$10 NLHE 6-max: QQ facing aggression preflop, thoughts?

J

J_Slice

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Total posts
65
Only one orbit or so with these players. SB is looking pretty maniacal having ran 100/50 thus far. BTN has only played one hand previously.

PokerStars - $0.10 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4


MP: $13.67
CO: $8.14
BTN: $6.51
SB: $9.28
Hero (BB): $10.27
UTG: $30.31

SB posts SB $0.05, Hero posts BB $0.10

Pre Flop: (pot: $0.15) Hero has Q Q

fold, fold, fold, BTN raises to $0.30, SB raises to $1.00, Hero raises to $2.30, BTN raises to $6.51 and is all-in, SB raises to $9.28 and is all-in


I was hoping BTN would fold out and I could play vs SB heads up. Do we call now though hoping they are holding each other's outs and we take down a monster pot? I feel like this is an easy decision but marked it at the time because I wasn't sure and struggled in the moment. Thanks for any input!
 
G

gustav197poker

Legend
Joined
May 2, 2019
Total posts
1,110
Awards
1
It is a standard fold. Although BTN has 65 bb you should not assume that he plays very wide when you do not have reliable information about him. Your intention to isolate SB's villain is not bad, but when BTN gets stuck his range is screaming KK +. It could even be interpreted that the BTN does not care that the isolation is with you or with the SB. Which should make us think that V2 possibly has KK as its main bluff and its most probable value should be AA, because when SB 6-bet his range perceived as wide could contain all AK combos. And it's a bit optimistic that an unknown V of 10NL has a worse hand than QQ, which you are blocking.
Greetings.
 
J

J_Slice

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Total posts
65
I'm all in for sure. Already committed with that 4 bet size

Versus my original target the SB that was my plan, although the action after my 4bet had me stop and think twice.

It is a standard fold. Although BTN has 65 bb you should not assume that he plays very wide when you do not have reliable information about him. Your intention to isolate SB's villain is not bad, but when BTN gets stuck his range is screaming KK +. It could even be interpreted that the BTN does not care that the isolation is with you or with the SB. Which should make us think that V2 possibly has KK as its main bluff and its most probable value should be AA, because when SB 6-bet his range perceived as wide could contain all AK combos. And it's a bit optimistic that an unknown V of 10NL has a worse hand than QQ, which you are blocking.
Greetings.

Thank you for the reply. I agree that BTN's bet does scream strength. Typically at 10 NL and below I do see quite a bit of getting it in pre flop with less than QQ that is why on review I wondered why I tagged the hand. If only one villain had shoved I think I can call and be ahead a good portion of the time. Versus both of them I feel like I am behind at least one of them and can see folding as a solid move.
 
C

Casey55

Rock Star
Joined
Jan 30, 2020
Total posts
340
Versus my original target the SB that was my plan, although the action after my 4bet had me stop and think twice.



Thank you for the reply. I agree that BTN's bet does scream strength. Typically at 10 NL and below I do see quite a bit of getting it in pre flop with less than QQ that is why on review I wondered why I tagged the hand. If only one villain had shoved I think I can call and be ahead a good portion of the time. Versus both of them I feel like I am behind at least one of them and can see folding as a solid move.



If SB is maniacal I can see getting all in here as ok, BTN’s range can be AQ,AK,KK,AA but SB can be wider + versus the BTN player with the likely stronger range you are getting 2:1 on a call and you have a sidepot versus the maniacal player. I would call it off
 
Shumkoolie

Shumkoolie

Legend
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Total posts
1,209
Awards
1
Only one orbit or so with these players. SB is looking pretty maniacal having ran 100/50 thus far. BTN has only played one hand previously.

I think the very first thing you said here tells me an awful lot. You DO only have one orbit against these players, so while SB is looking maniacal, you don't really have enough of a sample size to draw that conclusion, though the assumption is fair.

