to fold when I hit top pair. The turn is a bit scary, but he's firing all over-cards to the flop because they are supposed to be scary. The river is either a bluff or a strong hand, usually strong, but you block many. I don't hate calling here either. These guys will barrel off chips, generally, I let them do that.

Note: I wouldn't raise the turn. When you raise the turn you remove all his bluffs and continue against only his value hands. If he is going to bet with almost 100% of his range, we want to keep all the bluffs in it. When we raise the turn, he folds A-6s. If we call, he probably fires again with that on the river.

Make a note: river over-bets are strong hands, but maybe not the nuts.

I initially really liked much of what Vinnie put down here.

I thought the hand description was clunky, at best, even making me wonder how a "5nl" has a BB of $0.02, but that's just me.

I guess I read the story differently than everyone else that commented so far, though. I didn't read this as an attempted blind steal. (Is blind stealing $0.03 with J7s even a thing? If so, that's scary) I thought he meant that the BB was super wide and so he could get max value from him and this situation (hole cards irrelevant) was an opportunity to isolate and punish.

However, like Vinnie said, you need to consider more than just the fact it has been folded to you on the button in his BB before proceeding.

Generally speaking, I don't really have a problem with getting at it preflop with J7s. Just, in the sense that you can do this with "almost" ATC and such a garbage hand as this represents at least some gutterball value. BUT, that is in scenarios where you are clearly outplaying your opponents post-flop. If that description is not obvious, that would mean, more often than not, getting good->max value when you want and getting folds when you want. The way you played it, you're getting none of that here. You turned an absolute garbage hand, all the way through, into a hand that you thought had MUCH more value than it ever did.

I think you have your answer that the consensus is you played it wrong, at least post-flop if not after getting 3bet. So how about the call on the end, as that is the defining point in the hand? I hope you realize that while you thought you had some high-value here, you don't. You have a bluff catcher. If you felt like the price you were getting was worth calling often enough to be profitable, then okay. Go ahead and state that and stick to your guns. (It's unlikely, though) If, however, you're not in that situation, as others have said, you kill your equity too often if you simply call it down regularly wondering where you stand. So, that suggests that you need to be raising on the river or disappointingly folding.

Since it seems clear that neither you or the BB are seeking GTO here, then we're talking about exploitative. If I was your opponent, I'd love to see you call with your hand here. (I realize this was on ACRap where your hole cards are not shown but work with me here) UNLESS you WANT to advertise to the table that you are willing and able to play J7s in such a fashion, the play makes no sense. It doesn't even matter what the reason for the ad would be, but showing you can battle with ATC would be fine. Instead, you allowed the BB to be that guy with that ad and he took half your stack in doing so. I'd immediately begin pummeling you for max value expecting loose/weak call downs from then on, obviously mixing in enough other play to not allow you to flip the script and begin exploiting me.

So yeah, I'd say the advice is either just fold this preflop, or fold to the 3bet as played and look for better equity. Maybe throw in the occasional limp/fold as well. But once you played this hand this way you essentially now have to drastically re-adjust to the table OR just get up entirely. (Game selection is way too underrated by those not using scripts)

(FWIW, it sucks, for you, that this is the outcome of what you'd have to do now that it played this way since it is technically a "cooler" beat by a hand 1 step up. It's a pay for what you get sort of situation though)
 
HennieP

HennieP

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 30, 2017
Total posts
186
Chips
0
Disclaimer: Do not take this as me being mean or trolling, I am very sincere in my response to this very specific comment.

That is, I find this to be one of the absolute worst suggestions I have ever read or heard in my entire life. I am opening this up for a dialogue so I can better understand if maybe this was only specified for the context of this hand situation. Because, taken as an independent thought, it just strikes me as atrocious.

I'm not sure if you're making a statement that just seems to take even further the prevailing sentiment of "don't bet here because you're only called down by worse" which, I should state at the outset, I regularly disagree with that analysis, too, regardless of if it is on here or by Antonio at the WSOP ME Final Table.

Yeah, I think you missed the point completely. We're talking about raising with garbage hands like J7. The point was if you're not prepared to get into a fight with your hand then stay out of the pot. :deal:
 
Jblocher1

Jblocher1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Total posts
2,645
Chips
0
I initially really liked much of what Vinnie put down here.



I thought the hand description was clunky, at best, even making me wonder how a "5nl" has a BB of $0.02, but that's just me.



I guess I read the story differently than everyone else that commented so far, though. I didn't read this as an attempted blind steal. (Is blind stealing $0.03 with J7s even a thing? If so, that's scary) I thought he meant that the BB was super wide and so he could get max value from him and this situation (hole cards irrelevant) was an opportunity to isolate and punish.



