|
|
Amusingly I spent a little time over the weekend playing with a LAG idea in $0.01/$0.02 and ended up with stats of 55/45 or so - also read a bit about LAG strategies here and there, and one thing I remember from HoC is the mention that many LAGs have a standard raise of 2-2.5bb as it's enough to fold out some tight blinds for a free blind steal, and little enough to have other blinds call only to fold on any flop. Thus, given the rudimentary stats and the min-raise one possible interpretation is just that he's LAG and that's how he bets. On second thought, if this is true he really sucks. Short stacks do not lend themselves to LAG play.
An alternative to min-raise + call PF and super weak lead is the slowplayed AA. This line with AA is currently much publicised (and maybe even popular), and while I'll certainly consider it possible - I won't take it for granted.
The flop action is a little weak for a LAG with a missed flop. It's not unlikely for a LAG to put out a 1/2 PSB as a c-bet as most people will fold anyway, but 1/4.5 PSB as here is a bit too weak to hope to provoke any folds. At the same time his stack is short enough that he should already be thinking about pot commitment.
The story his bets are telling is AA. Min-raise + flat call the raise. Weak lead screaming raise me so I can push you all in and will have no chance but to call the all-in. The weak lead can almost be considered a check and this a check-raise move. Problem is, I don't believe him and our set is easily strong enough to put him to the test.
The weak lead may not be a concealed check-raise - it may be a blocking bet with him holding a high heart. For all we know he could be holding KhKx (which again could easily play this way).
Anyway, to ranges. For his PF min-raise he could be holding any marginally playable hand, including Q9s and even worse junk. For calling the 3-bet out of position his pot odds are really good - 1:2.35 - but with a weak PF raise from him I guess he can't rule out that he could be 3-bet lightly wide a relatively wide range from the button and he'd probably still be inclined to call with more than just premium hands.
Hmm, too much rambling. Let's get succinct. If he's not a bad player he will know what his stack size does to his optimal play and though he may have chosen (stupidly) to open a wide range from the CO for a discount steal he would not have called the 3-bet (even for $1) with anything less than a medium/high pocket pair or AQ+ or maybe KQ. This still leaves a decent amount of hands like AxKh, AxQh, KhKx, KhQx, QhQx, JhJx, ThTx, 9h9x hands solidly in his range for the whole thing in addition to the AA. Although many of these have a heart as an out to a flush we have 6 outs on the turn and if that misses 9 outs on the river to a full house, so that counters that. I still think we're comfortably ahead of this range.
If he's playing poorly he'll have a lot more junk in his range.
I'm officially of two minds about my play here.
One side of me wants to argue that we're psychologically committing to an all-in on the flop, and leave the rest of the hands as maneuvering that is likely to be called (such as call flop, check/call turn, push river) as long as it ends with all-in.
The other side worries a lot about fold equity. If we push on the flop and ThTx hands fold we take it down right there. If we don't, they may draw to a flush and beat us by the river. Thus we lose fold equity. I think the counter argument is this. The value of the fold equity is mainly in folding out 9-out hands when we lay them odds that make it correct for them to fold. This value is countered in large part by our 6 outs on turn and failing that 9 outs on river to make a full house. It's less than 9 on turn or river for his flush, but I think the outs we have to a full house outweigh the loss of fold equity by not raising. If another heart comes and we don't make our full house we'll have made our set of 8s a bluff catcher by the river. I'd still call any bet and push him all in regardless.
What a delightful hand. 
|
Hand Reading 4 Noobs, Part VI (Best Ever!!)
($3.35, 2 players)
Reply With Quote
. Somebody 
Originally Posted by meeloche
