|
|
#11
11-06-2007, 03:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
ok was just curious. Joe Tall seems to think its can be a raise med stakes thread [/ QUOTE ] He has 10,000 posts, but he's a Pats fan. You really can't trust that guy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 
|
|
#12
11-06-2007, 08:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
if i recall, joe tall plays a bit different strategy than most of us. i think he was coached by tommy angelo, and his style is more passive/tight OOP while playing looser with position. might have something to do with that. remember, it might be +ev for him in his games but that doesn't make it +ev in for us in our games.
|
|
#13
11-07-2007, 05:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
ok was just curious. Joe Tall seems to think its can be a raise med stakes thread [/ QUOTE ] It is something you need to consider and is great for meta-game, mixing up your play. Especially in live games.
|
|
#14
11-07-2007, 05:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
if i recall, joe tall plays a bit different strategy than most of us. i think he was coached by tommy angelo, and his style is more passive/tight OOP while playing looser with position. might have something to do with that. remember, it might be +ev for him in his games but that doesn't make it +ev in for us in our games. [/ QUOTE ] FWIW, I have disagree with Tommys blind play; we have argued about it. We do play poker the same way, all of us do, our own way. (Tommyism) [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] Do a bunch of simulations and find Q9s is going to be about neutral-EV and given you have the button, you are at an advantage, pushing into +EV territory. It is something to consider.
|
|
#15
11-07-2007, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
Do a bunch of simulations and find Q9s is going to be about neutral-EV [/ QUOTE ] I want to point out that for those of you who were saying that you'd raise QTs but limp Q9s in this spot, that Joe's quote, above, should be obvious. I suspect that it was obvious for most of you, but I also suspect there are some newer posters (perhaps lurkers) who would raise QTs but the thought of raising Q9s would never cross their minds, and even some who would call with QTs but muck Q9s. While you have to draw the lines between raise and call, and call and fold, somewhere, it's important to understand that at those lines of demarcation, other factors (such as having the button, as Joe points out) make the lines start to blur. In an earlier response to this thread, Rico Suave said that one of the reasons he would limp is that he already has the button. I think I'm interpreting his post correctly when I say that Rico would be more likely to raise in the cutoff, because making an EV-neutral preflop play like raising Q9s is worth buying the button, which increases your expectation postflop. Be flexible in your thinking about preflop play. I was tempted to respond to this thread with "stop worrying about this stuff -- doesn't matter whether you raise or limp here." But while it is basically EV-neutral to do anything besides fold in this spot, exploring the possibilities in situations like this is an important step to increasing your understanding of poker, which helps when you find yourself at a shorthanded table, at a table with an odd texture, or when you try to learn a new game. -McGee
|
|
#16
11-07-2007, 06:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
Be flexible in your thinking about preflop play. [/ QUOTE ] Yep, the right answer here is probably "it depends." How loose and aggressive are the blinds? How often will the limpers fold postflop if you c-bet? What is the recent action at the table? Have you been raising often? Will they make more mistakes in small pots or big pots? All these questions, and many more, are relevant. My default if I don't know any more is to limp, but it can easily be changed into a raise.
|
|
#18
11-07-2007, 07:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] EV-neutral to do anything besides fold in this spot, [/ QUOTE ] Conceptually, folding is 0EV. [/ QUOTE ] Dammit. You're right. -McGee
|
|
#20
11-08-2007, 12:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Q9s EV squeeze
[ QUOTE ]
My default if I don't know any more is to limp, but it can easily be changed into a raise. [/ QUOTE ] exactly. the way i play this hand pf has everything to do with the blinds' tendencies and the quality of the limpers. myself, if i'm in late position with alot of suited/connected hands i raise some portion of the time with each of them depending the number of limpers, how they play and how things are going/people are running that night(referring to live especially). i mentioned i raised QTs in that spot a vast majority of the time, but not Q9s. i didn't say i don't raise Q9s, i said i don't raise it a majority of the time. maybe once in 3, so about 33% of the time. it should be noted, in any one session there are certain factors that might it mean raising more often is the most profitable play. other times it may mean raising less is best. so yeah, it depends. fwiw, i agree that the value of position(which is amplified by the edge you hold over your opponent or opponents) adds value to what otherwise an EV neutral hand. this increases the overall expectation for the holding which can possibly be maximized through raising preflop. SO! Joe and anyone else, not trying to derail the conversation: i often raise JTs here. what about J9s? too weak as a holding? i raise KTs, what about K9s?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
