$215 NLHE MTT: Sunay Milly biggest ever: AQs in mutiple rounds of betting preflop

teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
No bragging here, I busted the tourney running KK into AA. What do you think about this pre-flop action? I did take me my entire time bank to sort out the nonsense

No Limit Hold'em Tournament T125/T250
Buy-in: $200+$15 USD Hold'em No Limit
PokerStars
9 players
Formatted by SharkScope.com - Track your poker statistics and avoid the sharks

Stacks:
UTG - Hero (
T16,642)
UTG+1 - UTG+1 (
T38,810)
UTG+2 - UTG+2 (
T26,011)
MP - MP (
T25,196)
MP2 - MP2 (
T24,394)
CO - CO (
T19,445)
BTN - BTN (
T14,095)
SB - SB (
T14,764)
BB - BB (
T53,072)

Preflop: (
T645, 9 players) Hero is UTG with A♥ Q♥Hero raises to T562, 1 fold, UTG+2 calls T562, 3 folds, BTN calls T562, SB raises to T2,250, 1 fold, Hero calls T1,688, UTG+2 calls T1,688, BTN raises to T14,065 (all-in), SB raises to T14,734 (all-in), Hero raises to T16,612 (all-in), 1 fold, Uncalled bet of T1,878 returned to Hero

Flop:
A♣ 7♠ 2♦ (T46,303, 3 players, 2 all-in - SB: T0, Hero: T1,878, BTN: T0)

Turn:
7♥ (T46,303, 3 players, 2 all-in - SB: T0, Hero: T1,878, BTN: T0)

River:
2♥ (T46,303, 3 players, 2 all-in - SB: T0, Hero: T1,878, BTN: T0)

Total Pot:
T46,303
SB shows
T♦ T♥ (two pair, Tens and Sevens)
Hero shows
A♥ Q♥ (two pair, Aces and Sevens)
BTN shows
9♥ 9♣ (two pair, Nines and Sevens)

Hero wins T1,338 from side pot
Hero wins T44,965 from main pot
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
I would probably have folded here. I am not so worried about the backship from BTN, because that will very often be a hand like the one, he had. But when SB also ships, he is uncapped, and with 60BB I think, we can find better spots than a 3-ways all in preflop with AQ.
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
It worked out this time, but if SB had shown up with QQ+ or AK, you are absolutely crushed.
That was my first thought as well. But then, would you put SB on QQ+, AK with such a small raise against 3 people already in the pot including UTG? That play didn't make sense, he should've raised much bigger but instead he gave us all very good odds to call (which is why my and UTG+2 did call). Also, I block most of that range, except KK.
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
I definitely see some players use undersized 3-bets with aces or kings. I guess, they are looking for action and feel, they get more of it by sizing down. In this case he was probably just not very good, since its a bit iffy to call off with TT for this many blinds. To be honest neither player should have gotten it in here, which just go to show, that high stakes tournaments are not always that tough.

I actually watched the first 10 minutes of this tournament as a spectator, and during that time someone busted with AQ on QXXX against AA in a single raised pot for 200BB. It made me wish, I was bankrolled to play on this level or had extra money for shot taking, but unfortunately neither of that is the case :)
 
I

Ianmacca99

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Total posts
490
Chips
1
I would of probably folded here given the action. Your flipping against hands like they had or crushed against AK AA I know you had some blockers to those hands but I'd have waited for a better spot to get it in that many blinds with
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
It made me wish, I was bankrolled to play on this level or had extra money for shot taking, but unfortunately neither of that is the case :)

They had a lot of promo qualifiers with +100 or +150 seats prize pool for $11. I'm pretty sure you would have a good chance in any of those if you give it the time. There's a +100 seats qualifier for this tourney every Sunday, that's how I get into it most of the time. The fields is full of bombers like in this hand.
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
I would of probably folded here given the action. Your flipping against hands like they had or crushed against AK AA I know you had some blockers to those hands but I'd have waited for a better spot to get it in that many blinds with


Ironically, I had a better spot later with KK and busted against AA. You're right, this was a slow tourney so could've waited it out. I have way too much exposure to fast blinds structures it's kinda hard to adjust when occasionally playing a slow one.
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
They had a lot of promo qualifiers with +100 or +150 seats prize pool for $11. I'm pretty sure you would have a good chance in any of those if you give it the time. There's a +100 seats qualifier for this tourney every Sunday, that's how I get into it most of the time. The fields is full of bombers like in this hand.

