blonde poker forum

300e 6max.

Good spot? Sizing? Line postflop once peeled in both spots?

***** Hand History for Game 1111111111 ***** (Winamax)
Tourney Hand NL Texas Hold'em - Sunday, August 04, 09:40:40 ET 2013
Table (50721229)010 (Real Money)
Seat 5 is the button
Seat 1: Player1 ( 10155 ) - VPIP: 19, PFR: 13, 3B: 3, AF: 2.3, Hands: 283
Seat 2: Hero ( 45100 ) - VPIP: 23, PFR: 19, 3B: 8, AF: 2.8, Hands: 62722
Seat 3: Player3 ( 40287 ) - VPIP: 32, PFR: 19, 3B: 5, AF: 1.6, Hands: 331
Seat 4: Player4 ( 18028 ) - VPIP: 24, PFR: 18, 3B: 3, AF: 7.0, Hands: 174
Seat 5: Player5 ( 103486 ) - VPIP: 38, PFR: 27, 3B: 13, AF: 2.5, Hands: 189
Player1 posts ante of [75].
Hero posts ante of [75].
Player3 posts ante of [75].
Player4 posts ante of [75].
Player5 posts ante of [75].
Player1 posts small blind [400].
Hero posts big blind [800].
Dealt to Hero [  Ks 9s ]
** Dealing down cards **
Player3 raises [1864]
Player4 folds
Player5 calls [1864]
Player1 folds
Hero raises [4355]
Player3 calls [3291]
Player5 calls [3291]
** Dealing Flop ** [ Qc, 8h, 9c ]
Hero ?

I think your hands good enough to peel pre from the big tbh, are you opposed to this? as played sizing seems fine/good.

Postflop I don't really see how we can do anything but c/f just dont see how we can get to showdown let alone get there and have the best hand.

I dont mind pumping it up pre. Board is too wet and pot is too big to do anything but c/f tho cant see you getting through two players and I doubt you have the best hand. Not that we need the best hand with the betting lead but v two its not a good spot to continue.

This but I would go somewhere near 5k pre.

I think it is 5k? well i assumed it is, think thats the raise on top of our bb some hh's do it weird like that, but yea if not i think 5k is good size

Agree it's a good spot/hand to put in a light 3bet. As long as my image was pretty good and they weren't peeling a really high amount it seems fine. Think the hand is too weak to peel pre and would prefer folding otherwise.

Flop c/f this sort of middling co-ordinated board will hit the calling ranges of 2 players way too hard and we can't withstand any heat.

 

Oh yeh if its added on then im like the man in the orthopaedic shoes.

Dont like pre would just go ahead and not hve a wide 3ettibg range. Opener seems splashy ad we need more connect on his fold to 3bet stats so far to go Muchdeeper into this. Player 5 is almost definitely too loose to make this a profitable 3bet though. Call and it's probably not close. Folding may be better than squeezing.

I dot understand how much we have made it pre flop but assuming its 400/800 and 1850, 1850, my normal 3bet sizing here would be 5200ish but with this splashy peeler I'd go bigger, somewhere around 5800ish

As played flop is an extremely clear check fold IMO but happy to be told different.

This.

Getting such a good price I wouldn't 3bet v often here and when I do I'm probably not gonna use these kind of suited broadway hands that we can peel profitably. And sizing definitely seems too small, they're getting such a good price that they can just correctly peel almost everything, especially if we're 3betting pretty wide here. And I guess just I'm check/folding the flop, just hoping it checks through and we somehow find a way to get to showdown / improve if they let us see the turn

Like 5500-6k more pre, as played c/f flop, heads up to flop I'd bet

more pre, prolly some value with a flop bet (like 1/3rd) but dont know villains. think i prefer sqz pre just.

Why? I think its very bad vs villains and French players in general.

They are not folding better hands, initiative is not important when they will call down with a high frequency and im sure the value is not from triple barrel bluffing in the bb vs utg and vs a v splashy peeler.

I don't really see why we wanna make it this size. We re inflating the pot 3 way most of the time oop. If we make our sizing bigger at least we go heads up to the flop a lot of the time. Reasons for squeezing pre to this size?

I agree if we squeeze we should go bigger but fully disagree with the merits of squeezing pre. I'd rather squeeze something like 96s than k9s where we can have equity on more boards and not have as much reverse impliees.

I wouldn't squeeze 96s either though.

Think sizing should be bigger but I think there's merits to squeezing pre, esp with this hand as it's one of the worst hands I'd peel pre, and can flop Kxx and be in a good situation, rather than 96s where 9xx is way more vunerable, and our flush draws have reverse implied etc.

Squeeze loads on the french sites and works v well in general. Made mistake with sizing here as it doesn't get through enough. Big is beautiful.

i think there are merits squeezing pre to a bigger amount, i just think in this mtt on this site, peeling is way better than squeezing. Everytime we have this kind of hand vs these types of players we should be happy to monster mine and then get 2 big streets of value. I'd hate not to get to flop with this hand vs 2 whales

i)  Don't 3 bet this hand as its good to see a flop with - esp when you're in the bb and getting such a good price.  
Better to 3 bet 96ss than k9ss because when you 3 bet 96ss you fold out a lot of 9's and some 6's that have you dominated but when you 3 bet k9ss some/most the 9s you dominate fold and most the kings that dominate you call.  Not sure i'd 3 bet 96ss or k9ss in this spot though - just call and see a flop - value innit.
ii)  If you are going to 3 bet 3 bet bigger as the main way you win chips in this spot is by getting folds pre.
iii)  Once you see the flop i'd check and see how much they bet, prob mostly folding.

