Playing JJ,QQ differently in cash or tournament?

The_Daddy_H

Something which has been puzzling me lately is the correct way of playing high pocket pairs like JJ and QQ post flop.

A few threads ago a poster was asking for similar advice, the scenario is basically you raise in early position as standard, and get one caller who you have no information on, the flop comes with an overcard as it is likely to do in the case of QQ and quite probable in the case of JJ.

The general concensous was that the correct move was to check and see what your opponent does, then I'd imagine probably call and hope he slows down on the following streets. The reasoning being a check may induce a bluff whereas a raise has a negative expectation. All this seems to make perfect sense, however having graduated from the Harrington School of Holdem my first instinct was to bet about half the pot since I still probably have the best hand and would prefer to be the aggressor rather than the risk being bluffed off the pot. The reason Harrington gives is checking yield no information, you check he bets, you call and still dont know where you are on the turn, you havent represented anything to you opponent who might fire another shot on the turn.

Harringtons' arguments hold for early stages of a deep stacked tournament, a scenario analogous to a cash game I'd imagine. So my question is what exactly is the difference, is information simply more valuable in a tournament where in every hand you potentially risk being knocked out of the tournament?

I find this line of reasoning somewhat suspect since I favour the the accumulating chips approach over tournament survival strategy. Especially since each chip gained in a tournament works out to be less valuable than each chip risked mathematically speaking, whereas money is money in a cash game therefore you'd be less inclined to risk an "information bet" in a tournament.

Opinions?

RoundTower

good thing we reached such an interesting consensus, I'd just tank it in and hope to get called by TT.

The_Daddy_H

RoundTower wrote:

good thing we reached such an interesting consensus, I'd just tank it in and hope to get called by TT.

So you are assuming the player with a king will fold whereas as a player with TT will call, I presume you are being facetious or witty or something like that.

Hitman Actual

The problem is that the OP has a lot in it, but it's hard to know what your point/question is. I read it a few times, and I'm still not sure.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

The_Daddy_H

LuckyLloyd wrote:

The above is an attempt to answer a very vague question.

Ok then let me clarify the question. Basically I'm wonder why the standard line with QQ or JJ against an over card on the flop is to bet out of position. You've already raised preflop and have been called so if you bet again on a flop with an overcard to your pair and get called, its quite likely your opponent likes his hand and has you beat.

Why is this the default action? Surely checking to induce a bluff then maybe check raise or call is better. Is there a difference here between tournament play or cash play in this particular instance?

ianmc38

Example, in a cash game, you raise on the button with QQ and get one caller. The flop is Kxx. The BB checks to you.

Now, if you bet, he is almost never folding a king that he can call a preflop raise with. By checking you're providing some deception, as your hand is now more likely to be air. By checking you also give him the chance to bluff later streets if you're not already beaten as well as keeping the pot small with a weak one pair holding.

You're not taking a huge risk by checking. If your opponent is behind, he usually has 2 or 3 outs to hit on the turn (Ax or a pocket pair). It's also more likely that he will call a turn bet with lesser made hands such as 99/TT and even total air like AQ/AJ.

The_Daddy_H

ianmc38 wrote:

Example, in a cash game, you raise on the button with QQ and get one caller. The flop is Kxx. The BB checks to you.

Now, if you bet, he is almost never folding a king that he can call a preflop raise with. By checking you're providing some deception, as your hand is now more likely to be a bluff. By checking you also give him the chance to bluff later streets if you're not already beaten as well as keeping the pot small with a weak one pair holding.

You're not taking a huge risk by checking. If your opponent is behind, he usually has 2 or 3 outs to hit on the turn (Ax or a pocket pair). It's also more likely that he will call a turn bet with lesser made hands such as 99/TT and even total air like AQ/AJ.

Yes I agree with this, the point I was trying to make, albeit incomprehensibly in my OP was that Harrington claims the correct move to make is to bet out immediately on the flop for information or something vague like that, what I'm trying to establish is whether or not this is a move designed for tournament play rather than cash since to me your above approach seems more correct.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

phantom_lord

Well personally, I don't think there should be much of a difference in how I play a hand, if I check the flop in the a similar situation in a cash game, I should do the same in a tournament.

Something is either a + or a - ev play, it doesn't make a difference whether it's a tournament or a cash game.