Have you seen what hands they're showing up with? Or are they winning without showdown? Maybe they were just on a rush of cards and while (possibly) splashy already, having good cards likely helps too. If the BTN wasn't in the hand, I'm happily raise calling off QQ against SB given assumptions of their being splashy and maniacal

If SB is maniacal I can see getting all in here as ok, BTN’s range can be AQ,AK,KK,AA but SB can be wider + versus the BTN player with the likely stronger range you are getting 2:1 on a call and you have a sidepot versus the maniacal player. I would call it off


Yes, it's marginal, but probably not that bad to get it in, but when you have a 4 and a 5 bet behind, though the SB shoving, I'm more comfortable calling off if it was just them as I said above. But the button 4 bet shove is the one that concerns me more. Assuming a lack of information on them, other than BTN has only played one hand previously in the orbit OP was there, you're HOPING that maybe you're up against a couple of AK's there. You do have a strong hand, but I think I'm probably finding a fold here and waiting for a better spot. You're not blocking Kings or Aces, and they won't have AQ since you block that hand, so you're HOPING for Jacks, but BTN's range here is likely VERY tight and has your hand beat.
 
H

Hermus

Rock Star
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Total posts
261
Awards
1
If both players follow a balanced strategy QQ is a fold. With the BU probably opening slightly tighter than optimal given the population, and SB calling a bit wider given the stats, folding is still perfectly fine.
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
10,303
Awards
1
I think, this one is pretty close. Normally we should be pretty worried, when they both jam, because SB should be very strong to get it in as a call, when he also have you left to act behind, and you have cold 4-bet. But in this particular case none of them started with a full stack, and SB has played every hand so far, even its a small sample.

So they both look fishy, and for that reason I dont think, we can say with confidence, that someone ALWAYS have AA or KK here. I also think, there can be some overplayed hands in their range like AQ or JJ, which we actually beat. And even if BTN has KK or AA, there will be a side pot against SB, which you might win to get at least some of your money back. So against these two guys I close my eyes and call, but against two full stacked regs I would fold.
 
J

J_Slice

Enthusiast
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Total posts
65
If SB is maniacal I can see getting all in here as ok, BTN’s range can be AQ,AK,KK,AA but SB can be wider + versus the BTN player with the likely stronger range you are getting 2:1 on a call and you have a sidepot versus the maniacal player. I would call it off

Thanks for the input! I feel at these stakes I encounter more loose-passive types preflop and 4bets+ tend to be very tight with big pairs and AK. SB I think very likely has a wider range even given the action. The side pot versus a wider range to possibly get a rebate if we lose the main pot is a good point and one reason why I think this spot had me pause.

Have you seen what hands they're showing up with? Or are they winning without showdown? Maybe they were just on a rush of cards and while (possibly) splashy already, having good cards likely helps too. If the BTN wasn't in the hand, I'm happily raise calling off QQ against SB given assumptions of their being splashy and maniacal

Thank you for replying! Fair questions and I know at the time of the hand I didn't know what they were getting to showdown with. Typically VPIP/PFR are the only stats I pay much attention to with a tiny sample.

After checking my database on the SB they had went to showdown (not including the hand in OP) with A6o from EP, Q8s and Q8o from BTN, and K9s from the BB. All pots were >10bbs and villain had lost 3/4.

One of the things multi tabling keeps me from doing is seeing some hands that I'm not involved in. I tile the tables so if I see a hand went to showdown I try to at least get a quick look at the hole cards and pot size and make a quick note if I can.

So they both look fishy, and for that reason I dont think, we can say with confidence, that someone ALWAYS have AA or KK here. I also think, there can be some overplayed hands in their range like AQ or JJ, which we actually beat. And even if BTN has KK or AA, there will be a side pot against SB, which you might win to get at least some of your money back. So against these two guys I close my eyes and call, but against two full stacked regs I would fold.

Great insight, thanks for sharing! BTN overplaying AQ or JJ is for sure possible and I think you're right it's more likely from a fishier player than a full stacked reg.
If both players follow a balanced strategy QQ is a fold. With the BU probably opening slightly tighter than optimal given the population, and SB calling a bit wider given the stats, folding is still perfectly fine.

