WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament...

stokesyph

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament...:

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament... : We're IP so how can we donk-bet? lol A donk-bet is when you call a raise OOP and then lead out on the next street
Posted by LadyFingrs

Pretty sure we're not IP

LadyFingrs

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament...:

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament... : Pretty sure we're not IP
Posted by stokesyph

Neither we are, I apologise

As a side note now I like flatting even more

HartshorN

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament...:

In Response to Re: WWYD? Pocket Queens, early in the tournament... : Neither we are, I apologise As a side note now I like flatting even more
Posted by LadyFingrs

I didn't mis-read then that's good

And thanks for the correction with the terminology anyhow. Only ever heard Tikay say it, and thought it meant betting into the raiser out of position.

Sky_Dave

Interesting stuff folks, and it's great to see how you'd all play the hand differently. Of course, you're asking the right sorts of questions and I particularly like Lady's comment about why would we ever 4bet then fold. I am not saying I agree with the conclusion, but if you're going to put a fourth bet in there for 1/3 of your stack, you're pretty committed to the hand, right?

The hand was actually one of my own and from a deepstack tournament I played a couple of years ago. I was the player with QQ and I opted to make the raise to 1500.  Nine times out of ten I would make the raise to 2400 and get a much more fixed line on his hand; unless you're playing a maniac, an average players shove range vs. the 2400 bet would be AA, KK, QQ (unlikely due to our holding) and AK. If you're REALLY lucky he'll do it with AQ or JJ. More often than not, if he shoves there I weep like a child and probably fold.

This case was a little different though, and the reasoning comes down to the fact that I know him to be a good player who is capable of putting me onto a range of hands and then try and fold me out of it due to his solid image. He's also aware that I am an active type of player who will be 'at it' more often than most. I knew that if I looked weak by reraising small he would do one of three things:

1) He thinks I am weak or up to my usual LAG antics and decides to move me off. He shoves.

2) He thinks I am weak but has a monster and doesn't want to lose his customer. He flats.

3) He has a medium strength hand and believes he can play the hand for a cheap price in position depending on the flop. He flats.

This was my read, so I went with it. I raised to 1500, he shoved over the top with little thought and I snap called. He showed AQ, effectively turning his hand into a bluff and I held up to win a big pot. 

It is probably my favourite hand because it was the first time I'd really applied situational analysis to a hand. Yes, we have QQ in the hole, X number of chips and are in so-and-so position, but as I am sure many of you realise, poker is a game where the optimum play depends on so many more situation unique circumstances. Playing online, I'd always found that I was just number crunching, putting a player on a hand based on position and chip counts and not thinking as much about table image or past history (called metagame by many poker geeks such as myself). This was the first time I'd consciously factored that in and it paid off - I ended up finishing the tournament in 3rd for my biggest online payday. Anyway, enough of my brag. :P

Conclusion: Normally I shove, but when something's not normal it's good to think a little differently