Cold Calling Multiway

[Josh.]

J9s is lucky, so i think i cold call with that more than any other hand. i would 3-bet, but i don't want to discourage the blinds from making the mistake of entering the pot when i have J9s

[sweetjazz]

Nate in a typical 6-max game, aggressive players are opening UTG with AT+,KJ+ and often with A9,KT,QJ and sometimes even worse.

Thus a hand like AJ or KQ is about as likely to dominate one of their hands than to be dominated by one of their hands. If the cold-caller is bad, then you have an equity edge and position.

I don't like 3-betting b/c you open yourself up to be capped by premium hands and taking the initiative here doesn't seem to be worth enough. So I would cold-call more often than 3-bet. But I'd prefer both to folding against a loose raiser. (There are, of course, some players who are tight enough to merit folding here.)

I think pushing it to AT, KJ, etc. would require a very specific read though.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't do a lot of cold calling. Low-medium pairs are a regular exception, as are medium suited hands depending on how much better of an advantage I think I have postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is an open-raiser and one cold caller enough for you to make these exceptions typically, or do you need another player involved (not including the blinds)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Two bad/loose opponents, the Button, and a pocket pair in the hole is enough for me to play almost automatically.

The suited hands (and I'm talking about stuff like 98s here - NOT ATs type hands which I'd always play and usually 3-bet with) are more variable. If the opponents are real predictable postflop (either predictably LAG or predictably straightfoward/passive), I think there's an argument for playing. If they can shift gears and read hands a little bit better, I won't get involved.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

I disagree on the value of initiative versus the risk of it being capped. There are just *so* many things the 3-bet does for you:

1) Eliminates the blinds.
2) Substantially increases the chance of winning the pot unimproved, sometimes without the best hand.
3) Allows you to take free cards on the flop/turn.
4) Tends to make hand reading easier after the flop.
5) Will frequently be correct from a preflop equity POV.
6) Versus most opponents, his cap/no-cap decision provides significant informational value.

[ QUOTE ]
Nate in a typical 6-max game, aggressive players are opening UTG with AT+,KJ+ and often with A9,KT,QJ and sometimes even worse.

Thus a hand like AJ or KQ is about as likely to dominate one of their hands than to be dominated by one of their hands. If the cold-caller is bad, then you have an equity edge and position.

I don't like 3-betting b/c you open yourself up to be capped by premium hands and taking the initiative here doesn't seem to be worth enough. So I would cold-call more often than 3-bet. But I'd prefer both to folding against a loose raiser. (There are, of course, some players who are tight enough to merit folding here.)

I think pushing it to AT, KJ, etc. would require a very specific read though.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
Depends a lot on the blinds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Subject to the above, I'm kinda in Nate's range. With a CCer in front of me I will frequently CC pocket pairs, and lots of mid-range suited hands; some suited broadways (some are three-bets), very few offsuit hands (some are three-bets). Without a CCer in front of me, the range shrinks up quite a bit.

If the blinds are rockish, than I am less likely to CC and more likely to three-bet or fold. If the blinds are loose and bad, more likely to CC. If there's a maniac in the blinds, I favor PP's over the suited connectors. And of course, the nature of the PFR and the CCer (if there is one) will dictate a lot.