(5NL 6max)AQs squeze gone bad

S93

S93

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Total posts
6,154
Chips
0
Original raiser was 21/17 callers are 72/10 and 40/4.
Both callers have been limp/folding or calling and folding to c-bets.
im 25/22
Other stats avalable if needed.

--------------------
HAND #1
--------------------

poker stars, $0.02/$0.05 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
Hand History Converter by Stoxpoker

CO: 158 bb
BTN: 72 bb
Hero (SB): 125 bb
BB: 320.2 bb
UTG: 107 bb
MP: 154.2 bb

Pre-Flop: Hero is SB with Q
diamond.gif
A
diamond.gif

UTG raises to 5 bb, MP folds, CO calls 5 bb, BTN calls 5 bb, Hero raises to 20 bb, 2 folds, CO calls 15 bb, BTN calls 15 bb

Flop: (66 bb) T
diamond.gif
J
heart.gif
A
heart.gif
(3 players)
Hero??
Do i c-bet and try to get it in or what?
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
I'm at a loss, to be honest. I think UTG is the main concern because this flop either smacks him in the face or he hates the ace. So if you're best here, you're not going to extract much more from UTG unless he's calling with KK/QQ or something on his gutshot.

I think I check to see what he does. If he bets, I probably call but may fold to serious aggression on later streets (barring trips/straight/diamond turn obv). If he checks and CO bets, call and hope UTG folds.

I'm probably giving 5NL players too much credit tho (no offense); UTG's range is probably a lot wider than TT-AA, AK here.
 
S93

S93

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Total posts
6,154
Chips
0
I'm at a loss, to be honest. I think UTG is the main concern because this flop either smacks him in the face or he hates the ace. So if you're best here, you're not going to extract much more from UTG unless he's calling with KK/QQ or something on his gutshot.

I think I check to see what he does. If he bets, I probably call but may fold to serious aggression on later streets (barring trips/straight/diamond turn obv). If he checks and CO bets, call and hope UTG folds.

I'm probably giving 5NL players too much credit tho (no offense); UTG's range is probably a lot wider than TT-AA, AK here.

UTG folded preflop.... I included his stats because i wanted feedback on the preflop play as well.
im up against the CO 72/10 and BTN 40/4.
The 3bet prf was intended(or i hoped) to fold out UTG and one of the uber fish and hopefully take it down with a c-bet HU.
But even thou the UTG guy folded this flop is still terrible dirty and hit at least one of the vilians almost every time imo.
Im just whondering if im c-beting this or C/C,C/F;C/R?
since a c-bet will committed me to any shove and so maby shoving for some FE?
but then where probably only geting called by vilians upper range,so i dno.


And no offense taken 5NL players in vast majority are horrible and im a horrible ring player but learning there and profiting beats getting creamed at the higher limits.

Probly shouldnt have condenced the prf action so post the hand again.
--------------------
HAND #1
--------------------

Poker Stars, $0.02/$0.05 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
Hand History Converter by Stoxpoker

CO: 158 bb
BTN: 72 bb
Hero (SB): 125 bb
BB: 320.2 bb
UTG: 107 bb
MP: 154.2 bb

Pre-Flop: Hero is SB with Q
diamond.gif
A
diamond.gif

UTG raises to 5 bb, MP folds, CO calls 5 bb, BTN calls 5 bb, Hero raises to 20 bb, BB folds, UTG folds, CO calls 15 bb, BTN calls 15 bb

Flop: (66 bb) T
diamond.gif
J
heart.gif
A
heart.gif
(3 players)
Hero?
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Total posts
12,000
Chips
0
it hasn't gone bad, you have a good hand that you can bet for value i think
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
my bad, i read it wrong. yeah against these two i think you take them to vtown and they call with a lot worse on all streets. fold to aggression after the turn.
 
P

Paul_G

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Total posts
24
Chips
0
Hi,

I don't think your hand is a 'bad' hand but the board is quite dangerous and needs some respect. More I think you've got youself in a bad position. You have top pair, with a gutshot and backdoor flush so certainly not a disaster if you proceed.
Likely hands:

Wouldn't have thouht there's aa or kk out there, since there wasn't any reraise but you never know so can't rule it out yet. A very quick scan at some others...
AK, QQ ,JJ are possibles, as is AQ. AJ would be very loose.
TT, against some is possible but doubt it, due to your raise.
Other boradways look unlikely to me but you may get someone call with them suited.

I always say to myself that even bad players get good or bad hands and can play them badly so I wouldn't rule anything till a later street. This is the initial start point I use to determine peoples hands.

