|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 10/6/2008 4:46:16 PM PACIFIC |
 QQ in small blind, Schuster, 12. Apr 2003 13:26 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I was playing the 2/4 last night online and the table was pretty loose passive. People were calling preflop with AX suited or not, and a few would call with just about anything. I was dealt QQ in the small blind twice, and both times there were 4 or 5 limpers already in the hand. Given the nature of this table, and the likelyhood that I'm beaten if an ace falls, how do I play this? I chose to just call both times, figuring the pot was laying me much better odds to just call, and if I happened to hit a good flop, anyone holding just an ace would have worse odds to see the turn (which they frequently did, regardless of the other card with the ace). I also figured that raising for value wouldn't play as well given the fact that players would never hestitate to call a second bet once they already called a first, and there was probably at least one ace and one king out there somewhere. On top of that, I've got terrible position. What would you have done? On a related note, I've been playing low limits for a while now, and I've noticed that the 2/4 seems to be much less "well behaved" than the 1/2 or the 0.50/1.00. It seems that at a 2/4 table, people are much more likely to call with any two cards, where as people are more likely to be reasonable in their preflop calls at the 0.50/1.00 and especially the 1/2. Has anyone else encountered this? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, john ray, 12. Apr 2003 15:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I will leave the hand question to those that know. As far as the limits you mentioned I have seen little difference in play. I think some people just don't see online as real money without the chips in their hands. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, 4 POKER, 12. Apr 2003 19:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| RAISE. I feel your hand is worth more then half a bet here, even in that spot. QQ is a strong hand and limpers should be made to pay holding inferior cards. So many players are afraid to raise with big hands out of the blind position because they feel that either their opponents will flop an overcard and then they have just wasted one more bet, or they feel that they are just in too bad a position to do so. Yes, You are in bad position but remember, You're in bad position with the best hand. I say make the raise, get the extra money in the pot, you're making the correct play for your long term profit. Plus, you can also use this position to do a lot more check-raising. If an Ace happens to fall on the flop, and you are almost certain that someone is holding that card, then you can play your hand accordingly; given the position of that player, you might want to take a card off or you can always throw your two QQ's away. There's no shame in mucking on the flop. Just as there is no shame in raising preflop. When you think you are getting the best of it in poker then you should give yourself the best chance at winning the hand. Bet, Raise, Reraise, checkraise, whatever... Just don't limp with big holdings. Make your opponents pay. Now if there was a raise to me, and I stood in the small blind with two QQ's, I wouldn't reraise for the simple reason being that my hand could be beat. Also it will add a lot more deception if you just call- noone will know if you have a big hand, and if you happen to get a favorable flop then you should make more money this way- they'll be a lot more betting and raising on the flop if you happen to hit your set or if someone else holds an overpair. A lot of times players make a preflop raise with AK, (which is correct in doing), however they feel the need to keep betting and raising some of the time after flopping absolutely nothing! So if your holding a pair (QQ) example, whether you flop your set or not, someone holding AK is going to try and steal the flop from you-even if he misses. Another point I want to bring up.... If you were to reraise in that spot (small blind), then your opponents will have a better idea into what you might be holding, AA,KK,QQ,AK,etc., and they will be able to play their hands correctly against you now, because you've given them more information. good luck 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, shorn, 14. Apr 2003 06:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| One thing to add is that with 4 or 5 limpers at low limits, there is a good chance that more than one of them has an Ace thereby making it less likely you will see one on the flop. Obviously, this is inexact, but quite common. I agree with 4 POKER here...raise and then let the flop dictate how to play from then on. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, 4 POKER, 14. Apr 2003 07:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 14. Apr 2003 06:01 shorn wrote: > One thing to add is that with 4 or 5 limpers at low limits, there is a good chance that more > than one of them has an Ace thereby making it less likely you will see one on the flop. > Obviously, this is inexact, but quite common. I agree with 4 POKER here...raise and then let > the flop dictate how to play from then on. Hey Shorn, You do agree with my response to that question? After posting my opinions, my friend and I were discussing the situation at hand and he felt that the person who actually posted the question, schuster I believe his name was, played his hand perfectly and would not have put in a value raise. Then he also pointed out that his play was how Malmouth& sklansky would have played it as well. I'm not saying that I always follow the book, in fact it's quite the contrary. I guess you can play the hand a number of ways as long as you are smart about your decissions from then on after during the hand. Anyway, It was nice to hear that somebody did feel the way I did, I was starting to doubt myself after giving him my advice because everyone plays to where they feel comfortable and they make plays based on the situation at hand. I guess what I'm trying to say, bla bla bla, is that I don't play the same hand exactly the same way every single time. Sometimes you gotta go with your gut instincts at that very moment... that seems to work for me. Anyway, I appreciate your reply, I respect alot of your decissions... just thought I'd tell