The hardest spot in micro stakes poker? JJ from the SB

[C4LL4W4Y]

[ QUOTE ]
checking this flop is horrible as i have said before because

A) Given LP's wide range if he checks behind he may hit a 2-8 outer of whatever, which is not something u can allow.

[/ QUOTE ]

if checking this flop allows our villain (with 2-8 outs on the flop) to try and extract value from our seemingly weak range, then it is definitely something you CAN allow.

[ QUOTE ]
B) If he raises he has an ace like 90% of the time and u can fold knowing your beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

where do you get this figure? an observant opponent will realize that you're betting your entire pf3b range on this flop and profitably raise with a much wider range than an A.

[ QUOTE ]
C) if he calls flop bet you can assign a range and play turn based on your reads


checking flop is scared poker and it is very very bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you're never checking this flop (and vice versa, never betting), you're going to be extremely exploitable. but hey, this is 50nl, right? (sarcasm of course)

[Check_The_Nuts]

I never really liked 3bet pot posts. I think its just too hard to summarize what someone should do in any given situation because TAGs play reraised pots so radically different. Even I play 3bet pots much differently dependant on the day, my mood, and how frequent or infrequent I've been 3betting.

Basically what I'm saying is gameflow really matters in 3bet pots. I've bet flop shoved turn with JJ before for value, but other times I've taken a line of check/fold flop and bet turn.

With all that said, I really think bates made a nice summarization of the typical situations found at 50NL.

[DaycareInferno]

the problem with checking the flop is that in a 3bet pot oop with normal starting stack sizes, marginal showdown value isn't worth much, because you have to make it through 3 rounds in an already inflated pot. calling 1 bet and folding to a second sucks pretty bad, and you're gonna face a second bet a lot vs. decent opponents. Ax/KK would be a lot better hands to do this with. you can't always think in terms of value, because sometimes its just too unlikely that you get to show your hand down passively. in order to really worry about value when you're 3 streets from showing down, its usually pretty advisable to have either a hand that fits into that zone where you can call two bets, or an opponent that makes that zone wide enough for the hand that you do have. its not a crime to not 3bet hands like JJ and AQ either. 3betting is generally highly profitable with atc, but you can only do it so much, so if there are hands that give you problems in 3bet pots, maybe switch in some hands that are easier to play for your 3betting. ranking hands against ranges preflop is pretty overrated. its much more important to be able to play your hands well.

[genius55]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
checking this flop is horrible as i have said before because

A) Given LP's wide range if he checks behind he may hit a 2-8 outer of whatever, which is not something u can allow.

[/ QUOTE ]

if checking this flop allows our villain (with 2-8 outs on the flop) to try and extract value from our seemingly weak range, then it is definitely something you CAN allow.

[ QUOTE ]
B) If he raises he has an ace like 90% of the time and u can fold knowing your beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

where do you get this figure? an observant opponent will realize that you're betting your entire pf3b range on this flop and profitably raise with a much wider range than an A.

[ QUOTE ]
C) if he calls flop bet you can assign a range and play turn based on your reads


checking flop is scared poker and it is very very bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you're never checking this flop (and vice versa, never betting), you're going to be extremely exploitable. but hey, this is 50nl, right? (sarcasm of course)

[/ QUOTE ]


i agree u r exploitable if u NEVER check this flop I'm saying your standard line should be to bet because of the above reasons, and you should vary your play vs. an observed
opponent. but hey like u said this is NL50. how many observant opponents are there>?

[bozzer]

checking flop given 3bet pre ships a heck of a lot of RIO to your opponent basically. betting is valuable for bluff+information+protection+very skinny value.

(and is +++ meta)

not 3betting ships a heck of a lot of RIO.

edit to clarify per ama.

[ama0330]

I think that the flop play and preflop play are so intertwined that to discuss just the flop action is short sighted. I think that if you want to make an argument about checking flop or betting flop you should make reference to your preflop play - ie. "flatting preflop and checking flop is X" as opposed to "checking flop is X".

[C4LL4W4Y]

[ QUOTE ]
i agree u r exploitable if u NEVER check this flop I'm saying your standard line should be to bet because of the above reasons, and you should vary your play vs. an observed
opponent. but hey like u said this is NL50. how many observant opponents are there>?

[/ QUOTE ]

our villain is 19/16/3, a classic uNL tag. chances are he's paying attention.

[wslee00]

ok - so semi-grunching - only read the first 40 posts

seems that everyone is looking at this hand in a vaccuum, which I think is wrong. If you are not 3-betting light to possible blind steals, then I don't think a 3-bet w/ JJ makes sense since this will look strong to villain and his calling range would be very tight. I think whether to 3-bet or not in this spot depends on how long you've been at the table and how villain perceives you. From someone that's a 19/16, I would think he would steal from the blinds quite often, so I'm just calling here pf as my default play as my hand has a lot of showdown value and is killing his range.

[DaycareInferno]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that the flop play and preflop play are so intertwined that to discuss just the flop action is short sighted. I think that if you want to make an argument about checking flop or betting flop you should make reference to your preflop play - ie. "flatting preflop and checking flop is X" as opposed to "checking flop is X".

[/ QUOTE ]

there are so many factors pf, but i would put it this way:

the ideal situation for cold calling a raise with a JJ would be against a very tight opponent that is very agressive post flop. we have very high implied odds against his range and playstyle, and a 3bet is much less profitable than normal, because he won't be dumping nearly as high a % of his range to that raise as a looser opponent.

the ideal situation for 3betting would be against a loose (or at least loose where he sits) opponent that is more likely to fold to our 3bet, less likely to have a hand that pays out, and more likely to have a speculative hand himself that performs much better with deep stacks behind on the flop.

most situations are a lot more gray than that, so you just use your best judgment.

if we do 3bet, leading out on this flop is far and away the best option in my opinion. while we won't often be called by worse hands, the fact of the matter is that we can still be pretty confident that it is a profitable bet on bluffing value alone. comparitavely, checking and calling in a sitaution that requires our opponent to only bet once, and with a worse hand, usually isn't profitable at all. its a long ways from the flop to the river, and calling 1 bet and dumping is probably one of the single biggest ways to bleed chips in nlhe.

if we elect to just call the bet pf and go to the flop, things change a little, because our opponents range is now much wider than before. now, a lot of times JJ will be a hand that can call 2 or more bets vs. a large percentage of opponents, and is also more likely to get to showdown cheaply, since there is more money behind, and worse risk vs. reward for potential bluffers. obviously we will also be taking down the pot less often without showdown ourselves, since we do not have the betting lead.

[bozzer]

[ QUOTE ]


there are so many factors pf, but i would put it this way:
[...]

[/ QUOTE ]

excellent post.