Satellites are mostly for chasing dreams, which is fine, if that is, what you want to do. But for me I want to stick to proper bankroll management and move up step by step :)
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
I have way too much exposure to fast blinds structures it's kinda hard to adjust when occasionally playing a slow one.

I dont think, you are alone in that. That hand, I talked about, where 200BB went in with TPTK against an overpair in a single raised pot is something, you would never see any even half decent cash game regular do at 5NL. It was a massive overplay even by the guy with the overpair.
 
Nr98

Nr98

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Total posts
589
Chips
0
Actually really like BU's play. If he flats, he is supposed to jam the top of his range to a squeeze (In this case probably something like AQs, TT-99). Ofcourse this depends on how wide he expect SB to squeeze, but it's a really profitable jam in general.

Pretty sure this would be a fold for you. You need 33% for it to be 0 chip EV (didn't do icm calc).

If we assign BU a range of 99-TT and AQs (reasonable imo, could include JJ but then we would have even less equity) and SB a range of TT+, AQo+ and AJs+ (which is pretty wide but probably in the ballpark). We only got 26.5%


Even if we expand the ranges to BU (TT-99,AQs-AJs,AQo) and SB (77+,ATs+,KQs,AJo+) which is waaaay too wide imo we still haven't got 30% equity. Thus a snapfold imo.
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
Actually really like BU's play. If he flats, he is supposed to jam the top of his range to a squeeze (In this case probably something like AQs, TT-99). Ofcourse this depends on how wide he expect SB to squeeze, but it's a really profitable jam in general.


This is not "top of his range". Its turning his hand into a bluff, because stacks are to short to call for a setmine. I am not a big fan of this move. Its super unbalanced, because most people never have any value, when they do this. Moreover 99 has no relevant blockers and bad equity when called. So while it suck, he should probably just fold here.
 
I

Ianmacca99

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Total posts
490
Chips
1
Ironically, I had a better spot later with KK and busted against AA. You're right, this was a slow tourney so could've waited it out. I have way too much exposure to fast blinds structures it's kinda hard to adjust when occasionally playing a slow one.
That's just an unfortunate cooler unlucky good luck in the future :)
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
If we assign BU a range of 99-TT and AQs (reasonable imo, could include JJ but then we would have even less equity) and SB a range of TT+, AQo+ and AJs+ (which is pretty wide but probably in the ballpark). We only got 26.5%


Why is it not enough? Yes we have 27% but they have 32% and 41%,
If you take out BU then we're 40% against SB.
If you adjust for the way SB played and take out QQ+ from his range we are 43% against 56%
Adjusted it's 27% to 38% to 34% if you keep the blocked hands in.

W/out the blocked hands it's 39% to 17% to 42% and that's the effective hand. I don't think it's an insta fold.
 
VovanBaron

VovanBaron

RiddlesInTheShadow
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 24, 2015
Total posts
1,931
Awards
15
Chips
4
That was my first thought as well. But then, would you put SB on QQ+, AK with such a small raise against 3 people already in the pot including UTG? That play didn't make sense, he should've raised much bigger but instead he gave us all very good odds to call (which is why my and UTG+2 did call). Also, I block most of that range, except KK.
In general I wouldnt play AQo for 60bb multiway allin but if you have some notes and assumptions concerning opponents play and you believe that these assumptions gives you profit and you can check it then you played pretty good.
 
7CardKillR

7CardKillR

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Total posts
151
Chips
0
although I didnt see the blind ante structure I feel this is a pretty clear call off in most spots.
 
Nr98

Nr98

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Total posts
589
Chips
0
Why is it not enough? Yes we have 27% but they have 32% and 41%,
If you take out BU then we're 40% against SB.
If you adjust for the way SB played and take out QQ+ from his range we are 43% against 56%
Adjusted it's 27% to 38% to 34% if you keep the blocked hands in.

W/out the blocked hands it's 39% to 17% to 42% and that's the effective hand. I don't think it's an insta fold.