My main point is this: you can't simply determine other players hands from only their preflop action. Just the range so you're going to have to proceed further to find out if your hand is good or not. Your hand is a decent hand and although you need to tread carefully, it is too good to just give up on.
Your big problem, however, is your position in my opinion. In a way, your squeeze strategy would have been better used if used against a hand different category than you've got, such as 7c6c. Since it would be:
1. Easier to get away from in early position,
2. Would either hit the flop hard or not. If it did hit, you'd also have the benefit of thought that it probably missed the others. Im not suggesting playing 7c6c out of position but more like pointing out that your hand and position are the things giving you the headache. Infact I hate playing AQ in any position. I've had huge domination problems with this hand and lost a lot of money due to it with AK. I certainly try my best not to initially get into a situation where Id be in early position in a big pot with two callers.

However, since youre in it.

Firstly I'd be thinking do I want to be in the hand or not. Checking with the intention of just folding is not out of the question. You may feel that your fancy move has gone the wrong way and just want out. Cut your losses.

If not and you think its winnable w.r.t. your opponents.. this would be the way I'd go..

You can't check here in my opinion since you may well be ahead and need to charge a drawing hand at least for the flush. I think if you check in your position you're in an even tougher spot to make your next decision if you get raised a lot behind you. Since their bet could be inkoked from them thinking you've shown weakness and they have to bet. Most players would at least suspect the c-bet here. The only way I could think of justifying a check here is if you've checkraised a couple of times in the game and your opponents are cabable of suspecting this is a check raise.

I personally would bet for both information and protection. You may be able to get away with about over 1/3 of the pot, but personally I would bet just less than the pot. This isn't something I like to do in general, especially out of position, for the pot commitment probs later. But if you bet a lot less than the pot I think that if you get a caller, the other may also be tempted to call as well. Getting this amount will limit pot odds. By betting this amount you're going to know how serious these players are.

If you're raised youre out of the hand.

If you are called, then you're going to have to re-assess the situation with all your new information. But you could always attempt to check that from the turn if its looking like a nightmare.
On the turn, I reckon you're going to know how much of a mess you are in.

Hope thats not to convoluted and relatively easy to follow.
 
S93

S93

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Total posts
6,154
Chips
0
i c-bet 2/3 the pot and get a shove from CO,time out before calling,vilian flips over A6 and i win the pot when i hit a K on the turn.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
Paul:
I think in 6-max you have to play AQ pretty aggressively and not worry about being up against AK, especially against these these fishy players.

I agree that 3-betting preflop here is probably meh, with an UTG raiser and two fishy calling stations in position.
 
P

Paul_G

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Total posts
24
Chips
0
Yup, I'd agree with betting aggressively - which is what I would do i.e. bet just under the pot.... (Like I said this amount is not what I would like to do normally, since it looks like you could be betting into later hands with pot comittment problems).

But I think you have to consider what you could be up against and ignoring AK (as with the other hands i've listed) could be costly in any situation never mind this one since people play it aggressively. The problem is imo AQ is what I would classify as a domination type hand. The fact they are fishy doesnt mean that they don't have this type of holding.

65% of the pot upwards would be the range to bet, but due to the bad position the hero is in, I would suggest that I would bet at the top end of the scale so you could more clearly define the situation. I wouldn't like to get to the river on this one and find I was second best since the 1st round of betting was very large and would get exponential. Doing this out of position is a nightmare. I would make the claim to the pot now, or get out.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
AQ's only dominated by four hands and they make up a tiny portion of these fishes' ranges. I'd be really worried about this flop if UTG had called.
 
P

Paul_G

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Total posts
24
Chips
0
Hi,

Don't think I'd been capable to call the shove. To me, there's just not enough intelligable info to define a hand I'd be happy calling the shove. So I think I'd really be taking more of a punt than I'd be willing to risk. You certainly hand enough chips spare to do that....

I think i'd have saved my chips until I was in a more favourable position - since I believe that your position was a difficult one. But hey, each to their own. My moto is run and live to fight another day. But I'm glad it worked out for you.

Can I just ask you, what were the reasons that you thought you were good there? Did you just think that you'd take the chance because the players were weak and you'd probably be ahead, because his range was so large, perhaps....

Also BTW did these players push that hard previous to this hand on their outer ranges? Were they shoving a lot? Maybe that was you reason?
 
Tygran

Tygran

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Total posts
1,757
Chips
0
But I think you have to consider what you could be up against and ignoring AK (as with the other hands i've listed) could be costly in any situation never mind this one since people play it aggressively. The problem is imo AQ is what I would classify as a domination type hand. The fact they are fishy doesnt mean that they don't have this type of holding.

