JJ on a paired QQ board --> riverd fh

[higHstaKesOwneR]

No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $1/$2
5 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $176.25
Hero: $197
Button: $62.25
SB: $250
BB: $162.85

Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is CO with J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]
UTG calls, <font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $9</font>, Button folds, SB calls, BB folds, UTG calls.

Flop: Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($29, 3 players)
SB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $20</font>, SB calls, UTG folds.

Turn: T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($69, 2 players)
SB checks, Hero checks.

River: J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($69, 2 players)
SB checks, <font color="#cc0000">Hero bets $42</font>, <font color="#cc0000">SB raises to $84</font>

Villian was unknown.
Can hero push here for value or is a call better?
This min-c/r looks really strong...

[Etats360]

You beat 55, TT, and KQ/AQ. You lose to QJ, QT. Isn't there a theory by someone on SSNL that says a raise,esp. a min raise is almost always the nuts? I think I just call here.

[PartysOver]

[ QUOTE ]
You beat 55, TT, and KQ/AQ. You lose to QJ, QT. Isn't there a theory by someone on SSNL that says a raise,esp. a min raise is almost always the nuts? I think I just call here.

[/ QUOTE ]

90% sure you're refering to BW's theorem, which is ... a minbet turn means one pair is no good

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

edit for the actual hand:

I'd go broke, it was played so weak on your part that there's no way villain can put your on a house. If you lose to QT, so be it... but he's also doing this with 55, KQ, AQ, AK.. which i think is right on target -especially with no real reads given

[GrandMelon]

Shove.

[delta k]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You beat 55, TT, and KQ/AQ. You lose to QJ, QT. Isn't there a theory by someone on SSNL that says a raise,esp. a min raise is almost always the nuts? I think I just call here.

[/ QUOTE ]

90% sure you're refering to BW's theorem, which is ... a minbet turn means one pair is no good

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

edit for the actual hand:

I'd go broke, it was played so weak on your part that there's no way villain can put your on a house. If you lose to QT, so be it... but he's also doing this with 55, KQ, AQ, AK.. which i think is right on target -especially with no real reads given

[/ QUOTE ]

DB theorem, river c/r=nuts

[pokahpaul]

damn this is tough, and i'm curious what others think.

from a purely equity maximizing standpoint, i think this would be a push. there are more hands that you beat and call. you underrepresented your hand and i can see him thinking his Qs are good and minraising the river for value.

[Etats360]

DO unknown villians really play AK like this? (Not 3bet PF, call on flop when hero bets into field of 3?)

[GrandMelon]

His c/r doesnt really make sense. Why wouldnt he just lead the river after we checked behind the turn if he wanted to get paid off? Ive seen dumb villians take this line and end up having like a lone T or something retarded like that.

I still say shove.

[PartysOver]

"DO unknown villians really play AK like this? (Not 3bet PF, call on flop when hero bets into field of 3?)"

Yes.

"His c/r doesnt really make sense. Why wouldnt he just lead the river after we checked behind the turn if he wanted to get paid off? Ive seen dumb villians take this line and end up having like a lone T or something retarded like that.

I still say shove. "

Yes. Yes. Yes.



[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[nogenius]

I think I just call here.