$10NL, AQ in BB

Curious to see if people have opinions on this. I'm not the hero in this case.


Previous hand the player now in BTN raised from SB with two limpers, called by MP, bet at low flop, called by MP, bet again at on the turn, MP with smallish stack shoved showing JJ but losing to KK.

Now on the button villain has raised, and we're in the BB with AQ. If I've added it up correctly, villain is 18/5 over 44 hands.


If we approach this like a Harrington problem, we get a series of options along the way.

Stacks: - MP2 with $9.85 - CO with $10.60 - BTN with $13.35 - SB with $9.75 - BB with $9.05 - UTG with $2.05 - MP1 with $5.40

Blinds: $0.00/$0.00
Site: pokerstars
* - Dealt to BB:Q♠ A♥
* - Sklansky group 3
Preflop:
**- 4 players fold.
* - BTN raises $0.30 to $0.40
**- 1 players fold.


Call? Raise? Fold?


* - Hero calls [$0.30]
* - Total folds this street: 5
* - Potsize: $0.85
Flop:
* - 2♥ A♦ J♦


Bet? Check?


* - Hero: checks
* - BTN bets [$0.60]


Call? Raise? Fold?


* - Hero calls [$0.60]
* - Potsize: $2.05
Turn:
* - 10♣


Bet? Check?


* - Hero: checks
* - BTN bets [$1.50]


Call? Raise? Fold?


* - Hero calls [$1.50]
* - Potsize: $5.05
River:
* - 5♠


Bet? Check?


* - Hero: checks
* - BTN bets [$2]


Call? Raise? Fold?






Poker Hand Converter By Cardschat.com Poker Forum

i would fold preflop if im honest, since as many of you might know by now, i hate calling raises oop, id rather be raising with 10-8 with position than calling with a,q here. Since unelss we hit a huge flop we have no idea where we stand.

Once we have called the raise however, id be check raising the flop, if villain re shoves then we can lay it down to his a,k or a,j. If he flat calls however then we can force the betting on the turn by leading out strong. I dont think the idea on this board oop is to get value, i think its about trying to either win the pot at the present moment or trying to take it to showdown cheaply. Therefore check calling is an option but i would prefer to check raise that flop to represent a bigger hand than what we have.

If a check raise is called, then we bet again on turn, if that is called i would slow down and probably check call river, since we would only really be beating busting draws at this point

I would definately be either reraising or folding this preflop. I hate flat calling hands like AQ, especially OoP b/c we have no idea where we stand. I would be reraising this one to about 1.00. We are typically ahead of a button raisers range here. If he comes over the top you can safely fold.

Yeah, the reason that I posted this hand is it's a sticky situation, and I think the BB doesn't do anything to make it less sticky.


As such, I think it has educational value. Not necessarily for those normally playing $50NL and up, but more for those of us dwelling in the lower depths.



AQo is a nice hand, Sklansky Group 3 as indicated in the Hand Converter, but you are out of position. And you flopped an Ace, top pair with a good kicker.

Any other thoughts?

I'm defo not folding this pf - that's crazy talk against a button raise from a guy playing a rush. A call oop also sucks but repop isn't that much better as we'ew liable to get called by a fairly liberal range and find ourself oop not knowing where we are in a swollen pot. The trouble is that c/cing all the way means we only beat a bluff or an overplayed AT (or even pp ), but we may be liable to lose more if we start playing it aggro oop (although this will probs only be the case if he flat calls w/AK etc.) Anyhoo in conclusion yep this is sticky and I don't like any way to play it lol

jaketrevvor said:

I'm defo not folding this pf - that's crazy talk against a button raise from a guy playing a rush. A call oop also sucks but repop isn't that much better as we'ew liable to get called by a fairly liberal range and find ourself oop not knowing where we are in a swollen pot. The trouble is that c/cing all the way means we only beat a bluff or an overplayed AT (or even pp ), but we may be liable to lose more if we start playing it aggro oop (although this will probs only be the case if he flat calls w/AK etc.) Anyhoo in conclusion yep this is sticky and I don't like any way to play it lol

Click to expand...

lol, so you don't fold, think it's a sticky situation, don't like to call all the way down, what do you do?

Cry inside while the timer runs down...

bw07507 said:

I would definately be either reraising or folding this preflop. I hate flat calling hands like AQ, especially OoP b/c we have no idea where we stand. I would be reraising this one to about 1.00. We are typically ahead of a button raisers range here. If he comes over the top you can safely fold.

Click to expand...

This is something you guys have to think about and consider why you're raising.

What types of hands do we expect villain to have?

Based on that, what type of action do we want from the different types of hands?

Based on that, what is the best line?

