[NL20-NL50] nl25sh - JJsc

  • 5 replies
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Hello Farmarchist,

      Doubt that there is much to do vs such a tight 3bet/squeezer. Most likely I'd also rather be laying down.

      Best Regards.
    • Avatars91
      Avatars91
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.12.2009 Posts: 2,689
      1) What about 3bet/going broke with JJvsCO as a default play on NL25 vs relatively unknown regs?

      At least on the site that I am playing NL25 on (WPT poker/Party), I find that rarely does any reg have a calling range OOP vs a 3Bet and the majority tend to play back by either 4Bet/calling or 4Bet/folding.
      Of course, vs nitty 4Bettors it is a call.

      2) Could we still not call the BB's 3Bet given that the sample size is still small for us to classify the BB as a tight squeezer?
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      1) What about 3bet/going broke with JJvsCO as a default play on NL25 vs relatively unknown regs?

      Nah, don't like it as long NL25 has enough of nitty style players and might be just break-even for us. Especially as in this case we took him rather unknown. 3betting though is fine but afterwards I'd always reevaluate my hand strength.

      2) Could we still not call the BB's 3Bet given that the sample size is still small for us to classify the BB as a tight squeezer?

      What do you mean small? All the stats are talking against calling here, even AF. Of course we could consider doing that but then again I'd want to see more stats as CB flop etc.
    • Avatars91
      Avatars91
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.12.2009 Posts: 2,689
      All the stats are talking against calling here, even AF


      Why is his low AF bad for us in this situation?

      Does it not mean that we will often be able to be in control postflop since villain seems to be somewhat passive? That sounds good.

      Although in combination with his high W$SD stat it might mean that we are not really getting paid that often postflop by weaker hands even if he does end up having a loose SQZ range here, which so far does not seem super-likely.
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Originally posted by Avatars91
      All the stats are talking against calling here, even AF


      Why is his low AF bad for us in this situation?

      Does it not mean that we will often be able to be in control postflop since villain seems to be somewhat passive? That sounds good.

      Although in combination with his high W$SD stat it might mean that we are not really getting paid that often postflop by weaker hands even if he does end up having a loose SQZ range here, which so far does not seem super-likely.
      Cause low AF also tells that he is passive postflop and if people tend to be passive postflop they are more likely to be passive also preflop.