Pre-flop 3-way all-in; who has what hands/ranges

moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
Live 1/3, $300 buy-in. Unusual betting pre-flop betting, so I'm curious to see what hand or range you would assign for each player.

My impressions of each player's table image is below.

MP2 ($505): Fish. Doesn't play a lot of hands, but bets often when in hands. Only a few hands have gone to showdown. Twice caught bluffing; once won a multi-way ~$200 pot with A3s and an ace on the board, getting everyone (including at least one better ace) to fold. Won most of his money getting folds on turns and rivers. One of his failed bluffs and his A3 hand both came in the last few hands.

MP3 ($343): Confused player. He knows that aggression is important, and he is willing to act aggressively. 3bets pre-flop a good percentage of the time, and leads out and raises a good percentage of the time post-flop. Hard to know exactly what he has. He seems to use aggression randomly, though, not giving consideration to his opponent or the board. Down a couple of buy-ins already.

BUT (~$1,000, covers the table): TAG. Plays few hands. Plays pre-flop and post-flop in a pretty straight-forward manner, betting big when he has a hand and checking when he doesn't. Had not 3bet pre-flop in the past 90 minutes. Will use that TAG image to steal pots on occasion.


THE HAND

UTG straddles to $6
MP1 calls


MP2 (fish, $505) raises to $30
MP3 (confused, $313) calls $30
Folds to BUT

BUT (TAG, covers) raises to $135
Folds to MP2
MP2 calls $135

MP3 raises all-in to $313
BUT calls $313

MP2 raises all-in to $505 ($192 to the side-pot)
BUT calls $192

Main pot, ~$950; side pot $484.


What hand(s) or range would assign each player here? I'm also particularly curious to hear what you think BUT's hand(s) or range is at each stage pre-flop. I'll tell you later why I'm posting the hand.

Comments

  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    BTn could definitely be squeezing, but give him a strong range being straight forward. Ill take out AK cause he didn't reshove. Im leaning kk+ for the btn. Qq or JJ for Mp2 and mp3 99-JJ AK.

    Btn KK-AA
    Mp2 JJ-QQ
    Mp3 99-JJ, AK.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    Thanks, @Austin!

    Assuming that your ranges are correct (those were my exact initial thoughts, too, when watching the action unfold), thoughts about the action?

    1) MP2's call of BUT's raise to $135?
    2) MP3's shove?
    3) BUT's flat-call of MP3's shove?

    I felt most confident in MP3's range.

    BUT seemed like AA/KK when he raised to $135. I know that he probably should just flat-call the $313 all-in from MP3 to try to induce a call from MP2, but it also seems like BUT's profile would be to shove here. When he flatted the $313 all-in, any possibility of a wider range -- that he was trying to steal, got caught, and didn't feel like he could fold?

    Given MP2's image and play, any possibility of wider range?
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Thanks, @Austin!

    Assuming that your ranges are correct (those were my exact initial thoughts, too, when watching the action unfold), thoughts about the action?

    1) MP2's call of BUT's raise to $135?
    2) MP3's shove?
    3) BUT's flat-call of MP3's shove?

    I felt most confident in MP3's range.

    BUT seemed like AA/KK when he raised to $135. I know that he probably should just flat-call the $313 all-in from MP3 to try to induce a call from MP2, but it also seems like BUT's profile would be to shove here. When he flatted the $313 all-in, any possibility of a wider range -- that he was trying to steal, got caught, and didn't feel like he could fold?

    Given MP2's image and play, any possibility of wider range?

    If btn was stealing and just got caught he would simply fold. Putting in $200 more cause he doesn't want to look like he was stealing is a bit crazy.

    Waiting for spoiler.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Thanks, @Austin!

    Assuming that your ranges are correct (those were my exact initial thoughts, too, when watching the action unfold), thoughts about the action?

    1) MP2's call of BUT's raise to $135?
    2) MP3's shove?
    3) BUT's flat-call of MP3's shove?

    I felt most confident in MP3's range.

