Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Leading the flop is fine if you're willing to play this hand for stacks and if you sometimes smooth call AA KK preflop and he's seen you do it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Explain to me why you want to play for stacks versus an opponent who often puts you on KK+, and apparently can beat that?

Also, leading means we lose tons of value from all the hands that villain will bluff with. I'm not in the camp of people who say "worse hands never call" because a button raiser has all kinds of hands that my have picked up a draw, or he might float with overs, or he might call with 88 because he beats a lot of donkhands that would bet here.

But checking certianly makes a ton more $$ than betting because Villain will bet around 99% of his hands, but only call with about 10-20% of them.

So I would probably never lead this flop, except perhaps with A4 or 33, because I probably can't stack him without getting him to raise one street.

Note that I'm talking about the preflop call scenario.

I would re-raise preflop. Many of you are too hung up about how often you win at showdown unimproved. Not every hands value is dictated by when you win at showdown.

For example, with AK (or AQs or even worse) we might 3-bet here, but we don't actually expect to win at showdown unimproved vs. a worse Ace. Nevertheless, you DO get calls, and you DO win value from worse aces. And you get MORE value (when you don't improve) vs. those hands by re-raising preflop and/or by winning the pot on the flop.

The same is true with TT vs. AQ, or say, 88.

Yes, if they call bets on 3 streets, you probably aren't good. But the simple fact of the matter is that there are many, many, MANY overcard hands that have significant equity vs. TT that will fold the flop if we re-raise, and that is a GOOD thing. It is a better thing than giving those same hands 5 cards to outdraw us (which they'll virtually always get if you play the hand for value), because calling a flop PSB, you've put in the same amount of money as if you'd RR preflop, but in this scenario the player in position will often see 5 cards for that price, or will double-barrel a draw and make us fold.

So, two scenarios involving roughly the same size pot:

1) RR preflop
2) call preflop, c/c PSB

But in senario 2) we will win a lot less often. And let's not forget the fact that re-raising will put us heads-up most of the time, where our equity is far better than in a 3-way pot.

A further reason to RR is that sometimes the other player gets stubborn with hands like 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] and thinks he can call for implied odds. You are crushing hands like this, and getting them to call is a good thing.

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

Kilillan,

Firstly, off cource you are 100% right about their calling ranges. I have no idea why people are giving opponents JJ+/AK calling ranges.I've hardly seen any1 fold any PP to a rr, and most players like you say don't even fold AJ/AQ/78s etc. I also completely understand your point that we can still get "value for our hand" even when we don't go to showdown in a way. As yes, we are getting called preflop by AJ or whatever, and they fold to our cbet on a 9 high flop or whatever. But the point is that although we got some "value" for our hand, the actual cards we held makes no difference.

This is my point about going to showdown and the reasons I asked you those 2 questions earlier in the thread. I'm not looking for a formulaic way to play poker or anything like that, I was simply trying to establish how often you get to showdown in rr pots OOP with TT. Of cource we don't need to go to showdown to win the hand, but if we don't go to showdown, it doesn't actually matter what hand we have, we could have 72o, played the hand in the exact same way, and still won the pot.

When you are talking about rr AK, there are 2 reasons why I prefer rr AK to TT. Firstly, and probably the least important reason, is that we can easily force better hands to fold. By rr preflop and cbetting on the flop, we can force 22-88 etc to fold on the flop after they called (wrongly) for set value preflop. The main reason I prefer rr AK to TT though is that with AK, if called preflop, 1 in 3 times, I'll see a flop that I'll be pretty happy getting AI on (ie I can very safely and happily vb these flops). However, with TT, there is only really 1 in 8 flops that I'm happy getting AI on in a rr pot, so when I cbet the flop, although I'm never getting a better hand to fold, it still seems like a bluff in the way that I don't want to go to showdown.

This brings me onto your last point. You say you play a lot LAGier than others around here, and certainly more LAG than me. And if you DO play LAGier or play in more aggressive games, then I have no problem whatsoever with rr TT. The reason being is that you can easily get AI on the flop or bet the flop and get to showdown and be ahead a good % of the time. What I have more of a problem with are players who just rr TT+/AK preflop and then cbet/fold flops or cbet flops then c/f the turns.

EDIT: 1 last other minor reason why I'd prefer to rr preflop with AK than TT is that at higher levels or vs loose opponents, I suspect AK does better vs a 4bet range than TT does

EDIT 2: thanks bilbo and 2paul2 for your posts, especially paul's on ways to get to showdown

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

[ QUOTE ]

But most TAGs and donks at this level will call it with hands as weak as AJo or any pair or suited connectors.


[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that TT is flipping a coin against AJ right? Granted not on the flop, but by the river it's a coin flip. Also, my point was that if you get action from AJ post flop, it's almost always because you are behind....that was really the essence of why it's a "bluff." If the AJ misses the flop and folds to your flop bet, it makes no difference if you held TT, or 2 Uno cards, he folded to the bet because he had nothing. Granted you had a hand that beat his, but it didn't matter in this instance because he's not likely to fold anything on the flop that beats your Tens.

I will grant that the reraise picks up fold equity against hands like AJ or AQ on a flop that somes KQx or KJx etc as they put you on the King and their second pair is no good, but again in this instance, you could have 2 Uno cards instead of tens and they'd still fold.

I'm not arguing against reraising with TT, i'll do it too, but I realize that if I get called on the flop, i'm probably toast and I will definitely not always reraise with TT preflop.

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

nice to see you back dj.

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

[ QUOTE ]
nice to see you back dj.

[/ QUOTE ]

heh, doing a project out at some lame ass company that had 2+2 blocked.....back in the office now.

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

[ QUOTE ]

You do realize that TT is flipping a coin against AJ right? Granted not on the flop, but by the river it's a coin flip.

[/ QUOTE ]

srssly?

gotta write that down

Yes, any action you get from AJ will be when you're beat, but it'd be very hard to lose a stack on an ace high board as well.

And I understand your point DB, but I'm not entirely sure what you mean by not winning a big pot with TT unimproved at Nl200. I can dig in pokertracker and find some NL200 hands where I won big pots with 99/TT unimproved

and I agree with what bilbo said

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

Kilillan,

I guess this discussion has just about run its cource now. But just to clarify, I've won a lot of big pots with 99/TT UI, but just not in rr pots. I'm sure you HAVE won a lot of big pots with TT/99 UI in rr pots, but thats just what I mean by overall styles and the more LAGy your play the more and more I like rr TT for value and if you play very TAG, the more I like just calling

Re: I dont know how to play mid pairs
 

So I just started reading 2+2, and I find it very interesting thus far. I'm slowly working my way through all of the digests before I consider posting in high volume. However, this thread sucked a comment out because it is very relevant to something Harrington wrote about in his first volume.

Even if the PFRR with TT OOP turns the hand into a bluff, it still is substantially different than bluffing with 23o or anything else for two reasons:

1. (the point Harrington makes) you build bluffs into your preflop raising strategy, so that the cards randomize your bluffs for you. Even if a cbet is just a bluff after PFRR is called preflop (a very dubious claim in my book), you are randomizing your bluffs by the percentage of times that you get TT.
2. (the point that 2Paul2 makes) TT can win in some showdowns. Even if the situations that TT wins in a showdown after an OOP PFRR are very rare, they still give TT the edge over 23o as a good hand to randomize on.

Now, I don't really buy the bluff logic, for reasons that have mostly already been stated. But even if you do believe that PFRR with TT turns it into a bluff, playing it this way is a great way to disguise your bigger hands. The merit of the OOP PFRR, then, shouldn't be evaluated just for this hand alone but also for what it adds to your overall style.