you that. 4 POKER:) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, shorn, 14. Apr 2003 07:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks. I do agree with your play and I would have likely played it the same way. I think the key is getting away from the hand if an Ace or a King flops (with no other card in the zone for a straight draw for you), you check and you see action behind you. Again, in LLHE, there will frequently be more than one person on an Ace so you are less likely to see one on the flop. Also, I agree with the philosophy that Sklansky uses in that good players are more apt to raise with their good hands that contain an Ace or a King and muck the rest. So, you most likely have the best hand at this point. Get the $$ in when you have the best of it and then muck when you realize you are beaten. Occasionally, I will just call in this position so as to disguise my hand and not give away its strength. However, it seems whenever I do this, the Ace comes and then i have no idea where I stand. So, I have to bet out and then when I am raised I am stuck. QQ is one of those tricky hands (like JJ) that should be a long-term winner multi-way, but only marginally so because of all the cards that can come that beat you when you essentially have two outs. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, TKarrde, 14. Apr 2003 08:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Still in diapers here... but I would have raised in the small blind. In the LL games I have be playing online. It seems to make a (positive) difference when you play aggressive with a solid hand. Not sure if this is a bad play or not but if an A or K did hit on the flop I would probably still bet out of the gate. If I get a re-raise I may then fold or pay a small bet to see just one more card. Like always, it depends. But for the most part I play very very tight and aggressive and sometimes that earns me some respect so that when I am aggressive with something a bit less I may get others to fold. TK | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 14. Apr 2003 10:44 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think that in general (most of the time) you should raise your QQ in the small blind at such a table. If an ace or king falls you have to be prepared to throw it away, but there are two things on your side here. With 5 limpers, you have pot odds to draw to a set, so right away you've got value on your side. You're a favourite to win this hand unless there is an ace or a king and no queen. So essentially you have to think of it like playing heads up all-in preflop for your odds. The boon that you have is that 5 people are paying you instead of 1. The chance of an ace or king coming is roughly 50% and if it comes on the turn or river then there is a chance your queens will hold up anyway. Also, by showing strength with a preflop raise and then betting out on a ragged board you are likely to get raised by anybody with top pair, subsequently folding players off their lonely aces and kings. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, john ray, 14. Apr 2003 11:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Without knowing your opponents would you bet out on the flop if A rag rag showed or is this check and fold with that many people. John | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 14. Apr 2003 12:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| With that many people it is pretty hard to put in a call here. You'd need a good reason to call and you certainly can't bet out. If it is checked around to the last position who is a big maniac and would always bet if it is checked around to him *and* would raise preflop with any ace at all, and therefore probably has no ace, then I could see checkraising here in order to fold out every other player and go heads up with this dingleberry. Otherwise, there's really nothing you can do in this hand. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, noiseboy, 14. Apr 2003 16:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm with everyone else on this one, you still raise even with a bunch of limpers because you still have the implied odds to go for a set. Also, even if you are against another premium hand, if you have four people in with crap, you still might win more than your fair share thus making it correct to get the money in. People playing bad hands can often finance not just the top hand, but sometimes the top two hands. You have to be careful if you flop an overpair; however, it might be good, but with that many people, if you lead and someone raises, you might be up against two pair. You just have to see how it develops, play aggressive, but if there are straight and flush draws or if the board pairs, it might be trouble if someone plays back at you. One of the hardest skills to learn in hold'em is when to throw those big pairs into the muck, and not lose a lot of bets to them when they don't pan out. I'm STILL working on that skill. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, shorn, 15. Apr 2003 05:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Perhaps another way to say what noiseboy is saying is that if you flop an overpair, how you proceed will be significantly influenced by the texture of the board. If it is 925 rainbow, you are in good shape excpet for a set. If it is T98 two-suited, hitting your set could cost you a ton of $$. Sklansky's original Hold em poker text has a good section on flops that are good/mediocre/bad for some starting hands. I have found that helpful in remembering that texture is important and can save you bets. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 09:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If you hit a set of queens with a board of 89TQ and 5 players in preflop, you have to realize that you are drawing to 10 outs and that your made hand is worth precisely dick. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, NiceFella, 14. Apr 2003 22:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Always raise QQ in a low-limit game. 1. You probably have the best hand if no one has yet raised, so you want more money in the pot. 2. Even if no one folds, you'll be getting at least 4:1 on that extra bet, which is about equal to your odds of dragging the pot against a large field of opponents. 