    BUT seemed like AA/KK when he raised to $135. I know that he probably should just flat-call the $313 all-in from MP3 to try to induce a call from MP2, but it also seems like BUT's profile would be to shove here. When he flatted the $313 all-in, any possibility of a wider range -- that he was trying to steal, got caught, and didn't feel like he could fold?

    Given MP2's image and play, any possibility of wider range?

    If btn was stealing and just got caught he would simply fold. Putting in $200 more cause he doesn't want to look like he was stealing is a bit crazy.

    Waiting for spoiler.

    Thanks for following up, @Austin!

    And props on your guesses in your first email!!

    I was MP2 in this hand. I do believe that other players at the table looked at me as a fish (and I loved that!!), but I was playing much more purposefully than they thought. I indeed had QQ.

    When BUT raised to $135, I thought first that he had KK or AA, though it was nagging at me that this was a steal attempt. I think that he is far more likely to value-bet KK or AA to, say, $100 than go 4.5x. Still, I wasn't confident enough to re-raise. Also, the awkward stack sizing at that point either meant that I would min-re-raise and shove the flop or go all-in pre-flop. None of those was appealing -- if V did have KK or AA, then he could pretty easily bet in my stack over three streets. And, if V were making a move, then he would fold to any raise pre-flop and not put in another dime post-flop.

    With MP3 behind me likely to call, flat-calling made the most sense, IMO. That was my thinking.

    MP3 made his move, shoving all-in. I was almost certain that I was ahead of him -- he would have raised with AA or KK or likely even AK. Had BUT shoved, then I'm not sure what I would have done.

    BUT's call, though, pushed me more to the thinking that he was trying to steal. Again, if he had AA or KK, I am almost positive that he would have shoved. Given that I didn't re-raise his $135 bet earlier -- and given my fishy table image -- BUT probably did not think that I was that strong. There was already more than $600 in the pot, and he had to call $183 to stay in vs. MP3's shove. With MP3 also not looking too strong, this is likely a profitable call no matter what.

    Once it got back to me, I discounted folding since I thought it likely enough that BUT got caught making a move. I also knew that there was no way that I would call the $313, making the pot just shy of $1,000, and then fold for less than $200 on the flop. I figured that shoving was optimal, since that at least gave a hair of fold equity (unlikely as it was), leaving me heads-up against MP3's lesser range. Not surprisingly, BUT called.

    Flop came K97. Turn was a K. River was a 6. BUT turned over 87s, I turned over my QQ, and MP3 folded JJ face-up. I won the pot.

    *********
    I posted since the hands seemed pretty obvious to me (with the added thought that BUT was pulling a move), but some other guys at the table seemed shocked. My range was almost identical to yours, @Austin, and the chatter at the table got me wondering if I missed something big.

    Thanks for the reply, for the confirmation of my general range assessment (with my adding the steal possibility for BUT), and, if you got this far, for reading all the way through! :)

    If you have other thoughts, then feel free to share them. Otherwise, I'm happy to let this thread end. :)
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Thanks, @Austin!

    Assuming that your ranges are correct (those were my exact initial thoughts, too, when watching the action unfold), thoughts about the action?

    1) MP2's call of BUT's raise to $135?
    2) MP3's shove?
    3) BUT's flat-call of MP3's shove?

    I felt most confident in MP3's range.

    BUT seemed like AA/KK when he raised to $135. I know that he probably should just flat-call the $313 all-in from MP3 to try to induce a call from MP2, but it also seems like BUT's profile would be to shove here. When he flatted the $313 all-in, any possibility of a wider range -- that he was trying to steal, got caught, and didn't feel like he could fold?

    Given MP2's image and play, any possibility of wider range?

    If btn was stealing and just got caught he would simply fold. Putting in $200 more cause he doesn't want to look like he was stealing is a bit crazy.

    Waiting for spoiler.

    Thanks for following up, @Austin!

    And props on your guesses in your first email!!

    I was MP2 in this hand. I do believe that other players at the table looked at me as a fish (and I loved that!!), but I was playing much more purposefully than they thought. I indeed had QQ.