No, but it does mean they don't have this type of holding often.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
Hi,

Don't think I'd been capable to call the shove. To me, there's just not enough intelligable info to define a hand I'd be happy calling the shove. So I think I'd really be taking more of a punt than I'd be willing to risk. You certainly hand enough chips spare to do that....

I think i'd have saved my chips until I was in a more favourable position - since I believe that your position was a difficult one. But hey, each to their own. My moto is run and live to fight another day. But I'm glad it worked out for you.

Can I just ask you, what were the reasons that you thought you were good there? Did you just think that you'd take the chance because the players were weak and you'd probably be ahead, because his range was so large, perhaps....

Also BTW did these players push that hard previous to this hand on their outer ranges? Were they shoving a lot? Maybe that was you reason?

It's pretty hairy and against a tighter player you could maybe fold, in fact, as I said, I'd play this cautiously if UTG were still in there.

But this is a guy who's never folding anything preflop, and he's not that aggressive but with a PFR% of 10, you'd think he'd still 3-bet or 4-bet shove with AA/QQ/TT/AK (AA and QQ are extremely unlikely anyway).

So, sets are almost never part of his range and we're almost never outkicked; if he's beating us it's with two pair or KQ. The rest of his range entirely comprises Ax, which we have crushed, a ton of flush draws and stuff like middle pair with a draw (like QJ). We have a strong hand against his range, a redraw to the nuts, BDFD, and great pot odds to call. And yes it's a scary board but he probably thinks his Ax is the nuts.
 
Last edited:
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
We're getting like 3-1 on a call so we'd have to call this with a lot worse than AQ here.
 
S93

S93

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Total posts
6,154
Chips
0
And the reson i called the shove Paul is because my bet priced me in,i dont thing the call is wrong but the c-bet might be....

And heres the actual hand

Flop: (66 bb) T
diamond.gif
J
heart.gif
A
heart.gif
(3 players)
Hero bets 60 bb, CO raises to 138 bb and is all-in, BTN folds, Hero calls 45 bb and is all-in

Turn: (276 bb) K
diamond.gif
(2 players, 2 are all-in)
River: (276 bb) 2
club.gif
(2 players, 2 are all-in)

Results: 276 bb pot (13 bb rake)
Hero showed Q
diamond.gif
A
diamond.gif

CO mucked A
spade.gif
5
spade.gif
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
You played it fine. i wouldn't give a free card to these clowns.
 
P

Paul_G

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Total posts
24
Chips
0
3:1 looks attractive I suppose, but I think to call to 3:1 pot odds you need approx > 11 outs, don't you? Am I working that out correctly?

The only outs I can see to be ginn cards would be the 4 Ks or runner runner diamonds. Otherwise I think you're assuming that the players have a more specific range. I don't think you can do this at this stage.
Maybe its me being a bit more conservative than most - I guess that's the way I am. But the way I see it, and this is the way I play, I can see a lot of risk with this hand and I would like to be more certain when risking that amount of money. Im sure you'll get action out of these guys where you're in a much better situation. If there's this much uncertainty in a hand, I'm more or less taking an expensive punt. One I personally don't want to take because I think I'm better off finding a better position to be in.
Like I said previously just because they are bad players doesn't mean they can't have good hands.

I'm not saying your choice of play is a bad one, just one I personally wouldn't take with your stack and your position.

One more thing I forgot to mention earlier. I would also ask myself if I was willing to go all-in with this hand. If I was, and clearly you are, you could have really overbet the pot so much that it gives the impression that you are pot committed. That way you have at least had some fold equity with your bet. I don't know if that could have been something you could have considered since I get the impression that you were expecting the callers to come along anyway - so maybe not. Now I'm not sure if that's a good play or not - or fits into your play. But it would be better than checking imo. (but only because you were willing to go all in with these guys).
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
3:1 looks attractive I suppose, but I think to call to 3:1 pot odds you need approx > 11 outs, don't you? Am I working that out correctly?
.

No, we only need more than 33% equity vs. his range, which we easily have as we are only losing to 4 hands that are likely in his range.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
I should say that he's beating us with JJ, not QQ, but I think JJ is still unlikely.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
One more thing I forgot to mention earlier. I would also ask myself if I was willing to go all-in with this hand. If I was, and clearly you are, you could have really overbet the pot so much that it gives the impression that you are pot committed. That way you have at least had some fold equity with your bet. I don't know if that could have been something you could have considered since I get the impression that you were expecting the callers to come along anyway - so maybe not. Now I'm not sure if that's a good play or not - or fits into your play. But it would be better than checking imo. (but only because you were willing to go all in with these guys).