Also when did you start worrying about reverse implies odds?  

I was going to reply but Ill just say plus 1 to this instead. gd post.

clear value on the flop, they will call w every gutter+pair, some pure gutters and some other tosh.

im talking about pre flop.

Def isn't bad on these sites pleno. Do u even play on winamax?

I said id be more than happy to be told a good logical reason and would be happy to improve my game, but this is generally fundamental 6max strategy and

"Squeeze loads on the french sites and works v well in genera"
"but I think there's merits to squeezing pre"
" as it's one of the worst hands I'd peel pre"
"can flop Kxx and be in a good situation,"

is way, way too vague.

can flop Kxx and be in a good situation particuarly seems super ambitious and I can just say literally "can flop Kxx and be in a bad situation" infact Id say the latter is WAY more common than the former.

Having a polarized range vs splashy players who dont fold is not a good 6max strategy. Vs these types of opponents it is very clearly going to be best to have a depolarized range consisting of a wider value range. For example if you wanted to 3bet KQo because they will peel kj, kt (doubt opening much wider or peeling much wider utg) then I would say ok squeezing more is going to be good, but adding these hands which do have reverse implied odds and playing a pot out of position for the whole hand and likely having to barrel 2 or 3 times semi often in spots where its going to be marginal at best is surely not going to be the most profitable play.

Again I am very very open to hear good strategical reasons why we should squeeze a polarized and often dominated range oop vs guys who dont fold and I mean that sincerely, I just think its going to be very hard to justify it.

If you take the reasons for calling pre flop, and now look at squeezing, 2 things happen

1 we have a bigger pot (spr)
2 we have initiative

1- is bad generally when we want to realize our edge
2- implies that we want to barrel certain boards

I think with peeling we

1- have a very good price to see a flop vs 2 weaker opponents
2- go to  a flop with a generally decent SPR
3- close the action
4- still have the opportunity to win a big pot



I hope I didnt come across bad in the thread, I know I mentioned it a few times that I think its clearly the best play but others itt (trigg, keith both thought the same) only reason i brought it back up was because Alex Martin who I know is very good assumed we should squeeze pre and I wanted to know why.

Lol at pleno saying someone is too vague in PHA.

well i mean i think ive been very constructive in the thread and even if you havent agreed with me have tried to reason myself properly and give examples rather than just "it works" or "kxx is sometimes a good flop"

certainly dont always spend time, certainly dont have to spend time and certainly wont in the future.

You definitely been constructive in this thread yes I'm not doubting that.

I'm also not saying squeezing is best, that's what the entire thread is about. If I thought it was clear cut I wouldn't even make a thread.

I'm saying I think it's close / has merits.

I take on board your points and they're nothing new to me. I could write a long post rattling off the points for squeezing and they'd be nothing new to you.

It's a bit different to when a new poster / player puts a PHA with a spot you think is really simple and you just say "lol easiest jam ever" or "worst jam in history".

? we are at cross-purposes plenfish?

Exactly what are you asking us here Alex? Is Squeezing bad? Is Squeezing the best play? What hands should I call pre-flop? Threads lost its track after lots of good points from pleno. Could be a good discussion given your experience on the french sites, i) What's the WORST hands you'll call pre-flop, ii) What's the BEST hand you'll fold and iii) What makes up your "Value" 3betting range?

I think squeezing pre-flop is pretty bad here, I don't really see why we would need to squeeze here ever with this hand, and how this can be one of the worst hands you'd call with, if that's the case I think you're folding too much here. (I don't know these players or this site, that might be wrong)

You're getting 6-1 and you're against two "splashy" guys on winamax, (even though the opener's 1864 sizing looks a bit reggy) seems like a delightful spot to just call with LOADS of hands, K9s would be certainly above the bottom of that range. All squeezing really achieves is making the pot big and messy no? I think as well in a spot like this where your image is very likely to be pretty lively (looking at your stats + knowing you lol) you can just call super wide for value and have a really strong 3betting range. With your image + it being a tournament where no-one folds your 3betting range here will be percieved to have a chunk of air in it, or maybe you're just against 2 players who don't care/notice. If you do in fact ever have a spot where you don't need any bluffs at all to run a profitable strategy I think it's getting a bit spewy to start 3betting light, speshly when you're risking a fair bit of equity from just calling with the K9s.

Flop has to be a c/f, smashes into both ranges like a train putting any more chips in postflop seems like a disaster to me.

not worst hand id peel but worst suited king probably.

maybe thats bad, should i be peeling K5s here? Obv peeling 98s etc, but i consider that a better hand than K9s.

good points though dave and pleno, will peel here and squeeze less in future. i like to just have initiative and have more than one way of winnign the pot generally.

like on winamax, i will squeeze here get one caller, cbet A36 or 824 and just take it down so often, or cbet 733 turn a Q and take it down then, or take it down pre. so many ways to win the pot, with no equity whatsoever, let alone when we flop something, or turn equity etc.

when we flat, there's almost 0% chance we can win the pot unless we flop something big/ cooler them. thats why i like to give myself options, esp since we're still pretty deep.

get folds pre here more often than ppl are giving credit for.

take on board your points though, and think will peel more/squeeze less in future.

I was undef the impression people were more bluff-prone + stubborn on these sites?

Seems a lot better if that is not the case, I feel like there is better hands though. KJo/ J7s etc

im talking specifically about flop, you guys are adamant its a clear c/f and im pretty happy with getting some value.

pre is much of a muchness i think, stylistic really.