    When BUT raised to $135, I thought first that he had KK or AA, though it was nagging at me that this was a steal attempt. I think that he is far more likely to value-bet KK or AA to, say, $100 than go 4.5x. Still, I wasn't confident enough to re-raise. Also, the awkward stack sizing at that point either meant that I would min-re-raise and shove the flop or go all-in pre-flop. None of those was appealing -- if V did have KK or AA, then he could pretty easily bet in my stack over three streets. And, if V were making a move, then he would fold to any raise pre-flop and not put in another dime post-flop.

    With MP3 behind me likely to call, flat-calling made the most sense, IMO. That was my thinking.

    MP3 made his move, shoving all-in. I was almost certain that I was ahead of him -- he would have raised with AA or KK or likely even AK. Had BUT shoved, then I'm not sure what I would have done.

    BUT's call, though, pushed me more to the thinking that he was trying to steal. Again, if he had AA or KK, I am almost positive that he would have shoved. Given that I didn't re-raise his $135 bet earlier -- and given my fishy table image -- BUT probably did not think that I was that strong. There was already more than $600 in the pot, and he had to call $183 to stay in vs. MP3's shove. With MP3 also not looking too strong, this is likely a profitable call no matter what.

    Once it got back to me, I discounted folding since I thought it likely enough that BUT got caught making a move. I also knew that there was no way that I would call the $313, making the pot just shy of $1,000, and then fold for less than $200 on the flop. I figured that shoving was optimal, since that at least gave a hair of fold equity (unlikely as it was), leaving me heads-up against MP3's lesser range. Not surprisingly, BUT called.

    Flop came K97. Turn was a K. River was a 6. BUT turned over 87s, I turned over my QQ, and MP3 folded JJ face-up. I won the pot.

    *********
    I posted since the hands seemed pretty obvious to me (with the added thought that BUT was pulling a move), but some other guys at the table seemed shocked. My range was almost identical to yours, @Austin, and the chatter at the table got me wondering if I missed something big.

    Thanks for the reply, for the confirmation of my general range assessment (with my adding the steal possibility for BUT), and, if you got this far, for reading all the way through! :)

    If you have other thoughts, then feel free to share them. Otherwise, I'm happy to let this thread end. :)

    Calling 87s seems suicidal thats my only thought. Great minds think a like! Now your going to have to develop a 4 bet range vs him.
  • drd66drd66 Red Chipper Posts: 3 ✭✭
    Sorry for the late bump. Bookmarked this hand a while back. Couldn't come up with a quick answer, waiting to find time to think it thru. After a long recreational career, I'm finally making an attempt at off-table study and this is a really intriguing hand. Time to try out my new Flopzilla. Did NOT read any responses before writing this. Here goes.

    Fish - initial raise. "Doesn't play a lot of hands" Giving him 88+, JTs+, A9s+, KTs, KJs, AT+, KJ, KQ. ~12%. I would probably open wider, but not sure even an aggro "fish" is going to try to iso the straddle, so staying conservative. Likely he's not thinking at all about what action could happen behind him. If he plans, it sounds like it's just to barrell regardless. Did he think his A3 was best, consciously turn it into a bluff, or just "I haz A! Bet, bet, bet!!" Kinda sounds like the latter.
    Confused - calls first raise with pretty much his whole limping and 3! range. Say 42% - any pair, any Ace, any suited connector, any suited king, most unsuited connectors, any 2 broadway. Because these are the hands they talk about on TV. The only thing he probably folds are junk suited hands because someone said fish play those. Not sure whether to keep TT+, AQ+ in his range. Since he "3-bets a lot", maybe not. Then again, maybe he is one of those sly ones who slow plays his big hands here. Let's at least eliminate AA,KK,AK and see what happens.
    TAG - the big question first go round is who does he think will fold to his 3-bet. Gotta figure Confused is calling most anything and/or doing whatever Fish does, so my range really would depend on what I thinks the aggro Fish will fold. But the description "plays few hands" confuses me a little. A TAG (tight AGGRESSIVE) with these two to his right should be playing a fair amount of hands from late position, and 3-betting a LOT of those. If he really hasn't 3 bet in 90 minutes, I'm ranging him as more passive and very much weighted toward premiums. JJ+, AQs+, AQo+, KQs. 5%. This raise is pretty big in absolute $$ for a 1/3 game. Gotta figure he's not looking to go multi-way. For myself, I'd probably include a few more suited aces and broadways if I thought Fish would fold, and be even slightly looser if I thought Fish (and therefore Confused) would flat, including some more unsuited aces, sc's and even gappers. Frankly, while I've become much better at not flatting in these situations, at game speed I would not think this deep and likely 3 bet WAY too wide. One of the main reasons I read this site is to correct these leaks.

