What should have been done preflop here?

[ericklam92]

Here’s a recent hand from a week ago that has sparked some discussion with a local peer.
1/1 NLH – effective stack $135 (approximately) – this game can play much bigger at time, potentially in the 2/5 range.
Hero is in the BB. UTG +2 raises to 6, not a big raise, but not an uncommon open. Usually between $6-12. He gets 2 callers before it gets back to the Hero who looks down at JJ. Hero 3 bets to $15 (way too light), and the original raiser then 4 bets to $40. Action folds back to Hero. Hero hasn’t played with this individual before, so is giving villain credit for a premium hand here. AA, KK, or AK. Despite, likely being behind, Hero elects to take a flop.
A, K, 10 – rainbow
Hero checks to the aggressor. Who visibly is taken back by the check even if for a second. Then proceeds to down bet $25. Hero tanks for a bit, believing this is likely the worst flop he could envision, he’s up against 2 pair, or a set of A or a set of K. The down bet intrigues him, and feels that calling $25 to draw, and win approximately $120 seems acceptable, even if the hero is drawing to a Q.
Turn Q.
Hero checks. Villain bets $35, hero not having a ton left jams for his remaining $70-ish. Requiring the villain to call $30 to see the river. Villain doesn’t think to hard before he calls.
The river bricks out, and the Hero turns over JJ to the surprise of most at the table. Villain turns over AA for the flopped top set.
Discussion at a day later, revolved around the preflop action. That by not 5 betting, the Hero was not polarizing the villain enough, and should have bet, then folded to the eventual jam which likely would have followed by the villain. Knowing that he was behind at that point.
The hero’s rebuttal, was that by calling, he got to see the flop and reassess based on what the board presents. Hero admits he got extremely lucky. But if he had followed this advise, he wouldn’t have had the opportunity to win. By giving the villain the credit for the top of his range, he believed he knew right where he was at the whole time. While against other players in that same group who are much more LAG, a 5 bet here would have resulted in a much higher win ratio, as it would force out weaker pairs and Ax hands who 4 bet attempting to steal the pot.
I see the value here in both arguments, but I feel they don’t take into account well enough having to make a decision in a certain spot, with certain variables. I don’t think the Hero wanted to overplay his JJ, if even to further narrow down his opponent.
Just curious what the forum thinks of this hand, which as played was very interesting.

 

[Station_Master]

The only 5bet size that makes sense is all-in at these stacks sizes, so I dont really understand what the other players are talking about.

I would only 5bet all-in if I thought villain was bluff heavy.

Also, yes your 3bet is way too small, probably should be more like $36 in theory though if you are not planning to call off a 4bet jam you could size down a bit

 

[Qniversity]

Here’s a recent hand from a week ago that has sparked some discussion with a local peer.
1/1 NLH – effective stack $135 (approximately) – this game can play much bigger at time, potentially in the 2/5 range.
Hero is in the BB. UTG +2 raises to 6, not a big raise, but not an uncommon open. Usually between $6-12. He gets 2 callers before it gets back to the Hero who looks down at JJ. Hero 3 bets to $15 (way too light), and the original raiser then 4 bets to $40. Action folds back to Hero. Hero hasn’t played with this individual before, so is giving villain credit for a premium hand here. AA, KK, or AK. Despite, likely being behind, Hero elects to take a flop.
A, K, 10 – rainbow
Hero checks to the aggressor. Who visibly is taken back by the check even if for a second. Then proceeds to down bet $25. Hero tanks for a bit, believing this is likely the worst flop he could envision, he’s up against 2 pair, or a set of A or a set of K. The down bet intrigues him, and feels that calling $25 to draw, and win approximately $120 seems acceptable, even if the hero is drawing to a Q.
Turn Q.
Hero checks. Villain bets $35, hero not having a ton left jams for his remaining $70-ish. Requiring the villain to call $30 to see the river. Villain doesn’t think to hard before he calls.
The river bricks out, and the Hero turns over JJ to the surprise of most at the table. Villain turns over AA for the flopped top set.
Discussion at a day later, revolved around the preflop action. That by not 5 betting, the Hero was not polarizing the villain enough, and should have bet, then folded to the eventual jam which likely would have followed by the villain. Knowing that he was behind at that point.
The hero’s rebuttal, was that by calling, he got to see the flop and reassess based on what the board presents. Hero admits he got extremely lucky. But if he had followed this advise, he wouldn’t have had the opportunity to win. By giving the villain the credit for the top of his range, he believed he knew right where he was at the whole time. While against other players in that same group who are much more LAG, a 5 bet here would have resulted in a much higher win ratio, as it would force out weaker pairs and Ax hands who 4 bet attempting to steal the pot.
I see the value here in both arguments, but I feel they don’t take into account well enough having to make a decision in a certain spot, with certain variables. I don’t think the Hero wanted to overplay his JJ, if even to further narrow down his opponent.
Just curious what the forum thinks of this hand, which as played was very interesting.