However, like Vinnie said, you need to consider more than just the fact it has been folded to you on the button in his BB before proceeding.



Generally speaking, I don't really have a problem with getting at it preflop with J7s. Just, in the sense that you can do this with "almost" ATC and such a garbage hand as this represents at least some gutterball value. BUT, that is in scenarios where you are clearly outplaying your opponents post-flop. If that description is not obvious, that would mean, more often than not, getting good->max value when you want and getting folds when you want. The way you played it, you're getting none of that here. You turned an absolute garbage hand, all the way through, into a hand that you thought had MUCH more value than it ever did.



I think you have your answer that the consensus is you played it wrong, at least post-flop if not after getting 3bet. So how about the call on the end, as that is the defining point in the hand? I hope you realize that while you thought you had some high-value here, you don't. You have a bluff catcher. If you felt like the price you were getting was worth calling often enough to be profitable, then okay. Go ahead and state that and stick to your guns. (It's unlikely, though) If, however, you're not in that situation, as others have said, you kill your equity too often if you simply call it down regularly wondering where you stand. So, that suggests that you need to be raising on the river or disappointingly folding.



Since it seems clear that neither you or the BB are seeking GTO here, then we're talking about exploitative. If I was your opponent, I'd love to see you call with your hand here. (I realize this was on ACRap where your hole cards are not shown but work with me here) UNLESS you WANT to advertise to the table that you are willing and able to play J7s in such a fashion, the play makes no sense. It doesn't even matter what the reason for the ad would be, but showing you can battle with ATC would be fine. Instead, you allowed the BB to be that guy with that ad and he took half your stack in doing so. I'd immediately begin pummeling you for max value expecting loose/weak call downs from then on, obviously mixing in enough other play to not allow you to flip the script and begin exploiting me.



So yeah, I'd say the advice is either just fold this preflop, or fold to the 3bet as played and look for better equity. Maybe throw in the occasional limp/fold as well. But once you played this hand this way you essentially now have to drastically re-adjust to the table OR just get up entirely. (Game selection is way too underrated by those not using scripts)



(FWIW, it sucks, for you, that this is the outcome of what you'd have to do now that it played this way since it is technically a "cooler" beat by a hand 1 step up. It's a pay for what you get sort of situation though)



Pretty much agree with mark here. Your hand is a bluff catcher and that is really all. But what I will say is this. Mark gets into a lot about exploitable lines which is definitely good stuff however it overlooks that it is OK to make exploitable plays if the table does not exploit you for them. My understanding is that this is a 2NL game and I don't worry about getting exploited for calling River here until 50/100NL.

Theoretically river is either a raise or a fold, but I think I would prefer raise given that the paired board gives u boat combinations, but this is 2NL and villain will probably never fold Jx so I think in this particular spot a call on the river is fine as a bluff catcher against what you describe to be a very laggy player. It's been a while since I've played 2NL but at those stakes river overbets tend to trend towards bluffs instead of value. At higher stakes people overbet rivers for value but I don't think people do that too much at micros unless you have a specific read that this player does.

Don't raise turn that would make 0 sense in terms of the story we are trying to tell unless you wanna rep JQ.
 
R

rickymass1

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Total posts
19
Chips
0
You should not have called the three bet pre flop. You were in position, but all other factors say fold. Jack high, terrible kicker(which cost you the hand), and your up against a reg who seems to be competent. Fold pre flop, lose 6 cents.
 
S

SafetyMark

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Total posts
56
Chips
0
Yeah, I think you missed the point completely. We're talking about raising with garbage hands like J7. The point was if you're not prepared to get into a fight with your hand then stay out of the pot. :deal:

Not exactly what you said, though, and I can only go on what you actually said.

But this point that you're making now I would also eagerly disagree with. I wouldn't say it is anywhere near as bad as I said the previous one was. And, we're all in agreement that this hand was played poorly. But the suggestion that you should never raise with garbage hands and/or stay out of the pot unless you have a hand able to fight back with ... nah, not down with that.

Thing is, for YEARS I've always been annoyed to end up in a tough spot (typically at showdown), parsing through it realizing almost no hand better makes sense and then see "unplayable hands" that take it down. J7 isn't *completely* in that category, as it still has limited equity, even if you're maybe not thrilled flopping the 2nd nut straight or a jack-high flush. But I'd be less annoyed losing to it than I would be, say, Q3o or other nonsense.

My defense of those times when this is okay is, again, just an ATC=good type of situation. I suppose the only way you can play a hand blind online is put up something that blocks you from seeing it and make sure no text is visible either that indicates to you your hand. Live, though, it is super easy to play blind. Literally, just don't look at what you're dealt and get in and mix it up. Still, the difference between the Gus Hansens and early-years Tom Dwans of the world even at micro stakes and me is that, for whatever reason, when they catch a small piece they fire at it like they've got the nutter butters. It baffles me.
 
