AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

Dunno how often a spot like this comes up, and I'm pretty sure this is the "default" way to play this, but I thought I'd run it by you folks.

I just sat down, this is my very first hand in the BB with A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. CO open-limps, Button folds, SB completes.

I pot it, CO calls, and SB re-pots.

I push. Standard? If not, what do you do differently?

By the way, both villains complete unknowns.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

i play it exactly the same, FWIW.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

i fold

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

+1 for folding. He has a PP here always imo.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

I prob fold aswell, I have great hands on my first BB all the time but don't run into this that often, but I've folded JJ on my first hand.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
+1 for folding. He has a PP here always imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely we have to assume it's not a big PP and that the call is justfied by the amount of money we potted and the remianing amount we need to call.

I would call and be happy racing for it.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

stack sizes?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
+1 for folding. He has a PP here always imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely we have to assume it's not a big PP

[/ QUOTE ]uhh, am I wrong for thinking this is totally opposite?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
+1 for folding. He has a PP here always imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course he does. But he has QQ+ here rarely.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

A couple of points:

1) I'm pushing, not calling. Dunno why some people are telling me to "call and be happy with the race"

2) This is 77-JJ a LOT, isn't it? Who LRRs with QQ+ from the SB after the CO open-limps?

3) If he "has a PP here nearly always", why should I fold? I 'm even money with a ton of PPs.

By the way, I'd never push AJ or less than JJ here. If he's calling my push with 22-TT and AQ, I'm pretty +++ G-bucks.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

oh wow I though it was CO that limp/RR...yeah I'm playing this the same. Sorry.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
stack sizes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I just sat down, and didn't note otherwise, I think it's a general convention to assume 100BB in this spot. If I played on a 200BB site and didn't mention it, or if I was a short-stacking pushbotter and didn't mention it, then I'd say it would be fair to throw rotten tomatoes at me and berate me for leaving out that info.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

ya i like a shove. if hes limping QQ+ in this spot after a limper, hes just terrible.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stack sizes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I just sat down, and didn't note otherwise, I think it's a general convention to assume 100BB in this spot. If I played on a 200BB site and didn't mention it, or if I was a short-stacking pushbotter and didn't mention it, then I'd say it would be fair to throw rotten tomatoes at me and berate me for leaving out that info.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, not berating. sorry you feel that way. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I am simply asking b/c I rarely see a full stack do stuff like this and it would determine what I would do.

IME players who buy in for the full amount don't make such ridiculously odd plays like this. So that is why I ask.

I usually equate the buy in amount with the caliber of player until proven otherwise.

Anyway, I will remember that when someone doesn't include stack sizes it is the general convention that they are 100bb. Of course sometimes people just forget, we are human afterall.

I would lean towards folding though. Without any info why would we want to make this type of marginal play?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
i fold

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think we need to stick 100bbs in here either.

kermit

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i fold

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think we need to stick 100bbs in here either.

kermit

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if you saw his cards were JJ, you'd fold, because you don't want to risk 100BBs!?

The argument should be about whether or not an unknown has QQ+ here very often or not (if he does, fold is obviously best).

Or alternatively, if we agree that he has JJ or less here often, we can argue about whether a mini-4-bet is better than a push.

But simply saying "I don't like risking 100BBs" is completely dodging the question (and ignoring EV implications).

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

bilbo,

Against an unknown, folding is a huge leak. If the guy is bad or misplaying Doyle's Super System strategy then a limp re-raise means KK or most likely AA. The positive expectation here is not that large so I am pretty indifferent.

Obviously, we do not have any reads so mathematically if SB's range includes at least 77+ and AQ+ I am pretty certain it is +EV to shove (no poker stove at work or I'd prove it out).

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.617% 33.67% 06.95% 36316824 7499124.00 { AhQh }
Hand 1: 59.383% 52.43% 06.95% 56560080 7499124.00 { 77+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Against an unknown I think it is difficult to determine whether he could hold QQ+ here. I think we don't see this situation very often so that is why I lean towards folding. If we knew villain had a slight tendency to make odd plays with less than QQ+ then I would argue for shoving.

I wouldn't want to start my session with such a high variance play when I have no idea what the villain is capable of.

This reminds me of a situation I read about playing AK tptk vs an unknown. I'm not sure who the poster was or where I read it, but he said it is probably best to fold to resistence b/c we are unsure whether the villain is capable of making the move w/ a hand we beat. He said it would be best to fold now and learn more about that villain so we can make a better decision next time we're in a pot with them.