3. As you said, you probably won't chase anyone ouf of the pot, but if you do, that improves your chances of winning. You've got to at least try to protect your hand. 4. Showing strength before the flop is a good thing. (Intelligent) people will give more respect to your later bets, and may decide to fold instead of sucking out. Of course, the pot odds have gotten a little better for the chasers as well... so maybe this point is moot. Against only a few opponents, though, I prefer to have the initiative that a preflop raise gives me. Just my .02 NiceFella | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 09:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| You should still be able to knock out gutshots, unless you have 5+ players in the hand. If you do have that many then you also have odds for hitting a set, so your raise is correct in either case. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 09:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I should clarify the last comment. You have odds for the set preflop...on the flop, you obviously cannot expect to draw for a set on the turn or river nomatter what. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, noiseboy, 15. Apr 2003 15:47 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Right, although you don't want to pay to spike the set, if you've raised before the flop, sometimes you'll get lucky and everyone will check to you, maybe they have crap, maybe they think they can check raise you, then you get one more free shot at the set. This scenario would be unlikely in a tough game, but at low limits "check to the raiser" happens quite a lot. Just one more benefit of the raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, stdioh, 16. Apr 2003 08:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Indeed, though when you are in the small blind, this does not apply. In general it is one of the boons of raising jacks in late position. You get enough people to go for the set, you might have overcards, and if the flop is aweful you might be able to sneak a free turn. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, mroban, 17. Apr 2003 10:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with most of what has been posted. I guess for me the difference is position. In late position (cutoff or dealer) I would always raise for sure, but in the small blind, if there are only a few callers I might just limp. My reasoning is that most people rate a small blind limper with an average hand. One or two of the limpers probably will figure they have a better hand and thus a check raising opportunity presents itself. If the Small Blind bets it out on the flop, good players at least will rate the hand a top pair or set of some kind. But in dealer or cutoff position I would almost always bet it out pre-flop. Anyone else agree? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, 4 POKER, 17. Apr 2003 12:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 17. Apr 2003 10:45 mroban wrote: > I agree with most of what has been posted. I guess for me the difference is position. In > late position (cutoff or dealer) I would always raise for sure, but in the small blind, if > there are only a few callers I might just limp. My reasoning is that most people rate a > small blind limper with an average hand. One or two of the limpers probably will figure > they have a better hand and thus a check raising opportunity presents itself. If the > Small Blind bets it out on the flop, good players at least will rate the hand a top pair > or set of some kind. > > But in dealer or cutoff position I would almost always bet it out pre-flop. Anyone else > agree? My opinion was to raise the hand pre-flop for value, but your approach to the entire situation makes perfect sense as well. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, chasepoker, 17. Apr 2003 14:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Bet it out for sure, if you have 4 or 5 limpers and you say a lot of the hands being played are Ax by people than can you not from that infer that it is " more likely " that at least 2 of the limpers have such a hand. This in turn decreases the odds of the A hitting. Also with 4 or 5 limpers you have built a great pot to cash in with if you hit a Q on the flop. I aint been playing for long but i think if you ever have a decison where you can either call, raise or fold then raise and worry about the consequenes after ! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, Andrew Wells, 18. Apr 2003 01:53 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think it plays okay either way with 3 or 4 limpers not including the big blind. It's a good spot to vary your play sometimes. With less or more players, to raise is preferred. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, JunglingS, 18. Apr 2003 09:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| With a pair of queens, you're looking at a 41.4% chance of an overcard on the flop, and a 59.9% chance of one on the board. With the table you describe, there's a good chance of an Ace AND a King hiding in various player's hands, so if you simply call to the river, you're beat 59.9% of the time just counting pairs of Kings and Aces!! Heck, calling pre-flop you're beat 41.1% of the time on the flop. Raise hard and fast. Intimidate people as much as possible. For every person you fold, you increase the chance that there are no Aces or Kings out there, and that is a beautiful thing for this hand. Ideally, with this hand in this game, I want to be heads up, or steal the pot. There are two ways I typically play a pocket pair. Raise hard, play fast, and drive out as much competition as possible (usually high pairs), and limp in pre-flop with the motto "no set, no bet" (more typical with lower, or "trouble" pairs). That's not to say I don't play these differently at times, just that this is typically where I see the greatest value in these hands. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: QQ in small blind, mroban, 18. Apr 2003 09:15 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| no argument there. I think varying play from the SB against a group of good players makes more sense than in a fishy table. Raise the fish who call everything to see the flop anyway and punish them when you make the set. I would throw away Q-Q on the flop if the board flops A-x-x or A-K-X with a lot of callers. Too many A-X players out there and QQ is a big underdog at that point. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|