    Next go round:
    Fish - having a real problem figuring out what he flats here. Lets get rid of AA,KK. He's shoving those. Maybe take out half the QQ and AK. Leaves the suited As, all remaining BWs. Does he really flat 1/3 his stack with KJs or ATo. Yeah, he probably does.
    Confused - damn, even tougher. WTF is this guy thinking. I'm almost convinced he shoves his entire range here. Tough to out-level a guy who isn't thinking. Certainly seen players limp/shove their monsters, don't think that applies here. Also seen "confused" players just get randomly aggro in these spots, been amazed at what they turn over. Yeah, keeping everything else in his range. He'll shove 88 here putting TAG on AK.
    TAG - man, these are some freaky players. There's pretty much nothing that's in his range (or anyone's) that's correct to flat here IMHO. Why would you not re-shove QQ+ AK+? Maybe he's incorrectly assuming Fish will fold to the Confused shove. Sorry, this guy is sounding more TP and less TAG every move. I'm giving him QQ+, AKs.

    But wait, there's more:
    Fish - shoves. Uh, wat? Again, not sure his range narrows at all. "Oh, must be one of those all-in hands, I'm all in too!" Seriously. Maybe he finds a fold with ATo, KJo, A9s-AJs. Maybe not. Kinda academic, TAG's calling and if he thinks about it (which he doesn't), he would know that.
    TAG - calls. He's the only one left with premiums in his range, and that's all he has left. He gets it in good and then sweats the runout 'cause he let it get 3-way.

    I wrote all this on a plane where I consciously couldn't look at other responses. I have played a lot of live NL in a TON of different casinos all over the US, and feel I'm pretty good at gathering information and profiling players. Problem is, I don't know what to do with that info and am often paralyzed by the sheer amount of it. So this was a REALLY long first attempt. I'm gonna post it, read the other responses, and then likely kick myself a little. Constructive criticism massively appreciated.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    drd66 wrote: »
    Sorry for the late bump. Bookmarked this hand a while back. Couldn't come up with a quick answer, waiting to find time to think it thru. After a long recreational career, I'm finally making an attempt at off-table study and this is a really intriguing hand. Time to try out my new Flopzilla. Did NOT read any responses before writing this. Here goes.

    Fish - initial raise. "Doesn't play a lot of hands" Giving him 88+, JTs+, A9s+, KTs, KJs, AT+, KJ, KQ. ~12%. I would probably open wider, but not sure even an aggro "fish" is going to try to iso the straddle, so staying conservative. Likely he's not thinking at all about what action could happen behind him. If he plans, it sounds like it's just to barrell regardless. Did he think his A3 was best, consciously turn it into a bluff, or just "I haz A! Bet, bet, bet!!" Kinda sounds like the latter.
    Confused - calls first raise with pretty much his whole limping and 3! range. Say 42% - any pair, any Ace, any suited connector, any suited king, most unsuited connectors, any 2 broadway. Because these are the hands they talk about on TV. The only thing he probably folds are junk suited hands because someone said fish play those. Not sure whether to keep TT+, AQ+ in his range. Since he "3-bets a lot", maybe not. Then again, maybe he is one of those sly ones who slow plays his big hands here. Let's at least eliminate AA,KK,AK and see what happens.
    TAG - the big question first go round is who does he think will fold to his 3-bet. Gotta figure Confused is calling most anything and/or doing whatever Fish does, so my range really would depend on what I thinks the aggro Fish will fold. But the description "plays few hands" confuses me a little. A TAG (tight AGGRESSIVE) with these two to his right should be playing a fair amount of hands from late position, and 3-betting a LOT of those. If he really hasn't 3 bet in 90 minutes, I'm ranging him as more passive and very much weighted toward premiums. JJ+, AQs+, AQo+, KQs. 5%. This raise is pretty big in absolute $$ for a 1/3 game. Gotta figure he's not looking to go multi-way. For myself, I'd probably include a few more suited aces and broadways if I thought Fish would fold, and be even slightly looser if I thought Fish (and therefore Confused) would flat, including some more unsuited aces, sc's and even gappers. Frankly, while I've become much better at not flatting in these situations, at game speed I would not think this deep and likely 3 bet WAY too wide. One of the main reasons I read this site is to correct these leaks.

