Defend vs a Squeeze

It depends per limit you are playing. On the micro’s I would 4bet or call tighter then if we play on a higher limit. Also it’s good to know how deep we are effective playing and how big the squeeze was.

Cheers,
SDK1987

Effective stacks are 100bb. Nl2-nl25. Squeeze is pot size big.
Give your ranges.

BB squeezes pretty wide as 9x with high equity cards are raising here. I might call with AA sometimes to make a statement. Otherwise I just 4bet here with AKs, QQ, KK, AA.
TT, JJ, AJs, AQs, KQs is a call.
ATs, KJs are folds.
All other cards as well.

Aces and kings raise. Big slick and queens call.

This is what I do when I am faced a squeeze, 1st step, look at his/her squeeze%, many have squeeze same as their 3bet, 9-12%, second, who is between us, a station? a nit??....3rd, look at squeezers fold to 4bet%, 4th, look at squeezers cbet in a 3bet pot%....all important info to look at before deciding to fold/call or 4b.....with no history I 4bet TT-JJ and fold to shove, AA, KK, QQ and AKs I 4bet and try to get it all in here. I also have 4bet bluff hands, A2s-A5s and AT. I don't like calling, calling is passive style I do not possess vs unknowns, however vs other opponents I have history with, I call wide range, I don't have hand requirements, just go by feel, I have called with 53s, J7s, 22 all the way to AA.

The interesting part about the thread is what is missing from my perspective is the perspective of the original poster for example, we all at our own level of play, stack size are put or have put others in this exact spot, the regularity of this scenario is based upon experience, ability, of our game and the game of our opponent(s).

From your post, this thought arises for my game to ask your game, what experience, good or bad has happened by calling here or other actions from these spots, meaning what is your plan once calling or opening up the betting again, did your game have a plan before knowing to either call or the particular plan of action? Or was the plan based on hitting the flop or could abstract play also be induced on the opponent as an option to take down the pot without the best hand? What has been your experience in these spots moving forward in the hand past the original thread question?

My requirements would be was my hole cards a hand that could eventually beat a one pair hand, or was this scenario dealt a hand that plays itself so, disguising the way it is played is based upon my creativity because of knowing my opponent. With no information what are my options?

Without options all of what remains is abstract to the brain, how well a player performs cannot be measured by numbers only, but by how they compete in the moment? Without knowing then this scenario has to brought into existence, the average winning hand in poker two pair, to beat my opponent straight up based on the result does my opponent hold a premium one pair hand, a sexy draw hand, a suited draw hand, or have the stepped out of line that needs and extra bet to define my opponents line of play that could start a potential leveling situation, and is my game prepared for this scenario?

Will there be the proper amount of bets to be gathered once our game makes the best hand or is their implied bets, their stack because our game can provide the proper play for the opponent to choose to pay off our bets? Will the natural course of the hand allow the opponent to pay us off or can our game adjust to make them fold because of a real time read of a mistake in their play?

These odds based on my hand, 8-1 to flop a set, 8-1 to flop an open-ended straight draw, 9-1, to flop four to the flush. This helps to remain patient as not to put my game into a psychological conflict, from this conflict putting my game in this spot first opens up all possibilities of abstract play for my opponent to induce psychology either by thought of his own or no fault of his own. Because of defining my objective to quick before the needing to bring my game into the moment of existence properly to give my game the purist read because of my opponent having to define his/her position first.

Any two cards can raise or three, four bet but it takes a stronger hand to call in these situations unless, the read on the opponent(s) is B.S., perhaps a person can put this person on an exact hand, or knowing they are just leveling to take position because of players regularly stealing from the CO.

Then what is the objective past the point of where the thread stops because either without previous experience or knowing how to compete properly in the moment then what is the end game once the hand continues past this point? Otherwise this allows the brain to find no clear objective to just put my game into this scenario by playing in the CO without a plan before the scenario happens?

This to help to anticipate abstract actions from opponents that have no history but we have history with our game, our game in these scenario’s so, just bringing this into existence now a player could say that the entire first part of thread should then become ABC with no need to state unless there is a rest of the story?

Even though, your thread is advanced question however, after many conflicts this should then become ABC for the brain because of stored memories this will become normal to experience rather than a mountain to climb because of already climbing then re-climbing the same mountain many times over. Thus, in many ways the information has already been played out even before making a bet in the CO.

Hi all, quick question about 3bet sizings if thats okay

How to manipulate 3bet sizings when there is also a Cold Caller preflop?
Am I supposed to add 1bb per cold caller or am I supposed to add 1 cold call per cold caller ?

Example A:
NL100
EP opens to $3
MP calls $3
BTN 3bets to $10 (3x + 1bb)

Example B:
NL100
EP opens to $3
MP calls $3
BTN 3bets to $12 (3x + 1 cold call)