Folding pre-flop is incredibly weak and anyone who does that here should consider finding a different game than texas hold 'em :/

NineLions said:

18/5 over 44 hands.

Click to expand...

I see this a lot, what does it mean? My guess is that it means he had 18 winning hands, 5 losing, assuming he made called or raised the BB.

Rossta said:

I see this a lot, what does it mean? My guess is that it means he had 18 winning hands, 5 losing, assuming he made called or raised the BB.

Click to expand...

Typically it's in this format ...

VP$IP/Pre-Flop Raise %/Total Aggression Factor

VP$IP = Money Voluntarily Put Into Pot i.e. not from the SB or BB.

ChuckTs said:

This is something you guys have to think about and consider why you're raising.

What types of hands do we expect villain to have?

Based on that, what type of action do we want from the different types of hands?

Based on that, what is the best line?

Click to expand...

Okay, so what do we know?

Villian is 18/5 over 44 hands. (For those of you that don't read PT stats, that means he's put money into 18% of his hands preflop, which includes completing from the small blind but does not include checking from the big blind. And he's raised 5% of those hands)

Previous hand he raised limpers from the SB w/KK, bet/bet/called shove.

It's $10NL.

No one opened the pot, villian is now on the button.


Does this mean he has KK again? If so, folding AQ preflop is a good play, although if you were positive he had KK, then call, look for an ace or a straight/flush you could represent, or fold.

ur getting 3.5 to 1 odds to call
so i think u have to call
but he is only raising 5% of his hands but since it is such a small sample size we really dont know if he is normally this tight or if he is on a bad run of cards

As played, I'd have done exactly what the button did on the flop: lead for about $0.60 and then re-assess. It really is hard to judge with all the check-calling.

Staring from scratch though, this is how I would've played it:

Pre-flop:

I probably make it about $1.40 to go - reason being villain's range is pretty wide. If this is just a button steal, I'm happy to take the pot down here. If we get called, we've at least got an indication of where we're at, and we can proceed with caution. And if villain goes back over the top... maybe I can find a fold. Though I make no promises on that count

Flop:

The flop could've been worse for our hand. Assuming we got a flat call to our pre-flop raise: AJ and JJ have us beat and are in the villain's range (I'd assume AK would've re-popped pre-flop), but there are a range of other hands that could've flat-called our raise too: pairs maybe 77-TT, a couple of broadway cards, maybe even the dreaded sooted ace.

With around $2.80 in the pot, I probably bet somewhere in the $2.20 range. If I'm beat I want to find out now, if I'm being drawn at (broadway straight / flush / both draws are plausible) I'm making it expensive for the villain and the hand is vulnerable, so if we take it down on the flop I'd be more than happy.

Action after that really depends on what villain's response was - it's hard to speculate from the actual hand action. If villain shoves over the top on the flop, I can probably find a fold. If they flat call... then this is really getting sticky, I think I either shove a non-threatening turn card or try to see a cheap showdown. And if they fold then... well, yay.

In the ballpark / messy / just plain horrible? I've only just started developing my cash game, so feedback appreciated

NineLions said:

Okay, so what do we know?

Villian is 18/5 over 44 hands. (For those of you that don't read PT stats, that means he's put money into 18% of his hands preflop, which includes completing from the small blind but does not include checking from the big blind. And he's raised 5% of those hands)

Previous hand he raised limpers from the SB w/KK, bet/bet/called shove.

It's $10NL.

No one opened the pot, villian is now on the button.


Does this mean he has KK again? If so, folding AQ preflop is a good play, although if you were positive he had KK, then call, look for an ace or a straight/flush you could represent, or fold.

Click to expand...

Well that's taking it a little far narrowing it down to one hand. Let's look at pf first.

18/5 means he's raising with 99+,AJs+,KQs,AKo according to Pokerstove, but I think we could probably add a few more hands in there since he's on the button and is more likely to be stealing with a wider range.

Anyways, pf is clearly at least a call, though I think 3-betting is good too. If we call and miss the flop, he can buy the pot with any hand in his range, and potentially one which we have crushed since he's got position. That would be a critical mistake (and I do think not 3-betting pf is probably the worst decision in the hand).

After the flop, we're clearly ahead of his range:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.493% 38.63% 01.87% 135367 6546.00 { 99+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
Hand 1: 59.507% 57.64% 01.87% 202001 6546.00 { AQo }

Remember this is a very tight range for him and we can add a lot of other hands like QJ, JTs, 55, A8s, etc etc.

Now break the range down into hands we're ahead of, and hands we're behind.

Ahead of: AT and worse, Jx, smaller pairs (non-22 or JJ obv), draws (KQ, FDs)

Behind: sets (AA/JJ/22), AK, AJ, A2.

