Common No Limit Situation

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
Either raise or fold. Calling is terrible, as it gives us no good information, and allows almost all drawing hands (even some gut shots with backdoor draws) to correctly stay in the hand. If we want to stay in this hand, we've got to eliminate the players to act behind us. Calling will virtually never do that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Calling gives information cheaper than raising. If someone calls behind you or raises, you have a good sense of where you are at. If no one stays in behind you, then you will have a good sense of where you are at depending on if your opponent bets or checks. Your call should be a bit scary because it represents a possible set. I can see a player tossing away AK behind you, so I don't think that the motivation to eliminate players works here. And you're definitely allowed to call and fold to a turn bet.

[LaMbaL]

I look at it this way: This is a hand we'd normally want to raise, but given the circumstances (many players left behind, BB showing strength) raising is imo too risky here.

There is a good chance that our hand is good here, and the chance of someone reraising behind us is reasonably small(!), so calling seems preferable over folding. Sure, calling will allow players behind us with draws to stay in the pot, but under the circumstances we do not have the position to stop them from doing so.

Also, if we get some more callers behind, we'll be offered great odds (6/24 and rising) and the pot will be 'locked', so unless someone hits it is likely that noone will attempt to steal the pot. Therefore, imo we can call with this hand that still has a decent chance of being the best hand, and reevaluate it to any future action.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
Most players in the BBs situation would probably not bet anything below ace queen there. If he is any kind of a player, you wouldn't put him on AJ there would you? Betting into the raiser and 4 people total. He is showing a lot of strength. He is not bluffing. Unless he is a complete fool, most of the time he has you beat. Even if he doesn't, the others could. This is way too marginal a situation. I don't think he would have anything less than ak in this spot...or an absolutely monster draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you always fold AQ in this spot, why shouldn't BB bet AJ or even much less?

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
If you always fold AQ in this spot, why shouldn't BB bet AJ or even much less?

[/ QUOTE ]Because

1. Many players won't fold AQ there, even if we do.

2. We are not the only player in the hand. If everyone folds except than the last player who has AQ, he certainly isn't folding.

[Dromar]

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone folds except than the last player who has AQ, he certainly isn't folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless of course, he doesn't have AQ, which occurs the vast majority of times this hand plays out.

So it seems, he should bet AJ and much less, since he's effectively gambling that
1)nobody else has a monster, and
2)the last guy doesn't have a pretty good hand.

[Dromar]

[ QUOTE ]

Calling gives information cheaper than raising. If someone calls behind you or raises, you have a good sense of where you are at.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Your call is going to give great odds to 4 players who have a huge range based on preflop action, and they are all lucky enough to have relative position on both of the aggressors in the hand up to this point. There's quite a bit they could call with here, so you don't really know where you stand. You calling is like a dream come true for them.

[ QUOTE ]
I can see a player tossing away AK behind you, so I don't think that the motivation to eliminate players works here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe they'll throw away AK, but the motivation to get rid of draws on this board definitely exists.

[Dromar]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, calling will allow players behind us with draws to stay in the pot, but under the circumstances we do not have the position to stop them from doing so.

[/ QUOTE ]

We have the perfect position to do so. Immediate action right after the initial bettor. Raising here will force them to fold for the reasons I explained in one of my earlier posts.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, if we get some more callers behind, we'll be offered great odds (6/24 and rising) and the pot will be 'locked', so unless someone hits it is likely that noone will attempt to steal the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your "no steal" comment is good, but our odds aren't really getting better. If we let the opponents behind us make a profitable call, we're losing money (via FTP). So, while our odds are getting better, we're ending up with less money. Those callers behind aren't just donating to the pot, they've got chances to win.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, imo we can call with this hand that still has a decent chance of being the best hand, and reevaluate it to any future action.

[/ QUOTE ]

Normally I like the "call and reevaluate" line, but I think it's even more important that we get HU here (if possible). Obviously, if there's a monster behind us, we're dropping the hand on the flop, and raising costs us more money in these instances. But these instances aren't common, and definitely aren't as common as the instances when calling would result in giving a player behind us a very profitable opportunity at our own expense.

[thatpfunk]

im guessing the people saying fold have never played live. generally good live 25-50 = avg 2-4 (mayyyybe) online.

people constantly do [censored] [censored] live.

[Jeff76]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless of course, he doesn't have AQ, which occurs the vast majority of times this hand plays out.

[/ QUOTE ]The question was, why shouldn't the BB lead out with AJ if we won't call with AQ? My point was that we are not the only person in the hand who can call, and the farther along we get toward the end of the table the more likely a call will be. While AQ might not be a good hand for us in our position, it WOULD be plenty strong enough in the hands of the last player to act, assuming no one showed extreme strength before him.

We are in a bad spot because we have the worst possible position at the table except for the one guy who says his hand is strong enough that he doesn't care.

[SpeakEasy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First of all, BB can't really be semi-bluffing here. I have to put him on Axh, A7, A8, 78, 77 or 88.

[/ QUOTE ]

So when you hit your Ace with AQ, but someone bets before you, you always assume you're beat by everything he might hold except the Axh hand, and just fold? Kinda weak-tight, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

context

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, critical question -- what context?

The SB is betting $600 into a $1200 pot and five players to act. If I am the SB, here is what I might be thinking in this context:

1. Axh -- I have a nut flush draw and top pair, so I'll put out a 1/2 pot bet here. If I get callers, great, it builds a pot in the event I hit. Plus, I might also have the best hand with a pair of aces. If I get raised by one player, I will either call or push depending upon the size of his raise.

2. Set, with 77 or 88 -- I could (a) open with a weak lead, hope to get raised, and then push, or (b) open with a big bet, or (c) go for the check-raise knowing that one of the five behind me will certainly bet.

3. Two pair with 78 -- Make a sizable bet and see if anyone represents a hand that beats me with a big raise. If I get a normal (3-4x) raise, I might assume that he has a big ace and then work to get more money in the pot with a re-raise, sized to make sure that a draw is not getting a correct price to call my re-raise.

So, looking at the context here, which is most likely? In my estimation, without having any additional info about SB, I'm thinking the Axh hand is most likely to make the half-pot sized bet. The remainder of the hands would probably bet more or check. There are obviously a lot of possibilities, but based on the number of players in the hand and the size of SB bet, I would assume that I am most likely in the lead, or I should at least test that theory with a raise. I can't fold here.