Isn't it best to lean towards conservatism when we are up against an unknown?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.617% 33.67% 06.95% 36316824 7499124.00 { AhQh }
Hand 1: 59.383% 52.43% 06.95% 56560080 7499124.00 { 77+, AQs+, AQo+ }

[/ QUOTE ]

So after factoring in the money already in the pot and about 10% worth of fold equity (assume he folds maybe 99- an AQ+) shoving would appear to be +EV.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

His range is wide enough here to shove.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

Ok, there are 60 combinations of hands from 77+, AQ+ (excluding the Ah and Qh). If he folds 77-99, AQo and AQs he folds out 27 hands to a shove. I doubt he folds AK here. So 27 is 45%. So we could say he has 45% FE.

so 45% of the time villain folds and Hero wins 22.5 bbs.

55% of the time villain calls with the range of TT+, AK (again excluding the Ah and Qh). That leaves us with 33 combination of hands he will call with.

We are a 65/35 dog to his calling range. So when he calls 55% of the time we lose 100 bbs 65% of the time, and gain 104.5 bbs 35% of the time.

So, 45 times out of 100 we win 22.5 bbs.

We win 104.5 bbs 19 times out of 100.

And we lose 100 bbs 36 times out of 100.

(22.5 * 45)+(104.5 *19)= +2998
(100 * 36) = -3600
For a total difference of -602 bbs.

That is -6.02bb per hand.

Given that villain's range is as such. Is this right?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.617% 33.67% 06.95% 36316824 7499124.00 { AhQh }
Hand 1: 59.383% 52.43% 06.95% 56560080 7499124.00 { 77+, AQs+, AQo+ }

Against an unknown I think it is difficult to determine whether he could hold QQ+ here. I think we don't see this situation very often so that is why I lean towards folding. If we knew villain had a slight tendency to make odd plays with less than QQ+ then I would argue for shoving.

I wouldn't want to start my session with such a high variance play when I have no idea what the villain is capable of.

This reminds me of a situation I read about playing AK tptk vs an unknown. I'm not sure who the poster was or where I read it, but he said it is probably best to fold to resistence b/c we are unsure whether the villain is capable of making the move w/ a hand we beat. He said it would be best to fold now and learn more about that villain so we can make a better decision next time we're in a pot with them.

Isn't it best to lean towards conservatism when we are up against an unknown?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bear in my mind that I LOVE Variance.

You ever take a finance class and see this question?

"Which would you prefer?

a) Pay $10000 and receive $15000 today

b) Pay $10000 and wait until tomorrow. At that time, you receive either $50000 (50% chance) or must pay an additional $10000 (50% chance)."

I'm one of the ones who picks B. Same expectation, but sometimes B gets me $50000!

To put it another way, if you play this game over and over again, and you get real lucky and win a few more than expected, you're up big. But if you get real unlucky and lose a few, it doesn't hurt as much as the winning helps.

My roll is high enough that I never, ever, ever, EVER sacrifice EV to reduce variance, and if I think EV = 0 (i.e. SB is shoving every single hand when it's folded to him), I'll often embrace the variance (unless it has indirect negative consequences, like if I know the stupid SB will leave immediately if he wins a flip).

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 40.617% 33.67% 06.95% 36316824 7499124.00 { AhQh }
Hand 1: 59.383% 52.43% 06.95% 56560080 7499124.00 { 77+, AQs+, AQo+ }

[/ QUOTE ]

So after factoring in the money already in the pot and about 10% worth of fold equity (assume he folds maybe 99- an AQ+) shoving would appear to be +EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are about 20bbs in the pot already. Pretty sure shoving against that range is +EV even if he never folds.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, there are 60 combinations of hands from 77+, AQ+ (excluding the Ah and Qh). If he folds 77-99, AQo and AQs he folds out 27 hands to a shove. I doubt he folds AK here. So 27 is 45%. So we could say he has 45% FE.

so 45% of the time villain folds and Hero wins 22.5 bbs.

55% of the time villain calls with the range of TT+, AK (again excluding the Ah and Qh). That leaves us with 33 combination of hands he will call with.

We are a 65/35 dog to his calling range. So when he calls 55% of the time we lose 100 bbs 65% of the time, and gain 104.5 bbs 35% of the time.

So, 45 times out of 100 we win 22.5 bbs.

We win 104.5 bbs 19 times out of 100.

And we lose 100 bbs 36 times out of 100.