We can't just take out BU mate, BU has only 700 less than SB. And what makes us think calling a 4bet jam means QQ+ wouldn't be in his range? Which blocked hands are you referring to? We definitely want to adjust for blocker effects (For example QQ only has 3 combos instead of 6 because we hold Qh, but this is already included in the equity calculation).

We can't just take out BU from the equation to justify the call. But ofcourse we can disagree on the exact ranges, which range would you put BU and SB on? If have no idea how you'd get to 39% equity here.

Edit: Also as for your first question, we always want to compare the equity we have to the pot odds. We get about 2:1 so we need 33%ish (actually we need more due to ICM, but for simplicities sake let's focus on chip EV since the spot isn't even close).
 
Nr98

Nr98

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Total posts
589
Chips
0
This is not "top of his range". Its turning his hand into a bluff, because stacks are to short to call for a setmine. I am not a big fan of this move. Its super unbalanced, because most people never have any value, when they do this. Moreover 99 has no relevant blockers and bad equity when called. So while it suck, he should probably just fold here.

BU definitely gets the right odds to call here, 7.8k pot and 1.7k to call (over 4.5:1) any PP will be calling IP.


I was referring to the top of his calling range preflop. Let's assume BU would definitely squeeze TT+ and AK for value (seems reasonable right, can argue about TT ofcourse but it's specifics) and the occasional bluff squeeze but for now those aren't important. This would mean AQs, 99-88 would be the top of his calling range.

IF sb is a decent player he definitely wants to be having a bluff squeezing range here (some suited ace, a hand like AJo that doesn't want to flat, a suited broadway etc.). Now if he squeezes, he's got both value and bluffs in his range. If we flat in UTG, and UTG+2 flats too, this means those two ranges are super capped.

Now the big decision is on button. If he thinks SB is a bit of a fish and doesn't have any bluffs here, flatting is the perfect play. We get great odds, are IP and can take a flop. But IF (big IF) sb actually has a bluff squeezing range, which any good reg should, but we want to decide that based on data, we get an amazing spot for a jam. There's already 7.8k in the pot (half BU's stack), UTG and UTG+2 are completely capped, and SB is folding a decent chunk of the time. If we get called, there's so much dead money in the middle that it's not that much of an issue, but the decent amount of the time that we get the jam through we're just printing money. And it makes sense to do this with the top of our range since we got the most equity when called then.

As for unbalanced, that's not an issue actually. This is exactly the reason why we include AQs too (otherwise UTG+2 could just call off hands like JTs without blinking). I agree BU doesn't want to be bluffing here, but he's just jamming his strongest hands in this spot into a pot with heaps of dead money, that's a big difference.

Again, the play depends on SB having a bluff squeeze range, if he doesn't BU should snap call, if he does it's a perfect spot for a jam.
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
We can't just take out BU mate, BU has only 700 less than SB..
I know, I was just comparing ranges

And what makes us think calling a 4bet jam means QQ+ wouldn't be in his range?
BU initially called 2 other people, with 2 behind giving tons of pot odds to everyone. I usually think they're capped when they do that, am I wrong? I make that play when I have big implied odds, which is the case now.
Which blocked hands are you referring to? We definitely want to adjust for blocker effects (For example QQ only has 3 combos instead of 6 because we hold Qh, but this is already included in the equity calculation)..
I block AK, AQ and QQ in AQs+, QQ+ which literally leaves only KK in the entire range. Yes it's included in the equity, what I'm saying is that fewer combos plus the betting action are enough facts to cap their range. And if you work with the capped ranges numbers are different
 
TheDude6622

TheDude6622

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Total posts
2,348
Awards
2
Chips
0
I would probably have folded here. I am not so worried about the backship from BTN, because that will very often be a hand like the one, he had. But when SB also ships, he is uncapped, and with 60BB I think, we can find better spots than a 3-ways all in preflop with AQ.

I agree with fundiver in this spot. Yes, the results showed us different, but getting 3bet and then a 4bet overshove shows a lot of strength against our holding. I'd say about 70% of the time facing two opponents in this situation, our hand is drawing thin to dead. Nice catch and nice hand, just be a little more careful in these spots.
 
Nr98

Nr98

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Total posts
589
Chips
0
I know, I was just comparing ranges


BU initially called 2 other people, with 2 behind giving tons of pot odds to everyone. I usually think they're capped when they do that, am I wrong? I make that play when I have big implied odds, which is the case now.

