Stars 30/60 6 Max Preflop Question

[farmslicer7]

I'm BB with Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

UTG+1 raises, SB calls(raises any 2, haven't seen him call often pre), I 3 bet...
I hate this because I think it defines my hand to JJ-AA, AK and maybe AQ. Does anyone else just call here sometimes then put plenty of bets in on a good flop?

They both call.

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]10 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
SB bets out, I call, BB raises, SB 3 bets, I fold...okay?

[Hobbit8750]

I do not raise here I want to see flop

I also would fold here AK and QJ both could be there

[admiralfluff]

Not raising preflop is a sin. I think the flop fold is ok without reads.

[Catt]

I pretty much agree with admiralfluff.

But, on another note:

[ QUOTE ]
I'm BB with Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

UTG+1 raises, SB calls(raises any 2, haven't seen him call often pre), I 3 bet...
I hate this because I think it defines my hand to JJ-AA, AK and maybe AQ. Does anyone else just call here sometimes then put plenty of bets in on a good flop?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think there are other approaches to pre-flop to prevent such a narrowing of your range with a 3-bet from the BB (i.e., other than flat-calling in this particular instance), and I think your hatred of the fact that your action does seem to so strongly define your hand highlights that you might think about your pre-flop profile a bit. I know the principal challenges to the game are post-flop but I also think that a 3-ball in the BB after the action you describe (and the limited read on SB) should really not permit your opponents to come up with such a narrow range, and if it does I think that you're actually giving away real money through your pre-flop play.

[yourface]

so you would 3bet some suited connector type hands to balance?

[tommy2tyme]

I think you definately have to 3 bet preflop.

Does anyone else think raising the flop is a good idea?

Who is the SB bettor?

[Carmine]

I always consider my postion to the PF aggressor(s) and how the flop action is most likely to unfold given the
PF action/players up to that point and also if i'm closing the action or not will change my decision.

In this hand for example I don't think just calling is a terrible play if it helps disguise my hand as #1- I'm closing the action and #2- I can make up any lost bets plus sometimes more on the flop (or turn should I choose) as I anticipate the flop action to go check/check/bet/call/raise.

I prefer to have reads on my opponents to give up my preflop equity. In this hand I want UTG to be agressive enough to C-Bet almost 100% of the time and SB to be loose/bad enough to call almsost 100% of the time.

If my opponents are unknowns I play more straightforward. I reap my PF equity and don't mind my hand being more defined as I'll be less likely to make postflop mistakes agaisnt unknown players. Also if they are unknowns it's just as likely I'm unknown to them and my range can't be so narrowly defined.

[Catt]

[ QUOTE ]
Carmine said:
In this hand for example I don't think just calling is a terrible play if it helps disguise my hand as #1- I'm closing the action and #2- I can make up any lost bets plus sometimes more on the flop (or turn should I choose) as I anticipate the flop action to go check/check/bet/call/raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that calling sometimes isn't so bad -- in fact for some of the same reasons you describe I will call this and other similar hands with enough frequency to not be "rare" in my mind. On the other hand, I will usually raise this hand pre-flop in these circumstances, particularly if I think raising and taking the lead pre- opens some interesting opportunities post- against UTG.

[ QUOTE ]
Carmine said:If my opponents are unknowns I play more straightforward. I reap my PF equity and don't mind my hand being more defined as I'll be less likely to make postflop mistakes agaisnt unknown players. Also if they are unknowns it's just as likely I'm unknown to them and my range can't be so narrowly defined.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was commenting largely on OP's perception that a 3-bet pre-flop from him in this situation defines his hand range too narrowly. I am presupposing that OP believes this to be true, even when he faces unknowns in the Stars 30 game. I think OP is either playing too straightforward a pre-flop gameplan, especially given his limited read on SB, or is too conservatively evaluating what others in that game will read into a BB 3-bet -- either way, extending his own pre-flop game to the point that he doesn't think his pre-flop action defines the range so narrowly among unknowns will, in my view, improve his approach to that game.

[ QUOTE ]
yourface said:
so you would 3bet some suited connector type hands to balance?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah - I would three-bet a larger range of hands against some table / pre-flop line-ups; but I would also flat-call with some frequency the premiums that OP defines as his likely range against other table / pre-flop line-ups. Against total unknowns I'd do one or the other and just concentrate on how the post-flop hand plays out and what it might say about my play (depending on what I have, whether I showdown, whether I win or lose without showing down, etc.)

[MAxx]

i think it would be much better to just call in the BB with AA or KK if it was heads up.....if you felt like you needed to disguise thangs. With QQ and 3way action, I'd rather 3 ball it.

While the flop fold is probably good, I think raising sb's lead has merits.

When you do call and are faced with two...it seems pretty close to spike one of 7 improving cards and the slim possibilty that you are still ahead. However, since your outs are very dirty....a fold is probably OK.