    Next go round:
    Fish - having a real problem figuring out what he flats here. Lets get rid of AA,KK. He's shoving those. Maybe take out half the QQ and AK. Leaves the suited As, all remaining BWs. Does he really flat 1/3 his stack with KJs or ATo. Yeah, he probably does.
    Confused - damn, even tougher. WTF is this guy thinking. I'm almost convinced he shoves his entire range here. Tough to out-level a guy who isn't thinking. Certainly seen players limp/shove their monsters, don't think that applies here. Also seen "confused" players just get randomly aggro in these spots, been amazed at what they turn over. Yeah, keeping everything else in his range. He'll shove 88 here putting TAG on AK.
    TAG - man, these are some freaky players. There's pretty much nothing that's in his range (or anyone's) that's correct to flat here IMHO. Why would you not re-shove QQ+ AK+? Maybe he's incorrectly assuming Fish will fold to the Confused shove. Sorry, this guy is sounding more TP and less TAG every move. I'm giving him QQ+, AKs.

    But wait, there's more:
    Fish - shoves. Uh, wat? Again, not sure his range narrows at all. "Oh, must be one of those all-in hands, I'm all in too!" Seriously. Maybe he finds a fold with ATo, KJo, A9s-AJs. Maybe not. Kinda academic, TAG's calling and if he thinks about it (which he doesn't), he would know that.
    TAG - calls. He's the only one left with premiums in his range, and that's all he has left. He gets it in good and then sweats the runout 'cause he let it get 3-way.

    I wrote all this on a plane where I consciously couldn't look at other responses. I have played a lot of live NL in a TON of different casinos all over the US, and feel I'm pretty good at gathering information and profiling players. Problem is, I don't know what to do with that info and am often paralyzed by the sheer amount of it. So this was a REALLY long first attempt. I'm gonna post it, read the other responses, and then likely kick myself a little. Constructive criticism massively appreciated.



    Thought of this when I read confused multiple times in your response....
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    @drd66: Thank you SO much for posting!!! It's as if you were sitting at the table -- this is exactly the kind of "WTF???" back-and-forth that happened after everyone went all-in and for another orbit or two later. And it's exactly why I posted it.

    Having read your response, though, I realize now (finally...) why this seemed less confusing to me at the time than it did to everyone else: If you've read on, you'll see that I am the "fish" in the hand. In truth, I wasn't really a fish that night (your analysis of the A3 showdown was PERFECT!!! -- I was actually confident that I could get a better ace to fold, which is what happened) but I also was confident that people looked at me as one.

    Given the fishy image of MP2, the hand is entirely confusing. Had I written that MP2 was a good LAG -- getting better hands to fold, showing some bluffs, but winning oftentimes on the turn or river without showdown -- then the whole rest of this hand is in a different light. In other words, I had info about myself (i.e., not really a fish) that no one else at the table seemed to have.

    In retrospect, and a bit to my embarrassment, this now reads as a brag post. I wasn't trying to do that -- I really was confused by how everyone else saw the hand. Their confusing was just a function of an image that I had set about myself that wasn't accurate. For all the bragginess (yup, bragginess) that that engenders, the reality is that creating a false image is really the ideal, one that I wish that I could achieve far more often. It just happened that I was able to do it here and got paid off for it...

