$2/4 preflop question

[hoosiertim]

[ QUOTE ]
Whatever odds he may be getting don't matter one bit because he knows I have AK, AA, KK, QQ or JJ. ATs is crushed and has to fold. The presence of one other player still does not make it a playable situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where the OP and I really differ. He thinks just cause you are behind you fold. Sometimes you can be behind...WAY behind and still make a profitable call. The size of the pot must help dictate every play one makes. If he SHOWS ME AA there I would make a call with any dominated hand if the pot was right.

Not understanding this concept is why the OP only puts $ in 6% of the pots.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
the fact that you do that is very silly. you cannot always expect orgigional limper to fold especially when the limper (hero) is a tag who wont let go of a hand sinced its ususally bound to have value.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't need the limper to fold to make a raise with 88 ok. I would do it in an instant if the LAG was raising way too many hands preflop and if I thought I could get it 3-handed with us and the limper.

[ QUOTE ]
If he SHOWS ME AA there I would make a call with any dominated hand if the pot was right.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you limp and are facing a raise and 3bet with no further action, that is not a large pot.

[phosix]

IMHO AND PLEASE CORRECT ME i think the 88 is a bad play because
1 we may have to play against two opponents with a total of 4 overs
2 even if we get utg to fold origional raisor will have a hand like k9 or better or a higher pp(if we can agree on that) but thats not to say they dont already have you beat considering their position. and they are not passive meanin youll be punished when behind.

can you add some theory to the 88 play im not sayin its wrong it just seems wrong to me.

like i said id raise the at suited utg in a rocky game but with a game full of different opponent styles( this game) if you raise youll get two callers give or take. and have no idea where you stand in the hand. if you limp you will get more people involved in the hand and perhaps someone in late will raise it up for you (giving excellent relative position for many different options or plays youll want to make on the flop or turn)
im just sayin that at suited utg is a very situtaional hand and you can lose money by playin it to fast in certain games imho.
i deffinity see some logic to your reasoning but maybe i just dont see all of it.
pho

[ckff93]

I think you fold. Mostly because of the fear of the re-raise behind you. With two raisers in the hand the odds are just too good that your A is dominated.

[hoosiertim]

[ QUOTE ]
If he SHOWS ME AA there I would make a call with any dominated hand if the pot was right.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you limp and are facing a raise and 3bet with no further action, that is not a large pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes Forrest I realize that. My point is that the pot size dictates the play. The OP believes that since I am likely dominated I must always fold NO MATTER WHAT THE POT SIZE IS. This is incorrect and I was trying to find a simple way to explain that.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
I limped UTG with ATs. Normally I would raise or fold, but I didn't this time.

The player immedaly behind me (loose agressive) raised. There was no way to put him on ANYTHING.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to have things backwards here. Limping UTG w/ATs is fine under normal conditions--but I wouldn't do it with a LAG to my immediate left.

[MrDannimal]

FWIW, PokerStove says that assuming his read on the 3-bettor is right (AA-QQ, AKs) and that the LAG raiser truly has any-two than he's 25% to win:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 25.2728 % 24.65% 00.63% { AcTc }
Hand 2: 16.3458 % 15.92% 00.43% { random }
Hand 3: 58.3814 % 57.92% 00.46% { QQ+, AKs }
</pre><hr />

I'm not entirely sure how that impacts the discussion (is calling okay getting better than 5:1 with 25% equity?), but it seemed worth considering.

[Xhad]

[ QUOTE ]
IMHO AND PLEASE CORRECT ME i think the 88 is a bad play because
1 we may have to play against two opponents with a total of 4 overs

[/ QUOTE ]

Or we could be up against one underpair and 2 overs, or 3 overs (because they're sharing outs, or because the lag raises hands like A3s)

[ QUOTE ]
2 even if we get utg to fold origional raisor will have a hand like k9 or better or a higher pp(if we can agree on that)

[/ QUOTE ]

If the tag is limping K9 he's also going to be limping some stuff like 77 and A7s. And he probably won't be limping many things that dominate me unless he's going for the lrr (which I admit is possible but I'm not that worried).

[ QUOTE ]
but thats not to say they dont already have you beat considering their position. and they are not passive meanin youll be punished when behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually unless I'm one of the blinds I'll have position on them. And I'm assuming I play at least as well as them postflop, and my hand is ahead of their ranges, and it's not like my hand is something like 22 where you either flop a set or the flop sucks; there are plenty of 0-1 overcard flops I'll feel ok continuing with.

[Mygtar]

Fold, as you are easily dominated and a cap may be coming and you are out of position for all rounds.

Peace,
Mygtar

[nooob]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, PokerStove says that assuming his read on the 3-bettor is right (AA-QQ, AKs) and that the LAG raiser truly has any-two than he's 25% to win:

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre>
equity (%) win (%) tie (%)
Hand 1: 25.2728 % 24.65% 00.63% { AcTc }
Hand 2: 16.3458 % 15.92% 00.43% { random }
Hand 3: 58.3814 % 57.92% 00.46% { QQ+, AKs }
</pre><hr />

I'm not entirely sure how that impacts the discussion (is calling okay getting better than 5:1 with 25% equity?), but it seemed worth considering.

[/ QUOTE ]

since we can safely assume that LAG is not a maniac, we can discount some of the holdings.. the calling here is at best marginal IMO- i would think the equity here is maybe a bit less than 20%. i'd call and i'm check-folding the flop unless i have a strong draw or top pair with a backdoor, but apparently it's an easy fold...