Micro Stakes Online NL Poker Forums

It's zoom and he's unknown.

Preflop I think he has a bunch of pairs, Ax, KQ and a couple of random hands. The flop-bet seems weak, like KK that got mad becuase of the ace, maybe KJ and some stronger aces too, like AJ. I raise thinking he'll call with worse.

The minraise puts him with about $0.5 behind. My move? By the time I figured it was a shove or fold because of his stack, but while writing this post I realize that maybe call and see what he does by the turn could be a good line as well? Problem is if he leads with like $0.08 on the turn.

Poker Stars $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 1760719
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

button: $2.37
sb: $5.03
bb: $1.05
Hero (utg): $2.00
mp: $2.25
co: $1.00

Pre Flop: ($0.03) Hero is utg with Q A
Hero raises to $0.06, 4 folds, bb raises to $0.14, Hero calls $0.08

Flop: ($0.29) J A 6 (2 players)
bb bets $0.06, Hero raises to $0.20, bb raises to $0.38, Hero ???

I'm kind of sad that this post didn't recieve any love, since it's the type of spot which I think is tough. Odd small-stacked player takes a weak-weird line where I can make a huge misstake by either action.

What if the player was 7/7 over 30 hands, 12/9, 15/13, 29/20, 50/30, 80/50?

If the guy is theoretically solid, what hands could justify this type of play?

Min-bet/3b is international sign of strength in poker so I think he has AK+ here and you can safely fold, especially since he 3b preflop. I could have saved a lot of buyins had I followed this rule myself.

There is never a reason to do it yourself. I usually treat min-bets as if the guy checked and raise/call depending on the strenght of my hand. Only if I have a draw I often just call, hoping he has nuts and thanking him for perfect odds to stack him.

Tappad we can't say he is theoretically solid because his entire line from preflop to flop makes absolutely no sense as a bluff or as a value hand - it could almost make sense as a bluff except for the fact that he led out for 6 cents into a 29 cent pot on the flop.

He min 3 bet preflop and now is going nuts when an A comes on the board... best to fold. His range is like JJ+ and AK preflop and once he leads out on the flop then reraises you his range is basically JJ, AK, and AA i.e. they all beat you. You only have a bluff catcher but just fold, if he is bluffing here good for him since it is a heavily -ev play. He seems like he is thinking about his own hand and he likes his hand and he really doesn't care what you have nor does he really understand about value and extracting it. He just likes his hand and wants to raise with it. That's when you fold. He could possibly have KK or QQ here but you're not exactly a favourite even if we add these hands into his range. There are also less combinations of queens since you hold one.

Tappad we can't say he is theoretically solid because his entire line from preflop to flop makes absolutely no sense as a bluff or as a value hand - it could almost make sense as a bluff except for the fact that he led out for 6 cents into a 29 cent pot on the flop.

That's why it's interresting imo. If you say that he can never be solid here, i.e must be doing something completely onesided and that it would always be easy to play against, you should back that up better.

He seems like he is thinking about his own hand and he likes his hand and he really doesn't care what you have nor does he really understand about value and extracting it. He just likes his hand and wants to raise with it. That's when you fold.

This is really good reasoning and is definitely something I'll heavily consider when people take these lines. Very nice! Thanks!

Tappad he is doing something onesided though... and he is very easy to play against. You're making the assumption that because you found this spot hard that the villain must be difficult to play against when in actual fact with some more experience at playing against loose passive 2NL players you will find it pretty easy to play against them too (bet for value, fold when they raise). He is probably a standard 2NL fish - gets excited when he gets a hand and just calls when he has nothing. He cannot do this line i.e. min 3 bet, lead out 6 cents, and then reraise your raise and be a good player. However, even if he isn't a good player we have to then just look at what this means when a bad 2NL player does this. I think it represents a lot of strength and that's why we fold. There are some other factors like timing tells that come into play though and reads at normal tables. Like if someone is a maniac you wouldn't fold here but it is +ev at 2NL to assume loose passive until evidence to the contrary is provided. This is also why I hate zoom, because you can't develop reads to play perfectly against your opponents.