    Thanks again for your comments, @drd66, and I'd love to hear your follow-up thoughts after you read the rest of the thread.

    Safe travels!
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,758 ✭✭✭✭
    I was MP2 in this hand. I do believe that other players at the table looked at me as a fish (and I loved that!!), but I was playing much more purposefully than they thought. I indeed had QQ.

    I'm not sure they see you as a fish. Your description doesn't depict a fish behavior. At least not to me.

    - "doesn't play a lot of hand" but "twice caught bluffing" and "Won most of his money getting folds on turns and rivers". A player who plays rather tight preflop and winning mostly by aggression and who bluffs postflop - is already at least a ok-ish reg (preflop hand selection, winning by aggression, can bluff aka shall be able to understand board texture and/or action to know a bit or more of when to fire the bluff).
    - I'd also note that "fish" opens to 30$ against a 6$ straddle. This isn't a bet sizing of a fish, who is going to still bet 15$ even if there is a straddle - or some slighter more like 20$. Changing so drastically the bet sizing shows a though in BB and not in $, which shows some understanding of bet sizing, which also doesn't fit a fish profile.

    If so, then his range in a open/call/shove action would be, to me, smth like 99- or TT-QQ, AK, AQs as:
    - good enough to open
    - would rather see a flop than kill the action by raising BU (which also discounts, but discards, KK+)
    - has a hand strong enough to shove preflop against both capped range (MP3 call/shove, BU raise/call)
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    Red wrote: »
    I was MP2 in this hand. I do believe that other players at the table looked at me as a fish (and I loved that!!), but I was playing much more purposefully than they thought. I indeed had QQ.

    I'm not sure they see you as a fish. Your description doesn't depict a fish behavior. At least not to me.

    - "doesn't play a lot of hand" but "twice caught bluffing" and "Won most of his money getting folds on turns and rivers". A player who plays rather tight preflop and winning mostly by aggression and who bluffs postflop - is already at least a ok-ish reg (preflop hand selection, winning by aggression, can bluff aka shall be able to understand board texture and/or action to know a bit or more of when to fire the bluff).
    - I'd also note that "fish" opens to 30$ against a 6$ straddle. This isn't a bet sizing of a fish, who is going to still bet 15$ even if there is a straddle - or some slighter more like 20$. Changing so drastically the bet sizing shows a though in BB and not in $, which shows some understanding of bet sizing, which also doesn't fit a fish profile.

    If so, then his range in a open/call/shove action would be, to me, smth like 99- or TT-QQ, AK, AQs as:
    - good enough to open
    - would rather see a flop than kill the action by raising BU (which also discounts, but discards, KK+)
    - has a hand strong enough to shove preflop against both capped range (MP3 call/shove, BU raise/call)

    I think, @Red, that you're smarter than the average bear.

    Many players (and most at this table, I could tell by their reactions) thought it insane that I made such a big bet on the river with A3. They didn't look at it as a good bet but rather as a guy who plays anything and bets with anything. I also think that most players remember their opponents' bluffs that they didn't call only to lament the "one hand that this guy got there with always against me". That's why I think that I was perceived as a fish -- I could hear from the other players at the table talking about it and I could see it from them calling my open-raises too much thereafter.

    Also, that's the reason for the bigger bet on the flop: People were calling quite more liberally...

    All that being said, you are entirely correct, @Red, that my play wasn't that of a "fish". But, that was how I was perceived.

    I imagine that, had you been at the table, you would not have been shocked at all by my play since you would not have looked at me as a fish.

    As I wrote in my previous post, what I realized just now was that my surprise at the reaction was only because I didn't realize how not attuned the other players were to my "image". And I would not have realized that without @drd66's analysis.

    So, thank you both!
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,758 ✭✭✭✭
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,758 ✭✭✭✭
    :smile:
    Thanks and welcome
    I think, @Red, that you're smarter than the average bear.