Preflop, you have to 3bet because of the callers and you only lose to QQ+, there will be a ton of trash out there, especially live. With the call being $6 and there being $19 in the pot and you having $135 in your stack, a 3bet of $30 seems reasonable. If original raiser jams then it sucks. You're calling $105 into a pot of 283 so you need 37.1% hand equity (assuming the 2 callers get out the way) and you have 36.6% against QQ+ and AK so if he jams TT here or anything else, AQs yadda yadda then you have the odds. It's just a high variance low +EV spot like most preflop 3b/4b/5b decisions. Imo, a live 1/1 game? Facing this small 4bet? With 3 left to act? I'm happy throwing jacks in the muck preflop and making a highly exploitable fold. The EV of continuing is probably neutral at best and AA at worst.

Flop you have 4 clean outs to an obvious straight that will only get paid by other straights (split) or sets which still have 21% equity and maybe 2 pairs. Then if you hit your 2 outer for the set it's like the reverse nightmare scenario. It's $25 to win a tiny amount that you're not even guaranteed to win 100% of the time. You have to fold, even to a down-bet. I put his 4bet range into equilab and then isolated the hands that continue on this board and you have only 17% equity.

Turn, standard.

 

[Aballinamion]

Here’s a recent hand from a week ago that has sparked some discussion with a local peer.
1/1 NLH – effective stack $135 (approximately) – this game can play much bigger at time, potentially in the 2/5 range.
Hero is in the BB. UTG +2 raises to 6, not a big raise, but not an uncommon open. Usually between $6-12. He gets 2 callers before it gets back to the Hero who looks down at JJ. Hero 3 bets to $15 (way too light), and the original raiser then 4 bets to $40. Action folds back to Hero. Hero hasn’t played with this individual before, so is giving villain credit for a premium hand here. AA, KK, or AK. Despite, likely being behind, Hero elects to take a flop.
A, K, 10 – rainbow
Hero checks to the aggressor. Who visibly is taken back by the check even if for a second. Then proceeds to down bet $25. Hero tanks for a bit, believing this is likely the worst flop he could envision, he’s up against 2 pair, or a set of A or a set of K. The down bet intrigues him, and feels that calling $25 to draw, and win approximately $120 seems acceptable, even if the hero is drawing to a Q.
Turn Q.
Hero checks. Villain bets $35, hero not having a ton left jams for his remaining $70-ish. Requiring the villain to call $30 to see the river. Villain doesn’t think to hard before he calls.
The river bricks out, and the Hero turns over JJ to the surprise of most at the table. Villain turns over AA for the flopped top set.
Discussion at a day later, revolved around the preflop action. That by not 5 betting, the Hero was not polarizing the villain enough, and should have bet, then folded to the eventual jam which likely would have followed by the villain. Knowing that he was behind at that point.
The hero’s rebuttal, was that by calling, he got to see the flop and reassess based on what the board presents. Hero admits he got extremely lucky. But if he had followed this advise, he wouldn’t have had the opportunity to win. By giving the villain the credit for the top of his range, he believed he knew right where he was at the whole time. While against other players in that same group who are much more LAG, a 5 bet here would have resulted in a much higher win ratio, as it would force out weaker pairs and Ax hands who 4 bet attempting to steal the pot.
I see the value here in both arguments, but I feel they don’t take into account well enough having to make a decision in a certain spot, with certain variables. I don’t think the Hero wanted to overplay his JJ, if even to further narrow down his opponent.
Just curious what the forum thinks of this hand, which as played was very interesting.

When we truly observe bet sizing we can deduce a bunch of good stuff to us: villain whiffs its opening raise, which is out of the way (observation of strange sizing), Hero 3-bets and another cool observation, villain 4-bets to another uncommon sizing, almost 3x.
We know that coming from weak players, they don’t know sizings to use for opening, 3-bet and 4-bet, and by this choice of volume we can put it right away into some strong range QQ+ AQs+. Unless villain is maniac/aggrotard, then we can hope for some 77-TT and weaker broadways and connectors.
Good that the flop comes good to us and villain bets a sizing that we cannot refuse, willing to extract maximum value with its AA, KK, QQ, AK and AQ.
The turn is even better but we must have in mind that most of flops will not come like this one and turns specially, só how are we going to play JJ postflop in a 4-bet pot having a stack that doesn’t give us many maneuverability postflop?
On top of that, it’s hard for anyone to fold a 4-bet pot, having 100 BB or a bit more. We put 20% of our stack preflop and most likely 30% OTF or OTT, which commit us to the pot not giving room to many bluffs, ergo we are going all-in most of times postflop.
One important matter is about rake. How much % are we paying per pot? Do we play rake preflop? If we don’t play rake preflop and let’s suppose the rake is equal to the pokerstars’ NLHE 100, we can 5-bet shove with no further worries.

 

[gustav197poker]

Assuming you min 5-bet, which in this case would be 40 + 25 = $65. You have almost half your stack invested, so it doesn't really leave you with adequate margin to fold. But it could be interpreted that the opener tries to exploit one of the callers in the middle. Which suggests that you have a tight player image. So when the callers fold, you can exceptionally fold when you min 5-bet.
But really at this table you're better off calling preflop with your full range from the BB, as your loose 3-bet won't help you fight for the pot, short-term or long-term.
When you call preflop, V might interpret next time that you want to induce him to 3-bet with a wider range. So here you must take advantage of the information that the opponents have about you and use it in your favor. Next time you should be the one to 4-bet with AA.
Grretings.