(22.5 * 45)+(104.5 *19)= +2998
(100 * 36) = -3600
For a total difference of -602 bbs.

That is -6.02bb per hand.

Given that villain's range is as such. Is this right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get your math.

1) I already have 4BBs committed. So at decision point I can only "risk" 96 BBs.

If I shove, my expection is 122.5 BBs when he folds, and 35% of 204BBs when he calls, and it "costs" me 96 BBs to shove. So:

EV = (122.5BBs)*.45 + (204BBs)*.35*.55 = 42.875+39.27 = about 82BBs

With your estimates it's actually -14BBs, because I invest 96 to get 82.

But I think he folds a HELLA lot more than 45% if you think our equity is only 35% when called.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

I find people have AK a lot here and hate playing it for a raise OOP. It can also get value out of weak aces.

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, there are 60 combinations of hands from 77+, AQ+ (excluding the Ah and Qh). If he folds 77-99, AQo and AQs he folds out 27 hands to a shove. I doubt he folds AK here. So 27 is 45%. So we could say he has 45% FE.

so 45% of the time villain folds and Hero wins 22.5 bbs.

55% of the time villain calls with the range of TT+, AK (again excluding the Ah and Qh). That leaves us with 33 combination of hands he will call with.

We are a 65/35 dog to his calling range. So when he calls 55% of the time we lose 100 bbs 65% of the time, and gain 104.5 bbs 35% of the time.

So, 45 times out of 100 we win 22.5 bbs.

We win 104.5 bbs 19 times out of 100.

And we lose 100 bbs 36 times out of 100.

(22.5 * 45)+(104.5 *19)= +2998
(100 * 36) = -3600
For a total difference of -602 bbs.

That is -6.02bb per hand.

Given that villain's range is as such. Is this right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get your math.

1) I already have 4BBs committed. So at decision point I can only "risk" 96 BBs.

If I shove, my expection is 122.5 BBs when he folds, and 35% of 204BBs when he calls, and it "costs" me 96 BBs to shove. So:

EV = (122.5BBs)*.45 + (204BBs)*.35*.55 = 42.875+39.27 = about 82BBs

With your estimates it's actually -14BBs, because I invest 96 to get 82.

But I think he folds a HELLA lot more than 45% if you think our equity is only 35% when called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, I hadn't done an equity calc before. The way you show it makes it easier to understand.

But the range I used was given by 42it, I was just trying to figure it out exactly. So it is a losing move according to those ranges, yes?

Re: AQs, BB, very first hand, and SB limp-raises
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, there are 60 combinations of hands from 77+, AQ+ (excluding the Ah and Qh). If he folds 77-99, AQo and AQs he folds out 27 hands to a shove. I doubt he folds AK here. So 27 is 45%. So we could say he has 45% FE.

so 45% of the time villain folds and Hero wins 22.5 bbs.

55% of the time villain calls with the range of TT+, AK (again excluding the Ah and Qh). That leaves us with 33 combination of hands he will call with.

We are a 65/35 dog to his calling range. So when he calls 55% of the time we lose 100 bbs 65% of the time, and gain 104.5 bbs 35% of the time.

So, 45 times out of 100 we win 22.5 bbs.

We win 104.5 bbs 19 times out of 100.

And we lose 100 bbs 36 times out of 100.

(22.5 * 45)+(104.5 *19)= +2998
(100 * 36) = -3600
For a total difference of -602 bbs.

That is -6.02bb per hand.

Given that villain's range is as such. Is this right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get your math.

1) I already have 4BBs committed. So at decision point I can only "risk" 96 BBs.

If I shove, my expection is 122.5 BBs when he folds, and 35% of 204BBs when he calls, and it "costs" me 96 BBs to shove. So:

EV = (122.5BBs)*.45 + (204BBs)*.35*.55 = 42.875+39.27 = about 82BBs

With your estimates it's actually -14BBs, because I invest 96 to get 82.

But I think he folds a HELLA lot more than 45% if you think our equity is only 35% when called.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, I hadn't done an equity calc before. The way you show it makes it easier to understand.

But the range I used was given by 42it, I was just trying to figure it out exactly. So it is a losing move according to those ranges, yes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but your calculations don't account for the fact that he rarely has QQ+ here, given the action, and instead weights all his hands equally.

In fact, I would argue that he never has QQ or KK, or AK, because if he is "getting tricky" with a big hand, it's only with AA.

Given this new information, my FE is a lot bigger than 45%, I think.