PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

0.25$ 90mans

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 0.25$ 90mans

    Description: I dint have any reads on the opponents.AK i could not like it much against two opponents.I assumed one of then two have atleast a mid pocket pair..and the other to have an ace..so i calculated using odds calculator and found that i was not a favourite to win.Please comment on my play and also let me know if i shud have 3bet and if so then what shud have been my play.

  • #2
    I like the flatcall behind after UTG+2 raises the limper. If he's a decent player, he could just be trying to push the limper off a medium hand. I'm not raising there though.

    The limper then 3-bets which I hate. Then when the original raiser 4-bet shoves, I'm done and my AK gets mucked everytime.

    AK guy played it nicely - a raise to his limp and a caller looks like a good spot to raise. In his case, I'm not sure I would have called the shove with AK off.

    I definitely don't like the 4-bet shove with AQ suited. The limper showed weakness by limping, but then turned strong with his 3-bet. I'd expect him to be beating my AQ any time there.

    ------------------------------------------------------
    keeping track of my poker semi-career: ov3rsight.blog.com
    The Road to Fame and Fortune - Keeping track of my poker semi-career
    Keep up to date: @Ov3rsight


    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Nee,

      I would definately 3bet is this situation. To me if we flat call here we are giving the limper and the BB too much incentive to join the pot. And as you say you don't really want to play AK in a multiway pot here. Given the way it rolls out I

      My 3bet size would be to 500-550.

      If the limper then came over the top of my 3bet (They may well not in this instance since we have shown more strength than flat calling). I would assume the raiser calls given what did happen. In this case we have an interesting spot.

      Assuming we had rasied to 550. We would need to put 3360 more in to win a 11k pot. This would be a little tough. I'd like to see some HUD stats. If these guys were loose I call here and expect to be facing a Ax & PP or 2 PP and we are getting an ok price. I don't think we're getting super value here though (and usually not a favourite, despite getting a good price) so a more conservative line of folding to a limp 4b shove I think would be good too.

      Thanks
      Andy


      Quad Bracelet Winner

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks Andy ..unfortunately i dont use a HUD..

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by ahar010 View Post
          Hi Nee,

          Assuming we had rasied to 550. We would need to put 3360 more in to win a 11k pot. This would be a little tough. I'd like to see some HUD stats. If these guys were loose I call here and expect to be facing a Ax & PP or 2 PP and we are getting an ok price. I don't think we're getting super value here though (and usually not a favourite, despite getting a good price) so a more conservative line of folding to a limp 4b shove I think would be good too.

          Thanks
          Andy
          Follow up question for you Andy:

          Theoretically, would you feel priced in had the blinds been at 50/100 rather than 25/50?

          This situation seems to hinge quite a bit on stack sizes. Here the blinds are low (25/50), but stacks are deep. Nee has 5300 chips. You suggest raising to 550 chips, 10% of our stack, but folding to to an all in reraise. (I agree 100%)

          Had the blinds been one level higher 50/100, we would have been raising 20% of our stack (1000 -1200 chips). Are you still leaning toward a fold to all in reraise? (I know this is often read dependent, but what's your standard approach?)

          I feel like finding this sweet spot is a big factor in mtts, especially with QQ and AK hands.

          Thanks!

          Roland GTX

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Roland GTX View Post
            Follow up question for you Andy:

            Theoretically, would you feel priced in had the blinds been at 50/100 rather than 25/50?

            This situation seems to hinge quite a bit on stack sizes. Here the blinds are low (25/50), but stacks are deep. Nee has 5300 chips. You suggest raising to 550 chips, 10% of our stack, but folding to to an all in reraise. (I agree 100%)

            Had the blinds been one level higher 50/100, we would have been raising 20% of our stack (1000 -1200 chips). Are you still leaning toward a fold to all in reraise? (I know this is often read dependent, but what's your standard approach?)

            I feel like finding this sweet spot is a big factor in mtts, especially with QQ and AK hands.

            Thanks!

            Roland GTX
            Hi Roland,

            Yes, absolutely if the blinds were bigger we looking at a different situation when we 3bet.

            I would generally assume the limper would go away. and the raisers stack is only 3k. So a raise to 1100 would be over 1/3 of his stack. If there were fewer people left in the hand we could almost just shove. But I think a 3bet is still ok since there's still larger stacks to act.

            Assuming we 3bet to 1100. We would now only have to put 2810 in to win a 11k pot. Meaning we only need about 25% equity. Plus the shortening of the other player stacks vs the blinds means their actions have slightly less strength. So here when the players are only 40BB deep rather than 80BB, yeah I think we can now call.

            Thanks
            Andy


            Quad Bracelet Winner

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks, just wanted to make sure I understood this situation properly.

              Roland

              Comment

              Working...
              X

              X Cookies Information

              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.