Pre Flop Play - Random Musings about Random Hands

JuliusFranco

Couple of quicky questions...

Let's say you're in a tournament with 20bbs. Someone in MP, who you know is a reasonable player but can change gears, raises to 3bbs (he's got about 20bbs too). You have the following hands. What would you normally do??

KQ
KT
76
A6
AT
QJ

Assume you're on the button, then assume you're one of the blinds. Also, does it matter if the cards are suited?

Why I'm asking this is that one (of the many) problems with my game at the moment is that I'm too tight. I really hate just flat calling raises pre flop. My view used to be that that I'm either behind or ahead therefore I should fold or raise. This approach though costs me because there are plenty of occasions where flat calling would be correct bearing in mind pot odds / implied odds erc

Now, I see plenty of people calling reasonable raises with hands like AT, KJ, QJ etc without really thinking why. I've been generally folding these kind of hands because well I thought they could easily be dominated..

But assuming there's dead money in a pot giving sufficient odds, it would be correct to just call a raise with say KJs if you know you opponent is raising with say ATo..right?
Or if someone min raises (with AA) and you're on the BB with 76s...

(Incidentally, thats how you know when your on your A game - when someone goes all in and you can correctly fold AQ or correctly call with AT etc)

Anyway, I'd appreciate your thoughts...

Thanks
Alan

Lafortezza

It all depends on the exact situation at the time. Variables include the stage of the tournament, your table image, villains table image, how close you are to the money, whether most of the table is distracted by the chick in the low cut top standing behind you, etc.etc.

When villain raised 3xBB from MP and you hold each of those hands, try to figure out what kind of hand Villain would raise with. Small pairs, suited connectors better than 78s, AJo, etc?

If you are able make the right judgement and then the resulting right decision by calling/reraising his 3xBB raise, then you can say it is correct to make your action with absolutely any two cards.

Rnger

I'd fold A6 alot of the time if im feeling slighty threatened unless they are suited. my 2 cents

Amaru

Seen as i play low stakes headsup, 5 and 10 dollar, pushing all in with a pair of Aces or Kings is an almost certainty to win. People love to call at those stakes(probably because they don't care because the money is so insignificant), and the great thing is that they usually over value their cards. I've been called on my all ins with everything from K7 to A3, and i've won pretty much every time. there was of course that one time when i pushed all in with Aces, the guy called with 6 7 off :eek: , and hit 2 7s on the flop, but thats for another day....

As far as people pushing all in online, i don't call unless i'm a certainty to win. People are far too unpredictable to put them on a hand, so unless i have the nuts, i'll usually just pay them off. Invariably, somewhere along the line they'll push at the wrong time, and thats when i make my move.

Hectorjelly

rounders123 wrote:

There's just no telling what internet players raise with or why they raise so much.

Whereas offline players hold one of their cards in the air so that you at least have some idea what they have.

DapperGent

rounders123 wrote:

Theres just no definitive read i think. For example yesterday i was in a heads up game and pre-flop this guy goes 'all-in' near the very start of the game 20/40 blinds(level on chips). Frequently a pre-flop 'heads-up' all-in early is a small/medium pair and if you have got 2 overcards and want to gamble then you call and win if you catch one.
So i called this guys 'all-in' with AQ's and he turns over AA :eek: . First time that happenned to me in a pre flop heads up. He won of course but if i had anything much less i would have folded 9/10 times and he would have won my 40 blind(bully for him). He basically threw away his AA all-in raise 9/10 times at least i reckon.

It sounds like a good way to improve his $/hr. If you call and he wins he's made his money very quickly. He can then move on to another game far more quickly maximising his earning potential for the time he's spent online. I dunno if you could do the maths on it but if he gets to finish a game out in a minute 1/10 times he gets aces it might be more profitable in the long run than just winning a larger pot with them most times.

I'd be interested to know if anyone has ever gone all-in at the start of a heads-up game with AA and why?.

It's never happened to me but I certainly would if I was playing it as part of a grind to make money. I probably wouldn't if it was a one off for whatever reason, though perhaps I should. I dunno.

JuliusFranco

Hectorjelly wrote:

Whereas offline players hold one of their cards in the air so that you at least have some idea what they have.

sarcasm is the lowest form of wit my arsé

mewso

To be honest I see all-ins early in STTs very often and it's always very bad players over playing monsters. I've seen it time and time again and it's an easy fold. It's possibly one of the worst plays in my opinion. Last nights PP tourney had a bit of it. A guy went all in with the SB and BB the only chips available (30+60), we all folded and he showed AK. As I typed in "nh wp" I spotted Dapper also saying "nh". Ah we nasty folk are all the same.
As to the original topic I used to be the kind of player who would probably fold all of the hands mentioned. Now given the odds I will call and am more likely to do so if it's not an Ax hand because that hand is the most likely to be dominated. The Ax is the most over valued hand out there (unless you are a Dapper type jambag) and many many players look for it to push their stack in when they are low but whats going to call you? Probably a better ace.

Imposter

musician wrote:

To be honest I see all-ins early in STTs very often and it's always very bad players over playing monsters.

PS tournament had it too. Problem was this time he wasn't bluffing!

mewso

Ah now I dont think we can categorise Hector as a very bad player. The caller maybe but not HJ

Imposter

musician wrote:

Ah now I dont think we can categorise Hector as a very bad player. The caller maybe but not HJ

It's quite high up here. Maybe you should get around to implementing that 20 game scoring thing. I'm getting a nosebleed.

*I'm well aware it was a rather crap decision but if he WAS bluffing it would have been an expert read