    Many players (and most at this table, I could tell by their reactions) thought it insane that I made such a big bet on the river with A3. [...]

    Mostly, I wanted to say that the label "fish" wasn't coherent with his behavior. Bad players labeled him as so, but he wasn't
  • drd66drd66 Red Chipper Posts: 3 ✭✭
    Thanks again for your comments, @drd66, and I'd love to hear your follow-up thoughts after you read the rest of the thread.

    Safe travels!

    Yeah, it was pretty interesting reading the exchange between you and @Austin. My first reaction was "crap, I miss read this entirely." But given the info in the orig post, I'm OK with what I wrote.

    Yes, I think labeling yourself a thinking LAG rather than a fish would have changed my analysis. But even this is a learning moment. As I said originally, were I MP2 I would have opened wider to iso the straddle. Maybe even as wide as all PP, all broadways, 65s+, J9s+ A4s+, J9o, 9To; ~24%. That either gets a piece of the flop or has overs ~50%, and I'm barreling pretty much whole range if checked to. Straddlers call way too wide in these games, and fit-or-fold a ton. Then when BUT 3!s, I toss all but value hands, 4 betting AA, KK, prolly AK too. I would assume a LAG would do the same.
    HOWEVER, you make a great point as to your perceived table image. Since you've recently had the "crazy" A3 hand plus a failed bluff, you know you're getting called light. Very true (and exploitable) that players remember bluffers and react by loosening up even more. Therefore, you should be very weighted toward value hands. In this context, your flat of the BUT 3! (which I couldn't figure) makes sense. Well done. Trying to get to this level of thinking at game speed, not there yet.

    What still really kills me is the play of the "TAG" on the button. Wow. Trying to learn from his mistakes. Since Ed preaches TAG as a solid winning style, I tend to forget there are a lot of tight, aggressive strategies that suck if the player isn't really thinking. TAG =/= good in all cases. First of all, how does this guy not 3! for 90 min and then decide to go to 4.5x with 87s?!? You must have really had that table tilted. Again, I didn't have anything near this weak in his range. He must've saw you more as a maniac than a fish, and made the mistake of countering with suicidal aggression. Granted, you want to 3-bet steal with a hand that has some equity, but what does his raise accomplish? I think it'd be better to flat and see a flop in position vs a fish/maniac and a passive caller (plus maybe the straddler, who is calling too wide also). Gets a slightly weird SPR of ~2.5-4 with confused player and you in MP2, but wouldn't that let you bet any piece or draw with good equity? And I think a lot of times you could profitably 1/2 pot any A- or K-hi flop when checked to. As played, now that MP3 shoves, he's priced in with a crappy hand and feels he has to call because of implied odds that aren't there anymore. Then HAS to call your reshove. It's that one early mistake that dominoes you down to the felt.

    I know a lot of hand are 3! or fold, but I'm thinking sc or small pp are calls on the button here. Since straddle is very unlikely to reraise. BUT's effectively closing the action. From my limit days, I learned that it's almost never correct to cold call a raise (Ed's SSHE), but there are times in NL when it's a good move. Watched a good grinder at my 1/3 last night work this several times, kind of a delayed steal. Couldn't figure out why he sometimes limped behind (or called a raise after other callers) in position at what was a very passive table. Then watched him take a few nice pots by betting when checked to OTF. At these passive tables, I feel sometimes I have to pass on a chance to steal IP pre, just because people are starting to notice and get frustrated by it. Occasionally waiting til flop seems to accomplish same goal and not piss people off as much.

    As to the A3 hand, very nice move. I know I'm playing well if at some point I turn over a correctly-played winning hand that make the whole table go "WTF?!?!" Love that feeling.

    And, yes, your post did sound a little braggy, but I've been lurking here long enough to know that wasn't your intent. Writing is hard for me too. This post took > an hour. Then again, I'm a long winded bastard. These'll get shorter as I get better and don't have to get my thoughts on paper to clarify them in my head. Thanks to any patient people who actually read this far.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file