Poker Forum > Strategy

JM 4/9/13 HAnd 4 Is this always a fold with QQ ?

<< < (2/4) > >>

Fatcatstu:
I honestly think he can c/r a flush draw here on the turn. I obv bow to Rodders seniority here, but we are beaten by so little...

AAroddersAA:

--- Quote from: Fatcatstu on September 10, 2013, 20:32:19 PM ---
I honestly think he can c/r a flush draw here on the turn. I obv bow to Rodders seniority here, but we are beaten by so little...

--- End quote ---

I understand what you are saying here, it is very true that there are very few hands that beat us. My concern would be that we have a player who has limp/called preflop. So that suggests a passive player, this may be wrong but with only this info to go on we have to use what we have. The game is also full of tight passive players so a passive player is not at all unthinkable. We have a limp call from EP, this is a pair that has decided to set mine a lot of the time although it can also be connectors of both the suited and non-suited kind.

Thing is most of the time when these players miss their set or draw they usually just seem to fold (which is nice for us). Now the Flush draw is possible but it is unlikely that such a player wants to raise the draw. They tend to try and make it cheaply. So when he calls on the flop I would say that the flush draw is bang in his range. I find it much less credible that he has suddenly decided to go aggressive on the turn even though it would be a good play, it would be more likely that he would raise the flop if he was going to raise the draw. I find it much more realistic that he has 99 or a 4. He MIGHT even have seen a paired board and decided to call the flop with 22 not really planning ahead. The size of the raise is also strong, flush draws seem to like either min raising or shoving. Also if he has some kind of 9 I think he is calling us on the turn and likely on te river as well. TT and JJ are likely to do the same given his play to this point, AA or KK are such a tiny part of his ranged based on how he has played the hand I am not considering them.

So although it is hard for us to be beat based on the cards we can see, it actuallyu seems quite likely we are beat based on the whole picture. I could be overthinking this spot and would be very interested to hear counter arguments from anybody really as it can only make the thread better :)

TheSnapper:
I"m with Rodders here, check raise the turn is super strong especially from a passive player, after an open limp utg, this is going to be a passive player almost always.

If villain was going to bluff with a FD villain wouldn"t wait till the turn to do that.

I"d expect to see A4,99,22 most of the time.

I reckon if you used the simple philosophy of bet till you get raised then fold, you could beat micro stakes comfortably.

All that said, this is a good illustration why I"m not a fan of Rush/Zoom, I just think we have to play readless way too often and imho, that just gives our potential edge away. So unless you are rake-whoring the volume, I just dont get it.

AAroddersAA:
This isn"t a zoom table though is it HH says fast not Zoom they are different. Also just a suggestion don"t we gain a big advantage against the regs by getting reads and are we not able to exploit the fact they are often readless against us. Obviously a standard table is a better game Zoom is for practicing the basics. There is an part of the game missing though.

Santino67:
Suspect I"m calling here and expecting A9 rather than A4, not sure if I"m worried about anything else the way the hand plays out. Feel I"m ahead most of the time in this spot.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page