Also as you already know remember that a min 3 bet is REALLY strong at 2NL (because they are afraid they will loose their customer if they bet more, all micro fish think this way for the most part but some will greatly overbet too). It shows a very depolarised range of premium hands. If he just called you then donked into you for 6c and then reraised your raise id ship it in because he is so short, you likely have the best hand, and he is going to spaz out with worse a lot of the time.

Tappad he is doing something onesided though... and he is very easy to play against. You're making the assumption that because you found this spot hard that the villain must be difficult to play against

That's fair. I can also see that only because the spot appears to be hard it's not necessarily so.

However, you are making your decisions based entirely on very polarized assumptions about the oponent in that he is always bad-passive or bad-spewy. This reduces most every thread from a "let's learn about these situations" to a "meh, don't get involved, wait for better cards then move up to where they respect your raises". This means that I can never learn how to make better decisions, I can only learn to avoid some marginal spots that will hardly affect my winnings overall.

But I find your posts great for me when it comes to why you'd take a certain line in these spots.

However, you are making your decisions based entirely on very polarized assumptions about the oponent in that he is always bad-passive or bad-spewy. This reduces most every thread from a "let's learn about these situations" to a "meh, don't get involved, wait for better cards then move up to where they respect your raises". This means that I can never learn how to make better decisions, I can only learn to avoid some marginal spots that will hardly affect my winnings overall.

It is zoom so you can't have your cake and eat it too. i.e. playing zoom and having reads. Zoom sucks and you shouldn't play it if you're trying to learn the game. If you play zoom and have no reads you need to have a baseline read i.e. what are players normally doing at these stakes i.e. are they generally loose passive. If the majority of players are loose passive then it is +ev to assume that this is the case. It is +ev to assume a min 3 bet is a strong range if that's what it most often represents. You don't need to be right all the time. When you play normal games and develop reads then you do have to be right a higher % of the same to make the correct decision. If you're playing zoom you're trading in your ability to read players with your ability to play against a generic player type and range but for more hands an hour which may result in an increased win rate just because of the mass amount of hands you're playing (but its still a bad way to learn poker).

This is not a marginal spot either, this is clearly a fold as if you ran this over and over again at 2NL zoom you would likely lose overall. It may be that when you take into account the 'spaz' factor of 2NL it is actually a little closer than you think but it is still going to be a losing play I think most of the time. Poker is a game of incomplete information but fortunately we do not have to be deadly accurate... you take educated guesses and reach conclusions based on the information available to you. Since you have no information except general game dynamics, stack sizes, table position, and the fact that the person is playing 2NL so he has a low bank roll, you really arn't basing your actions on a whole lot. If you want to make better decisions in marginal spots then you need to play normal games and focus on exploiting a player as an individual. Still, you need to create some +ev assumptions since even at a normal table you might have only played 10 hands with someone then they do something crazy and you have to just go by what a standard reg is doing at these stakes, as I was doing here.

I am the last person who advocates waiting for better cards... I think the 'waiting for the better spot' is an excuse for not having to make a tough decision. This is not a case of waiting for a better spot but a case of being behind his likely range.In zoom if the villain take this heavy aggression it is -ev to continue without a very strong holding. In normal games you can develop your image and if you're very aggressive you can justify getting it in here. If I raise like 30% of flops against a player and then he starts reraising me I will just get it in here with a pair of aces. You can't do that though since you don't have that dynamic with the unknown villain. You're not playing it safe or waiting for better cards... hand values are relative not absolute, you're making the most profitable play of folding against a range that is most of the time crushing you. Granted, this guy could be just wanting to log off and is just going to shove the rest of his chips in with any two cards but this wouldn't be very +ev to assume this every time someone takes such an aggressive line.

This is a wall of text now but anyway you pointed out that you thought the spot was hard. The reason you thought it was hard was because you're still considering the absolute value of your hand. You got into the pot with AQ, you got your A, so now you don't want to fold. However, hand strength is relative to your opponent's range. When you realise everything is relative you may be making some folds with good pairs like aces but you may also then be getting it in with worse top pairs like tens against certain ranges. It doesn't just equal out in the hand, it rather generates significantly increased profits over the long term. You have to even fold quads if you know your opponent has a straight flush.

Just this villain looks like just the type to spazz out w/ a crappy ace