[Raxxmataxx]

[ QUOTE ]
His range is something like rolled,(JJ)+,(Ace-low), lots of 3-low flush hands, any (baby-baby).

[/ QUOTE ]Ok. I write equity from 0-1 rather than 0-100 or a fractional number. Since that's the way twodimes puts it out and it saves on pixels.

Rolled, you've got .132. But one of his threes are dead, which drastically cuts down on those possibilities.

Against high pairs you range from .24 (AA) .36, (KK) .40 (JJ-QQ). And that's nine combos of JJ and QQ vs only 6 combos of AA and KK.

Unpaired ace-low ranges from .3 (with a four-wheel and three flush cards) to .4 (with only a three straight and a two-flush).

A553 you have about .38 equity against.

Unpaired lowflush gives you from .39 to .30 (if he has straight and a flushdraw).

Paired 3-flush ranges gives you about .35

Non-flushed, non-paired babies also gives you about .35.

Paired, non-flushed babies give you about .40.

You didn't mention them, but surely A33 must have been a starting possibility as well? Against those you have .40 in equity.

Out of your proposed range there's only 7 combinations where you lose significant money. And only when he's rolled up do you lose big, which is about 2.5 BB. Against the aces you lose 1 SB.

Of course, you're never ahead but, having .40 of the pot is a pretty big win (1.3 SB) and that's going to happen pretty often. In fact you,ve just the equity from JJ and QQ balances out the hits you take against 333 and aces.

Everything else is pure gravy. And against most of those hands you make a fair bit of money from the pot. There's only a few open-ended straights that you lose money against, and then it's not very much.

So to me this seems like a hand you definitely should play. Assuming there's no bug in twodimes S8.

At the very least your loss can only be small. And I doubt you have an average loss here a lot.

I'd definitely like to see a model where OP loses money by raising 4th and betting 5th and 6th against calls 100% of the time. I just don't see it now.