Now obviously we'd like to fold when he has us beat and get his whole stack when we're ahead, but we of course don't know which it is so we have to have a balanced play, and I think check-calling down is the way to go.

For one, if we're ahead, our opponent won't have very many outs to outdraw us with. I think a flush draw is the worst case, but I really don't see many hands in his range that could have flopped a FD. Something like QJ has 5 outs which is the next on the list of most likely to outdraw us, otherwise he's got 4 outs for a gutshot, 3 outs to hit his kicker with Ax, and 2 outs to hit a set with a smaller pair. Ideally if these were the only hands in his range, we'd bet for value and to protect our hand, but there are also hands we're behind here.

To balance the play, we've got to check-call any non-monstrous bets because the only way he's going to put in that much action is usually when he has us beat, otherwise he's going to check at least one street, or bet it like he has in the rest of the hand in OP.

So basically this is wa/wb, except we're not as far ahead as with AK on a K92r flop, for example. So let's say ma/wb for moderately ahead / way behind.

Anyways, this all leads to us trying to keep the pot relatively small. I'm not sure whether playing it passively like this is best, or maybe putting in a bet might be better, but as played I think it was fine (save the pf action again). Actually, I like playing it passively here because we induce so much more action from the hands we crush. If we bet it, Jx and the smaller pairs are going to run with their tails between their legs.

:dito:

Oz, that's not a bad summary/approach IMO.

Chuck, thanks for holding off, then jumping in. This is one of those hands that I thought had good instructional value, for me as well as for others. I only put that KK assumption there to try to force the issue in terms of what range of hands do you put him on.


AQ is definitely a quality hand, and the flop is not bad either as Chuck details. My issue is with how passively it was played early. Passive is good for disguising hands or playing against maniacs, neither of which should be the case here I think.

I'd tend to reraise preflop, which would have won it in this case (I was the villian). Failing that, bet out on the flop to find out where you stand. Checkraising the flop is a possibility as well, but I find a lot of $10NL players don't understand checkraises as representing strength, so that's a less reliable option IMO.

Once you check/call the flop, you're stuck check/calling the rest of the streets as well not having much sense of whether or not you might be ahead or behind, hoping for a Q to come.

OzExorcist said:

As played, I'd have done exactly what the button did on the flop: lead for about $0.60 and then re-assess. It really is hard to judge with all the check-calling.

Click to expand...

I think aside from the above, your assessment was fine.

Leading the flop loses tons of value from 99/QJ etc. Maybe they'll call the flop (unlikely imo), but they aren't putting in that turn and/or river bet as they would when we ch-c the flop.

As for the judgment as to where we are in the hand, I think we have plenty of info at the moment (see my post). A lot of posters stressed in the wa/wb threads that they don't get any info by playing hands passively - yes it's true that you are indeed much more in the dark when you play it passively, but the value you gain by doing so greatly outweighs the value you get from information. I mean what huge advantage/value does getting more info at this point yield?

NineLions said:

Checkraising the flop is a possibility as well, but I find a lot of $10NL players don't understand checkraises as representing strength, so that's a less reliable option IMO.

Click to expand...

Well again, we lose tons of value from those hands that might bet two or three streets whereas they might fold to a check-raise or even a flop lead.

ChuckTs said:

Leading the flop loses tons of value from 99/QJ etc. Maybe they'll call the flop (unlikely imo), but they aren't putting in that turn and/or river bet as they would when we ch-c the flop.

As for the judgment as to where we are in the hand, I think we have plenty of info at the moment (see my post). A lot of posters stressed in the wa/wb threads that they don't get any info by playing hands passively - yes it's true that you are indeed much more in the dark when you play it passively, but the value you gain by doing so greatly outweighs the value you get from information. I mean what huge advantage/value does getting more info at this point yield?



Well again, we lose tons of value from those hands that might bet two or three streets whereas they might fold to a check-raise or even a flop lead.

Click to expand...

Do you expect 99/QJ to keep betting? It depends on reads, and honestly I might take one more shot if I think the BB called because they suspect I'm c-betting a missed flop, but with an Ace out there I'm generally assuming I'm behind.

Hmmm, I guess if I have QJ/TT/99 and I think BB might be on a flush draw I _should_ be betting, although in this case I read BB as having an Ace.

Well it's not the logical thing to do, but opponents often will. I mean look at some of those wa/wb spots in some HA threads where people bet JJ to the river on ace-high boards.

As played the river is a must-call given our odds, but QQ/KK/QJ/99 etc most probably won't 3-barrel for these amounts which makes me a little curious what he's got. Looks like possibly Ak/AQ to me, maybe KJ or something like that or A9 and worse maybe turning their hand into a bluff.