S

SafetyMark

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Total posts
56
Chips
0
Pretty much agree with mark here. Your hand is a bluff catcher and that is really all. But what I will say is this. Mark gets into a lot about exploitable lines which is definitely good stuff however it overlooks that it is OK to make exploitable plays if the table does not exploit you for them. My understanding is that this is a 2NL game and I don't worry about getting exploited for calling River here until 50/100NL.

Theoretically river is either a raise or a fold, but I think I would prefer raise given that the paired board gives u boat combinations, but this is 2NL and villain will probably never fold Jx so I think in this particular spot a call on the river is fine as a bluff catcher against what you describe to be a very laggy player. It's been a while since I've played 2NL but at those stakes river overbets tend to trend towards bluffs instead of value. At higher stakes people overbet rivers for value but I don't think people do that too much at micros unless you have a specific read that this player does.

Don't raise turn that would make 0 sense in terms of the story we are trying to tell unless you wanna rep JQ.

Glad we agreed, at least initially. I've always been a proponent of the notion that good poker is good poker. For some reason, people buy into bots or even humans trying for GTO to follow the script at all levels of play, regardless of stakes, etc. Yet, if you play anything else, for some reason this is tossed out the window.

I'm not saying YOU are saying this, JB, but PLENTY of people will talk out of both sides of their mouth saying that play at micros is unsophisticated and isn't worth higher level thinking... and yet they also claim that these games cannot be beaten.

For the record, although this is "apparently" an "NL5" discussion that has a 2c BB (perhaps why you're saying NL2) and that's about as micro as you can get online - take it live and the vast majority of places don't bother to spread NLHE games under 1/2. There is a great book due out soon (not saying the author, etc., as it is NOT me and I'm not hyping the book here) that explains to players at ANY level the difference between GOOD/GREAT play at 1/2 & 1/3 and what everyone else is trying to do there.

Overall, what I'm trying to say is that poker theory is the same at any level. Although you may be correct to say that specifics aren't "as" necessary at NL2/5 as they are at higher stakes, the next-level thinking that I brought up should be in mind at all times. If you have it in mind but don't need it at your current level, you should then just be that much more well-prepared for battle as you move up.

However, I'd disagree that exploitable play is fine as long as it isn't exploited. Obviously, this is much more evident if you're playing in an online world that will track your play and indicate tendencies to your future opponents and similarly for any televised/broadcast (twitch/youtube is good enough) sessions. But MORE importantly, I'd say so for YOU because humans are creatures of habit. Why open Pandora's Box with exploitable play simply because of the level you're at and an expectation it won't get caught now if it makes you ANY more likely to use similarly flawed logic down the road when stakes are higher (in every aspect)?
 
HennieP

HennieP

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 30, 2017
Total posts
186
Chips
0
Not exactly what you said, though, and I can only go on what you actually said.

But this point that you're making now I would also eagerly disagree with. I wouldn't say it is anywhere near as bad as I said the previous one was. And, we're all in agreement that this hand was played poorly. But the suggestion that you should never raise with garbage hands and/or stay out of the pot unless you have a hand able to fight back with ... nah, not down with that.

Thing is, for YEARS I've always been annoyed to end up in a tough spot (typically at showdown), parsing through it realizing almost no hand better makes sense and then see "unplayable hands" that take it down. J7 isn't *completely* in that category, as it still has limited equity, even if you're maybe not thrilled flopping the 2nd nut straight or a jack-high flush. But I'd be less annoyed losing to it than I would be, say, Q3o or other nonsense.

My defense of those times when this is okay is, again, just an ATC=good type of situation. I suppose the only way you can play a hand blind online is put up something that blocks you from seeing it and make sure no text is visible either that indicates to you your hand. Live, though, it is super easy to play blind. Literally, just don't look at what you're dealt and get in and mix it up. Still, the difference between the Gus Hansens and early-years Tom Dwans of the world even at micro stakes and me is that, for whatever reason, when they catch a small piece they fire at it like they've got the nutter butters. It baffles me.

Actually it is EXACTLY what I said. You focused on my last sentence and conveniently ignored what was said before that. So let me refresh your memory.

What I said was -

So my advice to you would be to stop playing marginal hands because they only lead to tears. Yes, sometimes we get lucky but most of the time we get our fingers burnt. Never raise with a hand you do not want to get called on unless you're in a tournament and desperate to get some chips.

Which is saying the same as -

We're talking about raising with garbage hands like J7. The point was if you're not prepared to get into a fight with your hand then stay out of the pot.

