3 handed against with top pair

Villain is a 45/19/2 over only 75 hands. Do you call his rr all in?

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $1 BB (3 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Hero ($153.25)
BB ($140.60)
Button ($47.15)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A, 9.
Button raises to $2, Hero raises to $8.5, 1 fold, Button calls $6.

Flop: ($17.50) 8, 7, A (2 players)
Hero bets $12.5, Button raises to $39.15 (All-In), Hero??

i think you gotta go with this after you rr pf vs a lag shorty.
but i'd rather have more reads before reraising pre.

Call the push, you're good often enough

I've found that this is often a "ah ffs why did an A have to fall, now my TT is worthless. Fuck it I'm shoving anyway" type bet

you gotta figure that the draws will play this way but also Ax hands, your ahead of some Ax tho. I call but im never happy coz we aint WA of many hands

You don't have to be way ahead, you can even be behind pretty often to be winning

Originally Posted by minSim

You don't have to be way ahead, you can even be behind pretty often to be winning

This doesnt make any sense

Board: As 8s 7c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 51.612% 45.82% 05.79% 48538 6135.00 { Ad9c }
Hand 1: 48.388% 42.60% 05.79% 45122 6135.00 { A2s+, KsQs, KsJs, KsTs, QsJs, JsTs, T9s, A2o+, T9o }



Im not really sure TT+ is really in this guys range for pushing here. It probly is a call, but i folded because i didnt feel like i was really beating much that he shoves all in with.

3 handed and it's a Loosey goosey Shortstack push? I would call this every time...

Originally Posted by ChrisBCritter

3 handed and it's a Loosey goosey Shortstack push? I would call this every time...

Hes loose but he also hasnt been very aggressive.

After reraising that much preflop and having that little behind I think you have to be committed to any A flop. I call.

I also probably dont reraise preflop but I might and I think its fine. Just something I probably wouldnt do.

You say he isnt aggressive, and usually an AF of 2 isnt too aggressive but AF scales with VPIP. e.g. If someone is seeing 5% of flops and has an AF of 2 then they are betting and raising with way stronger hands than someone with a 45% VPIP and AF of 2 isnt stupidly aggressive but its not particularly passive either.

I think PF is bad.

I agree with most of the replies.

Dont reraise pre unless you are ready to get it in when the Ace hits. esp 3 handed.

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina

I agree with most of the replies.

Dont reraise pre unless you are ready to get it in when the Ace hits. esp 3 handed.

Theres less aces im beating on this flop

Originally Posted by dsmrolla06

Originally Posted by minSim

You don't have to be way ahead, you can even be behind pretty often to be winning

This doesnt make any sense

Odds

Originally Posted by dsmrolla06

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina

I agree with most of the replies.

Dont reraise pre unless you are ready to get it in when the Ace hits. esp 3 handed.

Theres less aces im beating on this flop

Yes But ... you are playing against the shorty. I think your ace is good enough to call his undersized jam. He could have many draws in this type of spot.

Sorry, just read this quickly but isn't this an obvious call?
Even with the tightish range you put your opponent on you were still 51% to win & given that you only needed to put in 27$ to win +- $70 ? Even if you only had a 35% shot of winning vs his range it would still definitely be a +ev call?
Maybe I didnt read this properly

i agree noble. he's pushing the flop with draws and any ace, and it sounds like he'd call pre with a lot of them.
otherwise i think reraising pre doesn't make sense - you may as well have 72.

Benny, your logic doesn't work - yes, of course you have to put money in on the flop when you 3-bet, but here, you already have, and you've been re-raised. Suddenly it's irrelevant that you re-raised pre-flop because he's already committed. In fact, your 72o example makes more sense in this case - what if we had re-raised pf with 72o? You're saying we'd still have to call here. Aggression's fatal if you can't get away from it when you need to.

(not that I'm saying you should necessarily fold in this particular spot!)

I think if you're reraising here with A9, then you have to commit yourself to calling the all-in. In reality, what were you hoping for? A 9 high flop or to pair your Ace, (really, you wanted a fold pre-flop) but since you didn't get that.... you have to call. Bad fold IMO

Lol dude, are you actively trying to not calculate pot odds during hands?

I c/r the flop all in in these spots alot.

This spot illustrates why re-raising with Ax where x is less than J is such a bad move - if an ace flops, your value betting and hes going to be scared of the ace unless hes got a higher one. if you raise with other hands you can always 'represent' the ace or value bet when you flop something. Ax are the worst hands to reraise with - but on the flop id probably fold you're not beating a lot your only beating A6 and lower also a flush draw is less likely as the As is out there.

Originally Posted by biondino

Benny, your logic doesn't work - yes, of course you have to put money in on the flop when you 3-bet, but here, you already have, and you've been re-raised. Suddenly it's irrelevant that you re-raised pre-flop because he's already committed. In fact, your 72o example makes more sense in this case - what if we had re-raised pf with 72o? You're saying we'd still have to call here. Aggression's fatal if you can't get away from it when you need to.

what part of my logic doesn't work?

i was saying reraising pre makes hero's hand about the same as 92 on this flop (forgot the flop has a 7), since it was confusing even flopping an ace.

...except we have tons of equity against villains shoving range?

for sure...but I mean if playing all in on that flop is not clear, then i think the rr pre was bad.