ChuckTs said:

As for the judgment as to where we are in the hand, I think we have plenty of info at the moment (see my post). A lot of posters stressed in the wa/wb threads that they don't get any info by playing hands passively - yes it's true that you are indeed much more in the dark when you play it passively, but the value you gain by doing so greatly outweighs the value you get from information. I mean what huge advantage/value does getting more info at this point yield?

Click to expand...

Good point - against a player I've got a decent read on, I'd probably be more comfortable with the passive line.

Against one I don't have such a good read on (as was the case in this hand, my understanding of PT stats is basic at best) I think I just default to the "I'm gonna feel really dumb if I check-call this the whole way and have him roll over AJ".

I guess my other problem is that, without much of a read, I don't know how expensive this hand is going to get. I might call down some reasonable sized bets if I think they're going to stay reasonable. If the bet sizes are going to stay reasonable, by the time we reach a showdown we probably wouldn't have put any more of our stack at risk than if we'd thrown in a bigger bet somewhere - if that's the case I can see what you mean, it doesn't hurt as much to play in the dark.

What would scare me is if we're up against the kind of player who's liable to, say, bet half the pot on the flop and turn and then shove the river. In that case, I'd be more inclined to do all the dirty work on the flop.

I see what you mean and I realize it's a comfort issue. I used to be this way but am quickly seeing the pros of playing passively in spots like this. I used to remember a few spots where I tried to play passively in similar hands, but got shoved off by the river by an aggressive opponent, then immediately assume anyone could do this.

But look at the guy's stats - if he's putting in that much action he has to be either on a hand that beats us, or is putting in a very uncharacteristic (and unlikely) bluff. So basically against a guy like this if we start seeing big bets or pushes we can safely get out of the way knowing we're behind almost all the time. When he puts in these smaller bets we're usually best, I think.

OzExorcist said:

Good point - against a player I've got a decent read on, I'd probably be more comfortable with the passive line.

Against one I don't have such a good read on (as was the case in this hand, my understanding of PT stats is basic at best) I think I just default to the "I'm gonna feel really dumb if I check-call this the whole way and have him roll over AJ".

I guess my other problem is that, without much of a read, I don't know how expensive this hand is going to get. I might call down some reasonable sized bets if I think they're going to stay reasonable. If the bet sizes are going to stay reasonable, by the time we reach a showdown we probably wouldn't have put any more of our stack at risk than if we'd thrown in a bigger bet somewhere - if that's the case I can see what you mean, it doesn't hurt as much to play in the dark.

What would scare me is if we're up against the kind of player who's liable to, say, bet half the pot on the flop and turn and then shove the river. In that case, I'd be more inclined to do all the dirty work on the flop.

Click to expand...

ChuckTs said:

I see what you mean and I realize it's a comfort issue. I used to be this way but am quickly seeing the pros of playing passively in spots like this. I used to remember a few spots where I tried to play passively in similar hands, but got shoved off by the river by an aggressive opponent, then immediately assume anyone could do this.

But look at the guy's stats - if he's putting in that much action he has to be either on a hand that beats us, or is putting in a very uncharacteristic (and unlikely) bluff. So basically against a guy like this if we start seeing big bets or pushes we can safely get out of the way knowing we're behind almost all the time. When he puts in these smaller bets we're usually best, I think.

Click to expand...

But Chuck, you would've been more aggressive early, when it's less expensive, no? 3 betting preflop in this situation. If called, expecting AK/AQ/TT+.


Given the betting on all 3 streets and the size, I wouldn't expect AA/JJ, even TT, or AK/AQ given the river bet when the flush doesn't fill.


What it was was A2, at the bottom of my raising range in this situation but I figured I'd get extra credibitiliy at this table having not played many hands and showing KK last hand. It may have been a factor in the BB's passivitiy.

A very vulnerable hand though. Any other Ace that pairs beats me, and if the board pairs the J or the T I'm counterfeited. I was surprised to get called preflop, and then surprised at the end. At this level I expected A9/A8 or something. I know people play AQ passively, but I think I expected a bet out or CR on the flop with a hand that good.

NineLions said:

But Chuck, you would've been more aggressive early, when it's less expensive, no? 3 betting preflop in this situation. If called, expecting AK/AQ/TT+.

Click to expand...

True - my posts in this thread were basically as an "as played after the flop" type thing.

The way I'd play it would probably be to reraise preflop, if called, simply bet the flop and take it from there. If I'm raised I'd probably be folding expecting that I'm behind and even if I'm not I'd expect to have to pay a lot to find out.

Anyways basically what I explained in previous posts is what I'd do had I played pf the way OP did, but not had I 3-bet pf.

Stop checking, and bet out, it looks like you're chasing a flush draw or something. You should have bet out on the flop and see where your hand is good or not. I think you should call the river and hope he doesn't have Ak or AJ.