Awkward position after supersized reraise pre against donk

[Roadstar]

Over a small sample (but it matches my view of villain), villain is about 40/30 preflop and pretty lag pre. I don't think he is a good LAG as he makes big mistakes by calling large raises cold or large reraises with sub par hands.


Party Poker
No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $0.25/$0.50
6 players
Converter (http://www.neildewhurst.com/hand-converter)

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is Button with Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif
<font color="#cc0000">UTG raises to $3</font>, 2 folds, <font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $14</font>, 2 folds, UTG calls.

Flop: A/images/graemlins/club.gif J/images/graemlins/spade.gif 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif ($28.75, 2 players)
<font color="#cc0000">UTG raises all-in $12.71</font>, Hero pukes and?

Because of LAG's tendency to illogically call large reraises, I popped it big to $14. He calls which is what I wanted (no KK or AA here as LAG definitely 4 bets).

Having said that wtf I do on the flop?! Is he doing this enough times with crap like 88-TT to offset the times he has AJ-AK?

[Vyse]

Fix the converter.

Raising so big PF commits you to the entire hand, which is why I don't like it. The smart play is to fold this, though. You see too many wannabe LAGs with A6o or some garbage here. With no flush draw, you're almost certainly beat.

EDIT: By no flush draw, I mean the villain isn't randomly pushing a flush draw, which you see a lot of in the micros.

[prodonkey]

Well I think you're pretty much priced into a call, I'm not folding Q's to a lagtard after I put 1/2 his stack in.. but you're gonna be looking at AJ or AT much of the time.

[KurtSF]

Puke and call, every single time. You make monies like this. Way to pwn him preflop.

[Roadstar]

Raising so big preflop exploits his mistake of refusing to let go preflop with an inferior hand... its a +EV move no?

I agree postflop is awkward...

[ QUOTE ]
Fix the converter.

Raising so big PF commits you to the entire hand, which is why I don't like it. The smart play is to fold this, though. You see too many wannabe LAGs with A6o or some garbage here. With no flush draw, you're almost certainly beat.

EDIT: By no flush draw, I mean the villain isn't randomly pushing a flush draw, which you see a lot of in the micros.

[/ QUOTE ]

[eviljeff]

preflop is clever, but there's not really any point in making a big reraise like this when he's short. he's still pretty committed to any pair or draw if you reraise less and he calls. do you get what I mean here?

as played you're getting a little over 3:1. do you have 25% equity? it's probably close. he has Jx or air here some percentage of the time. go ahead and call.

[Roadstar]

I think so, are you saying that my edge, given a good flop, will be a lot larger and he would have pot committed himself anyway?

Results - I called out of frustration, villain shows AQo lol

[ QUOTE ]
preflop is clever, but there's not really any point in making a big reraise like this when he's short. he's still pretty committed to any pair or draw if you reraise less and he calls. do you get what I mean here?


[/ QUOTE ]

[eviljeff]

yeah I think you've got it. here's a useless Sklanksy-esque hypothetical to drive the point home further:

assume if you raise to $25 (making up numbers) villain will always call. if you raise to $30 he will fold half of his hands. when he calls you will both get the money all in on any flop. despite the fact that raising to $30 is +EV, raising a bit less is the correct play.

[Vyse]

[ QUOTE ]

assume if you raise to $25 (making up numbers) villain will always call. if you raise to $30 he will fold half of his hands. when he calls you will both get the money all in on any flop. despite the fact that raising to $30 is +EV, raising a bit less is the correct play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is what I was trying to say. Raising big PF to nail him on his mediocre holdings is correct, but then this happens.

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah I think you've got it. here's a useless Sklanksy-esque hypothetical to drive the point home further:

assume if you raise to $25 (making up numbers) villain will always call. if you raise to $30 he will fold half of his hands. when he calls you will both get the money all in on any flop. despite the fact that raising to $30 is +EV, raising a bit less is the correct play.

[/ QUOTE ]

But isn't the point here that villain isn't folding anything to a oversized bet that he calls a PSB with? Yours is a great scenario, but it seems like just the opposite of this villain's tenancies.

If villain calls 90% to $25 and 90% to $30, which one is the correct play?

[KurtSF]

[ QUOTE ]


Yes, this is what I was trying to say. Raising big PF to nail him on his mediocre holdings is correct, but then this happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Variance?

Results oriented analysis?

Lets say villain plays PERFECTLY post flop, getting in when an A hits and fold when he whiffs or a Q hits. The times he hits (18%) he wins $27. The times he misses (82%) you win $14. Run this hand 100 times and I have hero up $660.

The big bet preflop exploits a hole in the opponent's game very effectively. Hero makes money playing this way.

Now if you assume villain doesn't play perfectly postflop, sometimes continuing to draw when an ace doesn't fall, the case Q appears, etc., and it should in actually be even more EV than my example above.

[Vyse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Yes, this is what I was trying to say. Raising big PF to nail him on his mediocre holdings is correct, but then this happens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Variance?

Results oriented analysis?

Lets say villain plays PERFECTLY post flop, getting in when an A hits and fold when he whiffs or a Q hits. The times he hits (18%) he wins $27. The times he misses (82%) you win $14. Run this hand 100 times and I have hero up $660.

The big bet preflop exploits a hole in the opponent's game very effectively. Hero makes money playing this way.

Now if you assume villain doesn't play perfectly postflop, sometimes continuing to draw when an ace doesn't fall, the case Q appears, etc., and it should in actually be even more EV than my example above.

[/ QUOTE ]

This happens when you do this vs ANY short stack, that's not variance...

And Ax should dominate his range more than any other holding -- you see that far, far more often.

[KurtSF]

If villain has AK instead of AQ he wins $21 over 100 hands. Minimal, but still. AJ, AT, those should be just as big winners for hero as AQ.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying.

[Vyse]

That's assuming he pushes any flop no matter what he has, which is quite doubtful. If this play happened every time and the flop was exactly the same every time, I am saying I think OP loses money. Over the long run, raising bigger PF takes advantage of villain's PF looseness, but his PF holding range is dominated by Ace anything, so when an ace hits, like here, OP is losing. Yes, it's +EV to raise to (going back to the hypothetical) $25 and call a push 100% of the time with QQ, but it's even more +EV to raise to $25 and fold when the ace hits on the flop, IMO.

[eviljeff]

[ QUOTE ]

Yours is a great scenario, but it seems like just the opposite of this villain's tenancies.

[/ QUOTE ]

yes I'm assuming that villain is more likely to fold to a bigger reraise. I think it's a pretty safe assumption and I don't know why you think it'd be the opposite.