QQ facing 4-bet preflop question

[Lambik]

There's something I don't understand about 10NL talk.

People (rightfully!) talk about valuebetting the calling stations, isolating the weak limpers, c-betting but backing off to serious resistance. Briefly, taking advantage of passive play.

Yet, whenever someone's got a QQ/JJ/AK hand and gets 4bet, he is often given the advice to get his money in.

Why is that? Because I honestly don't understand it.

4bets from non-maniacs at 25NL and lower are reserved to an extremely tight range (AA/KK, some AK, some QQ). People tend to call a 3bet with TT/JJ, some AK and some QQ and see a flop, and then convince themselves that you had AK and missed a flop of 832.

By your account, Villain is not a maniac. If he chose this time to 4bet bluff/value bet a worse hand, then good bet. But until you've seen him do it on a fairly regular basis: fold.

And in my experience, if he's the type to regularly 4bet with holdings weaker than AK/QQ at 10NL, you probably will notice it soon enough.

[chinz]

Originally Posted by Lambik

Yet, whenever someone's got a QQ/JJ/AK hand and gets 4bet, he is often given the advice to get his money in.

Why is that? Because I honestly don't understand it.

Our 3bet looks like resteal a lot, there should be some bluffs and weak hands for value in his range.

If we are playing 14/10, not 3betting much and we don't have steal/resteal history with the villain, I would fold this at NL10. At NL50 I don't think I'd ever fold against a regular who's not a complete nit.

So yes, I agree that folding is probably the best play here. I would fold this at NL10. It's very marginal either way.

By your account, Villain is not a maniac. If he chose this time to 4bet bluff/value bet a worse hand, then good bet. But until you've seen him do it on a fairly regular basis: fold.

And in my experience, if he's the type to regularly 4bet with holdings weaker than AK/QQ at 10NL, you probably will notice it soon enough.

I don't agree with this though, eg. if you have been 3betting him a lot and/or he has been stealing a lot earlier and your 3bet stat is decent (5-10%) I would just shove QQ, AQ, JJ and such over first 4bet 100% the time. You shouldn't really wait "to be sure" before you do it, because most of the people aren't 4bet-bluffing you many times in a row. They might do it once, but second and third ones are far more likely for value than bluffs.

The fact that some good players would prefer just to call a 3bet with AA (and maybe KK) in position here when they know that big part of our 3betting range is air, actually makes their 4betting range even weaker. However, at NL10 I think it's less likely that TAG regulars would call with AA in this spot, they are almost always 4betting it.

This is assuming that villain is decent regular, who I suppose to be thinking player (and capable/willing to 4bet bluff).

[nawhead]

Originally Posted by chinz

if you have been 3betting him a lot and/or he has been stealing a lot earlier and your 3bet stat is decent (5-10%) I would just shove QQ, AQ, JJ and such over first 4bet 100% the time. You shouldn't really wait "to be sure" before you do it, because most of the people aren't 4bet-bluffing you many times in a row. They might do it once,

You lost me at 5bet shoving AQ... damn you're aggressive. You must put people on some tilt where this is your default line of thinking when someone 4bets you the first time. And the other 75% of the time when people show up with AA/KK/QQ/AK, what's that a cooler?

But let's go back here. You say you're shoving QQ/JJ/AQ 100% when people are more likely to bluff the first time they 4bet you. Bluffing with A5? K9? So doesn't it make more sense to call with a hand like JJ/QQ and get value from them when they would stackoff with K9 on a 9 hi board cause they're in a 4bet pot and now they have one bet left in their stack?

Why are we trying to fold out the range of hands we crush? If anything, we should be 5bet bluffing with T9o and whatnot if we think that first 4bet by villain is a bluff a high% of time.

I was going to say something in another thread on the forums about 10 buyin swings being not as frequent as some posters make it out to be, but now I understand why you think that's normal.

I was listening to an interview with Samoleus on Pokerroad's Cash Plays, and it really struck me when he said the current trend of lighter and lighter 3bets and 4bets are basically lowering the skill required to play with 100bb stacks so essentially people play a 100bb stack like a 40bb stack. Which if you're 5bet pushing AQ at micros, that statement seems pretty spot on.

With all this rampant uber-aggression in these online games now. Now it's correct to actually revert back to a super tight game cause people just won't give anybody credit anymore.