This is also wrong because you don't want to scare him away, you want to maximize your equity vs. his range...ergo, you want to give him room to make the maximum mistake. That is, if we overbet the pot, is less likely to call with worse hands (although this guy is so bad he might) and even an idiot would realize he has no fold equity. By betting 2/3, he's more likely to stick his stack in behind.
 
S93

S93

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 27, 2008
Total posts
6,154
Chips
0
3:1 looks attractive I suppose, but I think to call to 3:1 pot odds you need approx > 11 outs, don't you? Am I working that out correctly?
Whe dont need any outs since whe only have to have the wining hand about 30%.


The only outs I can see to be ginn cards would be the 4 Ks or runner runner diamonds. Otherwise I think you're assuming that the players have a more specific range. I don't think you can do this at this stage.
Maybe its me being a bit more conservative than most - I guess that's the way I am. But the way I see it, and this is the way I play, I can see a lot of risk with this hand and I would like to be more certain when risking that amount of money. Im sure you'll get action out of these guys where you're in a much better situation. If there's this much uncertainty in a hand, I'm more or less taking an expensive punt. One I personally don't want to take because I think I'm better off finding a better position to be in.
Like I said previously just because they are bad players doesn't mean they can't have good hands.
I agree whe can find better spots against these vilians, but shouldnt whe still maximize our value even in marginal spots like this one?

I'm not saying your choice of play is a bad one, just one I personally wouldn't take with your stack and your position.

One more thing I forgot to mention earlier. I would also ask myself if I was willing to go all-in with this hand. If I was, and clearly you are, you could have really overbet the pot so much that it gives the impression that you are pot committed. That way you have at least had some fold equity with your bet. I don't know if that could have been something you could have considered since I get the impression that you were expecting the callers to come along anyway - so maybe not. Now I'm not sure if that's a good play or not - or fits into your play. But it would be better than checking imo. (but only because you were willing to go all in with these guys).
Problem with overbeting here imo is that even thou these guys are total fish the would propably still fold most of there bottom range and call with there upper range(witch is still huge).
but then where losing value from the times vilians think "He is bluffing! arww in!" even thou they have no FE.


Thanks alot for all the feedback Paul and BaudiB :)
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Total posts
12,000
Chips
0
the entire hand is amazingly standard if you keep in mind that fish will never fold a pair on this board and will call 3bets a huge percentage of the time with hands we dominate preflop
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
No, we only need more than 33% equity vs. his range, which we easily have as we are only losing to 4 hands that are likely in his range.

Eg:
If we're playing live and villain were to shove in and show us AT of clubs, we still call because we have 41% equity vs. his hand (10 outs being kings, jacks, queens, as well as back door diamonds).
 
P

Paul_G

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Total posts
24
Chips
0
Ok guys, I have a question now and I'll use the example at hand.

Assuming I play 1000 hands with the same players and where I need to statistically hit 30% to make a profit. Each game can have different buys ins and they're all cash games. I'm trying not to make this sound like a maths exam :)

999 games i buy in for $100 and win say 40% of the hands. Everyones happy - well I am anyway.

Now, in the 1000th game I actually buy in for $4000 and come across that situation you have there. We still have the 30% statistic. The results from this game would totally skew my profits one way or the other.
Is it still right to call? Imo it's not.

When I personally use these statistics, I use them in general for nickel and diming - and more importantly as a tool for imformation. When someone puts me allin, I think its a case that needs a little more consideration than say 95% of the hands. This is because every hand you play is not an allin situation. Its well out of the 1 standard deviation if you were to stick it on a probability distribution function like a bell curve. You are effectively risking a disproportunate amount of your chips in one hand.

So what I'm saying is this: if I have say a pdf and I have 30% area to hit to have a better range - that's fine and dandy. But, the size of the pdf isn't constant its varying - my risk is varying in size. Each different hand will give a different size pdf w.r.t. the pot. So I can't totally rely totall on a single figure of say 30% and go only on that.

If you're still awake :), to relate this to poker terms. I'd use this figure as an extra bit of information to support the other information I've got. I don't believe I can simply say yes/no to calling this all in bet just because my PokerTracker or whatever is saying thats what the figures are.

If this bet was a simple nothing special run of the mill 3x call then yes I would. I want to see just that little more info to risk this bet.
This is why I say it's better to fold and pick a better spot.

Maybe that's totally wrong, but it makes some sense to me. I think I'll post it to Charley Swayne on PokerVT :)
 
Top