[Mitke]

[ QUOTE ]
Mitke,

[ QUOTE ]
However, I doubt all four Jacks are still in the deck.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm interested in this concept. But at the flop, before we bet, how can you say it's likely less than 4 jacks are left in the deck? 3 LP limpers, and LP limpers often have a jack?

[/ QUOTE ]

Allday Everyday, I think calling it a concept might be asking too much..

To answer: yes, that's what I was thinking: JT,J9,J8s,QJ,KJ, etc. is stuff I think a lot of LPs like to (open)limp with. Hence, my comment and perhaps a slight discounting of J outs.

Thinking it a bit further, there isn't much of a reason to assume that before we see how they react.

Further, thinking like this might lead to counting us to have too little outs and lose value in some spots. I'd be willing to discuss though if there are any spots where you actually should discount your outs because you assume some of them migth be in your villains hand?

E.g: EP raises, we cold-call with KQs in MP, another MP 3-bets (and maybe BTN caps). Flop comes JT2r. Can we assume to have 4 outs to the ace?

(This is going woefully off-topic though.)