But taking pots down sooner and stack protection are important factors in tournament play that do not apply in cash games at all.

what??? how is stack protection not important in a cash game????

opr

LuckyLloyd wrote:

In a tournament I will continuation bet the entirity of my range. I rarely, if ever, check after taking the initative pre - flop. But taking pots down sooner and stack protection are important factors in tournament play that do not apply in cash games at all.

Tournament life is very important after all.

TBH Lloyd i would have thought checking here has alot to do with stack protection in the fact that i don't want to build a big pot with a marginal holding.

I don't want to start this debate again but i don't want the OP going away with the idea that he should play the hand one way in a cash game and another in a tournament.

Opr

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

opr

LuckyLloyd wrote:

You can reload.

You can move on to the next tournament.

Opr

The_Daddy_H

LuckyLloyd wrote:

In a tournament I will continuation bet the entirity of my range. I rarely, if ever, check after taking the initative pre - flop. But taking pots down sooner and stack protection are important factors in tournament play that do not apply in cash games at all.

Yes but your stack is hardly at risk here, it should be fairly easy to lay them down to any serious resistance on the turn. Why make a neg exp play?

phantom_lord

LuckyLloyd wrote:

You can reload.

eh, right. that's a good excuse for stacking off real easily!

pot control/stack protection becomes more important the deeper you get.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

sikes

the texture of the board has an awful lot to do with how you proceed with the hand.

Also how your image, do you cbet a lot, will he raise on a dry board with air?

phantom_lord

LuckyLloyd wrote:

In cash games the majority of hands online are 100BBs deep.

yeah, and most tournament hands are 10-30bbs deep.

so your saying pot control is more important 20-30bbs deep than 100bbs deep?



I dunno about you, but when I'm playing the open and being really deep I'm gonna be far more concerned about controling pot size and protecting my stack than I would be in a 20bbs deep tournament.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

phantom_lord

LuckyLloyd wrote:

I intend to play any hands I am involved in very aggressively during the first few levels precisely because of the fact that you, and many like you, will be thinking "I don't need to get involved".

That's not what I meant at all.

The_Daddy_H

opr wrote:

I don't want to start this debate again but i don't want the OP going away with the idea that he should play the hand one way in a cash game and another in a tournament.

Opr

So basically your saying the correct move regardless of whether its cash or tournament is to check, I'd be inclined to agree. Expect for the fact that Harrington says otherwise at least for tournaments. I'm not somebody who just defers to authority but I'm sure Harrington has thought carefully about this?

Marq

ianmc38 wrote:

Example, in a cash game, you raise on the button with QQ ...

Good post.

phantom_lord

are u sure he says taht?

That sounded a bit off to me and I had a quick look through the c-bet section, it's quite short, and he doesn't mention this type of situation?


and if he does he's wrong...

The_Daddy_H

phantom_lord wrote:

are u sure he says taht?

That sounded a bit off to me and I had a quick look through the c-bet section, it's quite short, and he doesn't mention this type of situation?


and if he does he's wrong...

Check out p271, similar situation except with KK. The boys over on 2+2 seem to be firmly in the Harrington camp, although I;m not sure why.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9729236&an=0&page=0&gonew=1#UNREAD

phantom_lord

yeah saw that, was surprised.

Check out p271,

in volume II? I must have a different edition or something, pg271 is 66 facing a raise, what chapter is that problem in?

opr

The_Daddy_H wrote:

So basically your saying the correct move regardless of whether its cash or tournament is to check, I'd be inclined to agree. Expect for the fact that Harrington says otherwise at least for tournaments. I'm not somebody who just defers to authority but I'm sure Harrington has thought carefully about this?

Taking the play in isolation checking in this situation is going to better in the long run but alot of poker is situation dependant so their is no correct play all of the time.

All i am saying is that i would check as this will have a greater expectation that betting in the long run for all the reason's that Ian outlines in his post.

I think ambiguity comes into this when you factor in a notion discussed at lenght on this board "Tournament Life" (Do a search and you will find lenghty discussion on it.)
I have not read any of HOH books and only know that he is seen as a conservative player who's tournament results speak for themselves and i would presume he is in the camp with this notion of preserving your "tournament life".

Although i am surprised that someone of Harrigtons reputation would advise this as a good play.