Regardless,

Whether you agree or disagree with my opinion is all down to personal preference. The short version of my reasoning is simply that if you raise with J7 pre-flop and get re-raised then what? Will you 4 bet? Will you fold? Why put yourself in these spots at all?

Perhaps I should also state the obvious and say that we are assuming a filled up 9 player table and not a situation where there's 3 or 4 players remaining at the final table of a tournament. It goes without saying that our range should increase quite a lot if this is the case.

People have different ranges they feel comfortable playing in different positions. If you find that J7 type hands suits your style then go for it.

Here you can see how far behind he was in this hand.
PE7AUxV.jpg


And here you can see that even a small pair like 44 is slightly ahead.
6jwx51w.jpg


So play what you like man, I'll stick to the mathematical sound decisions.
 
Jblocher1

Jblocher1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 20, 2012
Total posts
2,645
Chips
0
Glad we agreed, at least initially. I've always been a proponent of the notion that good poker is good poker. For some reason, people buy into bots or even humans trying for GTO to follow the script at all levels of play, regardless of stakes, etc. Yet, if you play anything else, for some reason this is tossed out the window.



I'm not saying YOU are saying this, JB, but PLENTY of people will talk out of both sides of their mouth saying that play at micros is unsophisticated and isn't worth higher level thinking... and yet they also claim that these games cannot be beaten.



For the record, although this is "apparently" an "NL5" discussion that has a 2c BB (perhaps why you're saying NL2) and that's about as micro as you can get online - take it live and the vast majority of places don't bother to spread NLHE games under 1/2. There is a great book due out soon (not saying the author, etc., as it is NOT me and I'm not hyping the book here) that explains to players at ANY level the difference between GOOD/GREAT play at 1/2 & 1/3 and what everyone else is trying to do there.



Overall, what I'm trying to say is that poker theory is the same at any level. Although you may be correct to say that specifics aren't "as" necessary at NL2/5 as they are at higher stakes, the next-level thinking that I brought up should be in mind at all times. If you have it in mind but don't need it at your current level, you should then just be that much more well-prepared for battle as you move up.



However, I'd disagree that exploitable play is fine as long as it isn't exploited. Obviously, this is much more evident if you're playing in an online world that will track your play and indicate tendencies to your future opponents and similarly for any televised/broadcast (twitch/youtube is good enough) sessions. But MORE importantly, I'd say so for YOU because humans are creatures of habit. Why open Pandora's Box with exploitable play simply because of the level you're at and an expectation it won't get caught now if it makes you ANY more likely to use similarly flawed logic down the road when stakes are higher (in every aspect)?



Good poker at 2/5NL vs good poker at 100/200NL are two totally different beasts though. If you try to apply advanced theory to a 2/5NL game you are going to get slaughtered because the way to crush it is to play ABC poker and focus on getting value from monsters. I'm not sure I completely agree with the notion that good poker is good poker period. "Good poker" is completely situational and stake dependent.
 
B

braveslice

Pull-ups!
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Total posts
1,988
Chips
0
Great discussions, I don’t really see opinions that I disagree.

I think there is one source of confusion that separates opinion that I feel is actually not defined well but it’s still shared by all posters; it’s not about level anymore after you have history with villain. Yes the general tendencies can be categorized by the level, but the most important thing is the individual villain you play against. ‘Situational’ by @JB was good one. All general poker theories (except GTO) are formed around villain type and tendencies you are playing against. It’s funny though how much good high level players suffer first, before they adapt.

I still don’t quite understand what ‘Never raise with a hand you do not want to get call” means. Yes, raising J7s was borderline bad (mini bad) against aggressive player, calling 3bet a fish play, but still ever? Against nit you open 100% and cry every time he calls two times a row.
 
S

SafetyMark

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Total posts
56
Chips
0
Great discussions, I don’t really see opinions that I disagree.

I think there is one source of confusion that separates opinion that I feel is actually not defined well but it’s still shared by all posters; it’s not about level anymore after you have history with villain. Yes the general tendencies can be categorized by the level, but the most important thing is the individual villain you play against. ‘Situational’ by @JB was good one. All general poker theories (except GTO) are formed around villain type and tendencies you are playing against. It’s funny though how much good high level players suffer first, before they adapt.

I still don’t quite understand what ‘Never raise with a hand you do not want to get call” means. Yes, raising J7s was borderline bad (mini bad) against aggressive player, calling 3bet a fish play, but still ever? Against nit you open 100% and cry every time he calls two times a row.

Was going to respond to the previous two posts in response to me, but this one seems to sum it up. It is difficult to always know what you guys are saying. But, I think I'm on board with this post and feel it at least begins to provide a response in line with what I was going to anyway.
 
Starting Hands - Poker Hand Nicknames Rankings - Poker Hands
Top