Thank you for the reply!
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
10,303
Awards
1
At the end of the day this is a math based decision, so why not pull out equilab and give them some ranges. The real math is rather complicated, because they have different stack sizes, but we can simplify it by altering it slightly, so they both start with 8$. With this simplification we are paying 5,7$ to win a pot of 24$, so we need 23,75% equity. However there is also rake, and we dont want to make break-even calls, so unless we have at least 25%, I am getting out of the way.

If their stack-off ranges are only KK+, we have 16% equity, so unsurpricingly that would be a fold. However I think, this is way to pessimistic. As I said already, these guys seem to be both recreational players, so I dont see them folding AK preflop in a late position battle. And I certainly also see BTN jamming AK rather than just calling a 4-bet and find himself in an awkward situation postflop. He did after all only start the hand 65BB, so in his spot I would also not call a 4-bet with AK. I would either fold or jam.

And if we widen their ranges to QQ+, AK, then our equity booms to 31%, so now we are making a solidly profitable call. This is mainly due to the fact, they will sometimes both have AK, which is obviously a great situation for us, since they then block each others outs. So we dont even need them to have hands like AQ or JJ for this to be a profitable call. We just need both of them to have the full 16 combos of AK. Which I think is a pretty reasonable assumption, when they are both recreational players.

If SB was a good reg, then its different, because he might be able to lay down AK facing this action. And as soon as we start removing AK from even one of the ranges, then we are quickly back below our 25% break-even point. If for instance we give BTN a slightly wider range of JJ+, AK but SB a tight range of QQ+, AKs, then we only have 23%, which is not enough. And since we actually have a side pot against SB, the real math would be even worse, if he is the player with the tighter range, as he is supposed to be.
 
C

c0rnBr34d

Visionary
Joined
May 6, 2019
Total posts
991
My initial instinct was to fold when reading the OP but after thinking about it and reading the comments I think this is definitely a call based on stack sizes. Particularly the 55 BB side pot against a wide SB. Here is my super simplified EV calculation.

I'm giving BTN, QQ+, AK and SB AQ+, TT+ but from the description he could easily be wider than this. Also given the SB dynamic it should make BTN more likely to stack off with AK as our ISO range may be perceived as wider than QQ+, AK here given the BTN open and maniac 3B. But for arguments sake I'm going with these conservative ranges and expecting our real EV to be higher.

If we call:
Main pot will be 153 BB + our call and against those ranges we have 28.73%.
So our EV should be:
(153 BB *28.73% win) - (42 BB call * 71.27% lose)
(44 BB) - (30 BB) = +14 BB !!!!
This ignores ties since it's a bit complicated 3 ways but the tie % is less than 3%

Side pot will be 27.5 BB + our call and against SB we have at least 54.54%.
(27.5 BB * 51.04% win) - (27.5 BB * 45.46% lose)
(14 BB) - (12.5 BB) = +1.5 BB
This accounts for the 3.5% of the time we tie and chop the side pot for +0 BB.
The top of SBs range is also blocked by BTN so it should bias it a bit in our favor.

It really comes down to if BTN can have AK or not. If SB can have AK then it's a definite call. And with one orbit and no reads against a maniac SB and an unknown ISO 4B I'd error on the side of including it until I have better reads. If we were risking our stack against solid players for a +2 to +5 BB EV then I could see not getting on the variance train and electing to fold sometimes but if we are passing up +15 BB spots I think we are probably making a mistake or do not have a large enough bank roll for the stakes.

The worst case scenario as fundiver suggests if we give SB only QQ+ then our equity in the main pot plummets to 15.34% and our EV in the main pot falls to something like -12 BB. Then we need SB to be really wide to make back as much as possible of that on the side pot. For example if SB has AJ+, 99+ now we are making 6 BB in the side pot to offset and if he has AJ+, 66+ then we are already close to breaking even on the worst case scenario as we will make back close to the 12 BB on the side pot. Some of the maniac SB players here will call with 22 or A8s or worse in which case your QQ will be printing money in the side pot to cover even the worst case in the main.
 
Last edited:
Top