Anyway so by betting out if we get raised we fold or take the pot down easy peasy. Problem is in general we lose value from all the hands we beat and we only get called when we are beat so at what cost does this information come. Alot of the time you could even be folding the best hand.

When we check yes the hand is going to be harder to play and at times you are going to have induced bluffs that you will have to call. It means you are more likely to have your "Tournament Life" on the line.
This does not mean i am going to pass up and edge and make a play that has less EV in the long run just because i am worried about my stack and busting out of the tournament.

God this has rambled on enough.

Opr

The_Daddy_H

opr wrote:

I think ambiguity comes into this when you factor in a notion discussed at lenght on this board "Tournament Life" (Do a search and you will find lenghty discussion on it.)
I have not read any of HOH books and only know that he is seen as a conservative player who's tournament results speak for themselves and i would presume he is in the camp with this notion of preserving your "tournament life".

Although i am surprised that someone of Harrigtons reputation would advise this as a good play.


God this has rambled on enough.

Opr

I doubt this is a tournament life issue, hes never advised anything like it anywhere in his 3 books. Especially since he says to throw the hand away if you encounter any resistance, your tournament life isnt at stake anyway.

opr

The_Daddy_H wrote:

I doubt this is a tournament life issue, hes never advised anything like it anywhere in his 3 books. Especially since he says to throw the hand away if you encounter any resistance, your tournament life isnt at stake anyway.

This is the whole point you get to make easy peasy decisions rather than having to make tough ones. If you bet and get raised its and easy fold.

Consider this K high board you have QQ.

You check and Villian fires on the flop , you call and check again and Villian fires again .... you now have a really tough decision ?

Opr

fuzzbox

opr wrote:

This is the whole point you get to make easy peasy decisions rather than having to make tough ones. If you bet and get raised its and easy fold.

Consider this K high board you have QQ.

You check and Villian fires on the flop , you call and check again and Villian fires again .... you now have a really tough decision ?

Opr

A tough spot with potential positive expectation is better than an easy spot with negative expectation.

opr

fuzzbox wrote:

A tough spot with potential positive expectation is better than an easy spot with negative expectation.

Exactly.

Opr

The_Daddy_H

My faith in my master has been shattered. I'm frightened.

Rnger

The_Daddy_H wrote:

My faith in my master has been shattered. I'm frightened.

Theres some terrible advice in HOH3.. dont worry about it, its all part of learning this cruel game One day you think you know everything, then you realise your barely at the tip of the iceberg

Gholimoli

I posted this in another similar thread which was a cash game situation and hero had KK and was wondering how to proceed on the A high flop.
First of all the fact that this is a tourney or a cash game does not affect the correct play.
Your stack size dictates a lot of the strategy and after that the dynamics of the table and situation in place.
You could be playing a cash games where you are 20BB deep and most of the advice should be same if that was the tourney.
There are obviously some exceptional circumstances where these two should be threated differently but not often.
Ive read all the replies and no one seems to want to bet the flop at all.
Betting the flop with JJ on a Qxx or Kxx or Axx board is a good play and doing is fine.
While its true that you will never get a better hand to fold what you are doing is protecting your hand.
If you check and villain checks behind you are effectively giving him a free card to catch up with you.
I made the point in the other post that I would always check with KK on A high flop but would often bet with TT,JJ,QQ and I don’t think it’s a bad play at all.
The more over cards you have to worry about the more a bet on the flop is justified.
Its not always the case that you are miles ahead or miles behind when you hold TT,JJ,QQ on a flop with one over card and villain can potentially be drawing to twice as many outs as you anticipated if he has two over cards.

phantom_lord

If i was betting jj on an A high board, it wouldn't be to protect my hand, it'd be the 10-20% of the time I was doing it to balance my play.

protecting our hand isn't hugely important in this situation.

equity 	win 	tie 	      pots won 	pots tied	
Hand 0: 	71.010%  	71.01% 	00.00% 	           703 	        0.00   { JcJd }
Hand 1: 	28.990%  	28.99% 	00.00% 	           287 	        0.00   { KhQh }

we're prob gonna bet the turn if he checks, so in essence he gets one free chance to hit at max 6 outs.

RoundTower

RoundTower wrote:

good thing we reached such an interesting consensus, I'd just tank it in and hope to get called by TT.

having read the whole thread I still agree with this.