I block AK, AQ and QQ in AQs+, QQ+ which literally leaves only KK in the entire range. Yes it's included in the equity, what I'm saying is that fewer combos plus the betting action are enough facts to cap their range. And if you work with the capped ranges numbers are different


Ye BU wouldn't flat QQ+ for sure preflop. The way you phrased it made it sound like SB range was capped. But that BU shouldn't have QQ+ and AK you're completely right :)

As for the second part, we do block some of their value range indeed. But while blockers are imporant, we shouldn't overestimate it (for example there are still 12 out of 16 combos of AK left).

BU's range is capped, that's for sure (that's why I say he should be jamming the top of his initial calling range of the first raise), the top of his capped range should be around 99 and AQs. SB's range is uncapped, definition wise, athough we do block some part of the value range. But I already accounted for that in how I got to the 27%.

Their ranges should (if they do that can be argued ofcourse based on data) look something like this:


BU (99-TT and AQs) and SB a (TT+, AQo+ and AJs+)



We got 26.5% against this. So the numbers aren't different no matter how you spin it. Now what we can disagree upon is the exact ranges, so which one would you propose? Genuinely curious to hear that.

However, even if you go from ranges that are way too wide:

BU (TT-99,AQs-AJs,AQo) and SB (77+,ATs+,KQs,AJo+)


We still haven't got the right equity. While in reality especially SB will be calling the jam a lot tighter.

Btw just to clarify, I genuinely enjoy discussing poker hands, so I do not intend to argue with anyone for any other sake then either learning something new myself or helping out someone else. Discussions like this are the most valuable if we disagree :D
 
F

fundiver199

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Total posts
13,216
Awards
1
Chips
233
I agree BU doesn't want to be bluffing here, but he's just jamming his strongest hands in this spot into a pot with heaps of dead money, that's a big difference.

If you 4-bet jam 99 for 60BB, you are not happy when called, and then you are per definition bluffing. I guess, its a bit of a game of chicken going on here between three of the players. BTN is essentially saying to both Hero and the guy in between, that he know, they know, he does not have it. But he also know, they dont have it, and because he puts their tournament life at risk, they can not call.

Maybe I am just not advanced enough, and I certainly dont play at this level. But to me this is punting away a stack, and I dont think, it is long term profitable even with the dead money in the pot. That dead money also gives SB an extra incentive to call, as in fact he did. To me this is a bit like bounty tournaments, where people sometimes go completely out of line, when they can score a cheap bounty but fail to think about the fact, that other players behind will also want that bounty.
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
BTN is essentially saying to both Hero and the guy in between, that he know, they know, he does not have it. But he also know, they dont have it, and because he puts their tournament life at risk, they can not call.

But to me this is punting away a stack, To me this is a bit like bounty tournaments, where people sometimes go completely out of line, when they can score a cheap bounty

My gut feeling was exactly this while playing the hand
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
SB's range is uncapped, definition wise, athough we do block some part of the value range.
Their ranges should (if they do that can be argued ofcourse based on data) look something like this:

BU (99-TT and AQs) and SB a (TT+, AQo+ and AJs+)

Agree with SB having squeezes in his range but only in the first round of betting. The later action takes out all those hands and having called the BU shove (which we come to agree was a hard sell) becomes very narrow because he gives me better than 3:1 pot odds. Overlaying the blockers he might had KK but I didn't buy it because his sqeeze bet was too small from the SB against 3 people.

Quite frankly, during the hand that was my thought process together with the gut feeling that the BTN cannot have it failing to raise the first time. Really, my worries were UTG+2 all along and I spent half the time trying to decide if he'll lay off the hand since he got the best odds of all by closing the betting action. He doesn't have to have any strong hand here, he got very good pot odds each time, was covering everybody in the hand and he'd had almost half his stack behind.
 
teebahnoo

teebahnoo

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 17, 2019
Total posts
79
Chips
0
SB's range is uncapped, definition wise, athough we do block some part of the value range.
Their ranges should (if they do that can be argued ofcourse based on data) look something like this:

BU (99-TT and AQs) and SB a (TT+, AQo+ and AJs+)

Agree with SB having squeezes in his range but only in the first round of betting. The later action takes out all those hands and having called the BU shove (which we come to agree was a hard sell) becomes very narrow because he gives me better than 3:1 pot odds. Overlaying the blockers he might had KK but I didn't buy it because his sqeeze bet was too small from the SB against 3 people.

