Preflop survey --- 5 hands ez quick

[EnderIII]

I'll comment on hand 2, since I disagree with the consensus that has been reached. I don't call here all the time, but certainly at least some of the time. You have decent immediate odds, and while you have bad implied odds against the short stack you have good implied odds vs. the deep stack.

Even though you are out of position, i think you can check just about everything and can benefit from the invisibility of being the blind that just comes along for the ride. The short stack is either likely to make a play at the pot on the flop or give up entirely given that the size of the pot and their stack will be so similar.

I would feel reasonably confident that the short stack doesn't have a monster or even anything as good as AK or they would have pushed preflop. The big stack's range is potentially huge, so take a flop with good odds and a good guess at how the hand might proceed.

[Paul Thomson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
on #3:
when u call a preflop raise based on implied odds, u have to figure your chips will be made off of the preflop raiser. in this spot the preflop raiser has very few chips so your implied odds are low. also he will often play the flop aggressively since the pot will be big relative to his stack, so u cant really play ur draws very profitably unless u semibluff but that will be risky as you're oop and wont really know where the other players are at when u flop a draw.

not saying its right or wrong but that's my rationale for folding...

[/ QUOTE ]


good post - thank you for that

I should really post that entire hand...it ended up being pretty interesting....

[/ QUOTE ]

Your right that it was a good and interesting post, however, it's not relevant to this situation. You're getting 5-1 (assuming the first limper calls), to call the bet. You probably have close to that much equity without implied odds.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
You're getting 5-1 (assuming the first limper calls), to call the bet. You probably have close to that much equity without implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]You cannot figure equity in NL without considering implied odds unless you are getting in all in PF. Immediate odds of winning in a showdown are not enough since we have at least 3 more betting rounds to deal with.

[jon_1van]

1. I play AJs in the BB with 2 limpers because I'm interested in playing a multiway flop with a suited Ace. But I'm not looking to press any TPTK type hands too much.

2. Fold 86o

3. Meh, its close. It doesn't cost much to call, and you are getting 3-way action with a multiway hand. But, you are gonna be OOP...so...meh. Fold/call...my decision here rest outside this hand (do I have a hand on another table??? does someone in this hand suck really bad??)

4. This really depends on how the table is playing. If they are kinda loose and will insta push with hands like AJ I fold for 2 reasons. (1. I'm likely to be playing a big hand with a smallish edge OOP)(2. The opponents will call big bets when I actually do have a hand...so I'll wait before I invite a coinflip)

[Paul Thomson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why would you call in hand 1?

Let's say the flop comes Ace high. SB bets, you have to fold. Let's say flop comes J high, SB bets you still have to probably fold.

[/ QUOTE ]No you don't. Depends on how agressive SB is. If he's c-betting most flops then I'm calling here and then re-evaluating the turn.

AJs and having position on the raiser, even with poor relativie position to the other two players, turns this into a marginal call for me. I'd fold AJo.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you'll flop a flush draw 10% of the time, how does this make it a call? And to try and outplay the villain on an Ace high flop is retarded.

Fold is better. Unless it's a donkament and then maybe you could find a reason to call because you *know* the SB and the co and button are all donks.

[Paul Thomson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're getting 5-1 (assuming the first limper calls), to call the bet. You probably have close to that much equity without implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]You cannot figure equity in NL without considering implied odds unless you are getting in all in PF. Immediate odds of winning in a showdown are not enough since we have at least 3 more betting rounds to deal with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you missed my point. We have equity odds preflop WITHOUT implied odds to call. When you take GOOD implied odds as opposed to reverse implied odds, then it's a call.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
So you'll flop a flush draw 10% of the time, how does this make it a call?

[/ QUOTE ]You aren't just playing for the flush. TP might be good against villan, so you have SOME high card strength. However, having the flush potential can add draws later in the hand to make it more valuable.

Since you get to act after villan, you have some information about how to play your hand on the flop. If he pots it I'm probably tossing TP unless I get my flush draw, but if he puts out a feeler bet I'll call and re-evaluate on the turn.

This seems to be a small investment in a marginal hand that will win a few pots and SOMETIMES stack villan if the flush comes in.

[Paul Thomson]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll comment on hand 2, since I disagree with the consensus that has been reached. I don't call here all the time, but certainly at least some of the time. You have decent immediate odds, and while you have bad implied odds against the short stack you have good implied odds vs. the deep stack.

Even though you are out of position, i think you can check just about everything and can benefit from the invisibility of being the blind that just comes along for the ride. The short stack is either likely to make a play at the pot on the flop or give up entirely given that the size of the pot and their stack will be so similar.

I would feel reasonably confident that the short stack doesn't have a monster or even anything as good as AK or they would have pushed preflop. The big stack's range is potentially huge, so take a flop with good odds and a good guess at how the hand might proceed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your logic in this thread is absolutely backward.

"while you have bad implied odds against the short stack you have good implied odds vs. the deep stack"...implied odds is based on alot more than just how deep of a stack someone is. It's a relationship of their stack size and their possible hand ranges. Therefore, you want the deep stack to have a strong hand and the small stack to have a big hand. At the same time, it's much harder to get a flush draw paid off as opposed to a hidden set. And we aren't that DEEP at all. Last we have POOR implied odds, infact, we have reverse imiplied odds because the SB should only raise with hands that beat us. Put yourself in SB shoes, do you raise or limp with AJ in this situation, you limp. Well he raised so guess what hand he doesn't have. Let's say you have a 88-TT and your the SB do you limp or do you raise, limping is better than raising if you think you'll get alot of calls. We have HORRIBLE implied odds.

You make an interesting point about having good relative position to the short stack however that has to assume that the SB doesn't bet out on the flop and we actually hit something that we want to call a push from the short stack.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
We have equity odds preflop WITHOUT implied odds to call.

[/ QUOTE ]In order to get any share of this pot we feel we are entitiled to based on immediate odds we are going to have to get to the river, which means dealing with a likely flop bet, or if not that a possible turn and/or river bet. Are we going to continue on past the flop without hitting either two pair or better or a strong draw? Certainly that isn't going to happen often enough to justify our investment.

My point is that we can't just look at our share of the pot in terms of how often we expect this hand to win without the pot growing, because it WILL grow. Our immediate pot equity doesn't matter in light of future bets that will grow the pot bigger than what we are faced with PF. This is why we have to consider the implied odds, and in fact implied odds are more important than immediate odds. Since I don't believe we have the implied odds here, I think it's a fold.

[Paul Thomson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So you'll flop a flush draw 10% of the time, how does this make it a call?

[/ QUOTE ]You aren't just playing for the flush. TP might be good against villan, so you have SOME high card strength. However, having the flush potential can add draws later in the hand to make it more valuable.

Since you get to act after villan, you have some information about how to play your hand on the flop. If he pots it I'm probably tossing TP unless I get my flush draw, but if he puts out a feeler bet I'll call and re-evaluate on the turn.

This seems to be a small investment in a marginal hand that will win a few pots and SOMETIMES stack villan if the flush comes in.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have ZERO high card strength unless you're playing against some donks. Pretend your the villain, two people limp and you have AJ in the SB, do you raise or call? Say you have 88-TT, do you limp or call?"