This is from someone I know that played this a while ago, but I think that its worth posting

Party 2/4

Preflop: Hero is the CO with Q 10

3 limpers in front of me, I call in the CO, sb raises, utg calls, utg+1 three bets, MP2 calls, I call, sb calls, utg calls

flop:(16 sb) 6 9 7

sb bets, utg calls, utg+1 raises, MP2 folds, I call, sb calls, utg calls

turn(12 BB): J

sb checks, utg checks, utg+1 bets, I `call, sb calls, utg folds

river: (15 BB) Q

sb checks, utg+1 bets, I call, sb folds


so, yeah

UTG+1 must have AA or KK in this spot to be limp reraising, or he is just an idiot. I know it was from a friend, but any read on him?

I don't mind seeing the flop with this hand though, even for two more here. It most likely won't get capped, plus implied odds will be nice if UTG+1 does have AA or KK.

Flop play is marginal, in my opinion. Could go either way. 2 cold to draw to a gut shot, 4 outs. I want to assume that your overcards are live, but I really dont' think they are, so maybe another out or two incase he would pull that limp/reraise with AK. So you are getting the outs to call, but the chance of it being 3-bet and then capped behind worries me.

The turn plays itself, as you now have the OESD, and in this huge pot, clearly have the odds to draw.

River is good too, IMO. I still think you are beat, but you can't fold getting 16-1 with TP.

Zach

Most of them are idiots.

I usually don't respect a LRR unless it's from the first person who entered the pot. Even then, I'm skeptical.

I couldn't agree more. If I had a nickel for everytime some jagoff LRR with some garbage hand I'd... er wait, I probably do.

Seriously, for every 1 time someone has had a big hand and LRR I've seen 10 where they didn't. I no longer give it any credit whatsoever.

Jeff

Me AJ Button, raise 2 limpers, SB calls, MP limper 3-bets ???

long story short.

Board J27 AA

LRR: j9 ??? paid me 8 BB's total
SB: AQ, poor guy. 8 BB's as well.


i too do not take the LRR into consideration either, just assume random hand, ticked cause I raised, trying to outplay himself.

well said sir.
i have consistently seen LRR's from AA/KK, AK/AQ and connected hands like J9, J10, and the ole random hand from a LAA/LAG. i think given how the hand plays after, the LRR slightly helps you narrow down his hand, but not enough to significantly change your play.

ummm, lets refocus on teh hand

I think it plays itself out.

Preflop with a ton of people in i'm willing to gamble with suited semi high cards.

You're getting great odds to call even 2 cold on the flop with the gutshot and runner draws.

On the turn you're open ended and the pots huge so again its a relatively simple call.

River: call, hope for an overcall and you definitely want to show down this hand as you now have top pair.

Ok.

i think this should be raised pf. After it gets 3-bet and comes back to us, I think we should call. While we generally don't want to be up against aggressive players postflop with these types of hands, I think the large multiway pot more than compensates for it. Plus we have great relative position.

I was thinking about a 3-bet on the flop, but I doubt that does any good here. UTG+1 has raised this somewhat coordinated flop after LRR'ing, and while I usually don't give credit to LRR's, after he raises this flop, he's probably got something. Same goes with sb. He raise preflop, and then bet this raggedy flop into a field of opponents. He's probably got some type of mid-high pp. Given the aggression shown by both UTG+1 and sb, I don't think we get a free card often enough to make a 3-bet profitable, so I like the call.

Turn plays itself.

Same with the river. Raising here would be pretty bad. After sb slows down on the flop, he likely has JJ-TT/88, and maybe QQ. He won't fold QQ no matter how much we raise, but he may fold those pp's we want sticking around. Also, we have to give UTG+1 credit for some kind of hand. We are likely behind, but we are ahead more than enough to call (maybe something like 30% of the time).

So the only real blunder that I can see is not raising pf, and that's not a big mistake at all. Other than that, everything is looks good.

I play it the same throughout. I hate being first to call on the river with a very mediocre hand, but I hate folding and raising more.

You certainly can raise this PF, but in this particular instance it would have been bad because SB probably would have knocked out the limpers with a 3-bet. I don't think we want to play this hand HU even with position against a 3-bet, so I like PF too.

Jeff

I don't understand.

You know what sb is going to do before he does it?

Er, no, and I don't think I said that.

Let me rephrase: Knowing the results of this hand, raising this would be very bad.

Not knowing the results of the hand, and therefore speaking generally, QTs is a limping hand even from the cutoff. But I understand in the Aseem-esque pre-flop world many people think the equity edge is enough to exploit even PF. I don't put myself in that camp though, so I play it the same as OP.

Jeff

Ok.

I thought you were saying that a raise was bad because sb would have 3-bet.

BTW, you should join the camp.

we roast marsmallows!
I love building big pots with suited 1-gap high cards

ack, okay, this hand was posted a full year ago, and now that SSHE has proliferated there isn't as much discussion on the hand as there was in the 2+2 thread that I got it from. oh well

it beats what we get in Micro!

I do like separate forums though.
Just wish we could get more old schoolers.

You're just trying to hijack the thread again to piss off Kdawg

The reason I haven't joined the camp is that you guys make a lot of assumptions which, when proved false, entirely negate whatever minor equity edge we have PF.

Eg, in this hand, we don't know that SB has a big hand yet, true. But when we raise to "exploit our equity edge", we give him the opportunity to isolate us and suddenly we find ourselves in a very -EV situation when we were trying to exploit a marginally +EV situation in the first place.

Furthermore, people who raise this PF make a lot of assumptions about what our opponents limp with that are just completely unfounded. Lots of people limp with AQs and other hands which dominate ours. And let's not forget that we're a dog to (iow, have negative equity towards) any A-rag or K-rag hand. I see people plug in "random hand" in pokerstove for limpers all the time to justify their argument but people don't routinely limp with "random hands" in my experience.

That's why I don't raise this. Is it a huge mistake to raise it? No. But saying it's a clear mistake not to raise this is overreaching the situation a bit. Long story short, I think raising here increases our varience considerably more than it increases our winrate, and I'm not at all convinced it does the latter to any degree.

Jeff

can we ever know whether raising or calling here is best?
How many data examples would we need.
These arguments are great.

for me, I win a ton with suited broadway (like all of us do); but who knows if I win as much not raising preflop. Kinda doubt it.

It's not just about equity. I do believe an edge exists, but I don't think it's all that large. And yeah, it does increase variance.

I mostly raise to buy the button, and to maybe get a free card on the flop.
The raise also disguises my big pfr'ing hands, without giving up any value.

And if sb 3-bets like he might have this hand, it's unlikely everyone will fold, and we will still have great relative position. We can also narrow his range down more and play accordingly.

You're not giving up much by calling here. I raise because I think it's more profitable in the long run and it's certainly a lot more fun. :-)