Quite frankly, during the hand that was my thought process together with the gut feeling that the BTN cannot have it failing to raise the first time. Really, my worries were UTG+2 all along and I spent half the time trying to decide if he'll lay off the hand since he got the best odds of all by closing the betting action. He doesn't have to have any strong hand here, he got very good pot odds each time, was covering everybody in the hand and he'd had almost half his stack behind.
 
Nr98

Nr98

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
Total posts
589
Chips
0
If you 4-bet jam 99 for 60BB, you are not happy when called, and then you are per definition bluffing. I guess, its a bit of a game of chicken going on here between three of the players. BTN is essentially saying to both Hero and the guy in between, that he know, they know, he does not have it. But he also know, they dont have it, and because he puts their tournament life at risk, they can not call.

Maybe I am just not advanced enough, and I certainly dont play at this level. But to me this is punting away a stack, and I dont think, it is long term profitable even with the dead money in the pot. That dead money also gives SB an extra incentive to call, as in fact he did. To me this is a bit like bounty tournaments, where people sometimes go completely out of line, when they can score a cheap bounty but fail to think about the fact, that other players behind will also want that bounty.

It's a bit of a weird one what to call BU's shove. It's not as much a bluff since he does very well against UTG and UTG+2's range (even against a part of SB's Ax calling range). But ofcourse when SB calls he's in bad shape, completely agree there. But the sheer amount of dead money makes up for so much (especially when SB folds his hands like AJo, QJs A9s etc. that he bluffed squeezed with). So the spot is really player dependent, does SB in fact have a bluff squeezing range? Then it's an amazing spot to jam. Does he not? Then I completely agree and it's a total punt. But since BU is actually capable of making this play I assume he had a HUD running all along and probably got a good idea on SB's play style.

Agree with SB having squeezes in his range but only in the first round of betting. The later action takes out all those hands and having called the BU shove (which we come to agree was a hard sell) becomes very narrow because he gives me better than 3:1 pot odds. Overlaying the blockers he might had KK but I didn't buy it because his sqeeze bet was too small from the SB against 3 people.

Quite frankly, during the hand that was my thought process together with the gut feeling that the BTN cannot have it failing to raise the first time. Really, my worries were UTG+2 all along and I spent half the time trying to decide if he'll lay off the hand since he got the best odds of all by closing the betting action. He doesn't have to have any strong hand here, he got very good pot odds each time, was covering everybody in the hand and he'd had almost half his stack behind.


Yeah ofcourse SB's bluffs aren't calling the BU jam, that's totally right. I do agree that his range is really strong, which is why we wouldn't have the equity.

Well that depends on how you define having it. Sure he doesn't have the top of his range, but vs AQs he actually holds up pretty well (having said that tho, had SB folded it's probably a good call given the pot odds, so in that regard you have a point). The main problem is SB's uncapped very strong range and the fact that it's a 3way pot (pushes down our equity).

Actually good that you point out the odds. I made a mistake when adding all the bets together last time (please use a hand converter next time to help me out here, can't handle this on early mornings :p). We actually need 27%. When using the ranges that I assigned it would still be a fold (especially once we adjust for a little bit of icm in this stage of the tourney). But now it becomes really dependent on our data of SB. That's your read. If he is a solid player OR a bit of a tight player who doesn't really know what sizings to use (seems like it) we got to fold. But if he is a bit of a spazz who also calls off too wide we can actually call the jam. I don't think it's too likely in this tournament to have SB just punt off a stack there on nothing, but if he did stuff like that before it would be a spot for a call. In a vacuum I'd fold, but if you got specific reads on the guy (not a feeling, but actual reads), a call can become the right move.

My advise, probably fold but as always follow your data. You're the one playing the tables so you got a better idea of how they play than we do. Just make sure to check any read you got with data (and logic) to see if it holds up :D

Think that's about as deep as we can get on this hand. Really good discussion guys :)
 
Related Betting Guides: CA Betting - AU Betting - UK Betting - SportsBetting Poker - BetStars
Top