QQ in middle of 4 bet

Better fold, too much action from early positions.

I think folding is the best.

Yes, I can lay down the hand here.

I agree that this is a case you can fold and move on. UTG shows a lot of strength.

CO 3-bets very light IMO, I think we might be ahead of his range, but UTG's stats are much tighter, I would say he has AA or KK, I would fold.

I would shove, because CO looks like he is 3betting super wide, which means that UTG should have bluffs in his range, so that you can shove here. The only bad thing here is low 3bet % of UTG, which usually indicate also not bluffing much 4bet.

I think you miss that we are mw too... not that much bluffs when the pot is huge.

Originally posted by nitrol
I think you miss that we are mw too... not that much bluffs when the pot is huge.

I didn't miss that. For UTG it is a great spot to 4bet bluff since MP is mostly folding and a sqeezer is too bluff heavy (15% 3bet). If you think that regs are not bluffing vs agro sqeezer from UTG then it is a fold. But from what I see at NL10, regs are 3bet and 4bet bluffing a lot nowadays (at least on party and ipoker where I usually play, I dont know on Prima).

You are way to optimistic. You attribute to a tight UTG a hand reading ability that is unwarranted (he'll start bluffing now...), at the same time you claim that CO will squeeze über-lightly against tight UTG open + HJ call. He'll not if he has only moderate hand reading ability. This is a clear fold. Not all are joking this hand.

why do you think that he is tight from UTG? his vpip and pfr look standard to me. Also CO has 15% 3bet and 10% sqeeze, such player is going to sqeeze a lot IP in this spot.

A 15% PFR and a 5% 3-bet is übertight. Naturally he is tighter from UTG than from the button. The caller (OP) should have a tight range calling in HJ and squeezer (which I admit is loose) is or is not going to observe this depending on how good he is. If you are overoptimistic, then you peg UTG as loose in this particular situation. I m o, there is no ground for that. It is just wishful thinking.

UTG may want to bluff, but he is really thinking "I can't wait 'til I get AA and can bust this maniac", not "I think I'll start 4-bet bluffing here and now".

A 15% PFR

I dont think that this is relevant.

and a 5% 3-bet is übertight.

yes, in my first comment I said that this is the only bad thing I see against shove, that a 3bettor who is tighter 3betting is likely also 4betting tighter.

Naturally he is tighter from UTG than from the button.

Like most of regs, still this is not relevant.

The caller (OP) should have a tight range calling in HJ and squeezer (which I admit is loose) is or is not going to observe this depending on how good he is

UTG also open raised 2bb which gives better pot odds for MP to call looser than standard, giving CO more FE. Most of regs when using 2bb open raise from UTG do it with a wider range than 3bb (mostly when a fish is in blinds).

If you are overoptimistic, then you peg UTG as loose in this particular situation. I m o, there is no ground for that. It is just wishful thinking

You dont need UTG to fold that often in order to make a shove +EV with so much dead money. If you see the 4bet of UTG value heavy, he can also see your shove very strong and he could be folding AK, QQ together with bluffs, giving you enough FE.
I am not saying that a shove is super +EV, but I think that it higher than 0.

UTG may want to bluff, but he is really thinking "I can't wait 'til I get AA and can bust this maniac", not "I think I'll start 4-bet bluffing here and now".

this is all based on assumptions. If your assumption is that utg is bluffing often enough then we shove otherwise fold. It is also a very rare spot, so it can't be estimated with population stats. So there are left only intuition and experience.

Wow. Relax!

Originally posted by YohanN7
Wow. Relax!

So, when you are left out of arguments, then you say "Relax!"? Even if you think that I was writing 100% nonsense about the hand, you can still ignore my comment, or try to explain why it is wrong. I didn't insult you in any way. Maybe I have different opinion about the hand than most of the guys who were giving opinions (or all), but still this is not the reason to write such things.

Originally posted by canad32

Originally posted by YohanN7
Wow. Relax!

So, when you are left out of arguments, then you say "Relax!"? Even if you think that I was writing 100% nonsense about the hand, you can still ignore my comment, or try to explain why it is wrong. I didn't insult you in any way. Maybe I have different opinion about the hand than most of the guys who were giving opinions (or all), but still this is not the reason to write such things.

Nit raises two. I go for the easy explanation, Nit likes nits hand. You go for another explanation, a more complicated one that implicitly assumes nit played much with maniac.

Nit raises two

VPIP: 21, PFR: 15, 3B: 5, F3B 60, AF: 2,3 is surely not a nit, he is a reg a who likes a bit more to call than to 3bet, but not too far from a standard reg. His AF is agro as well.

I go for the easy explanation, Nit likes nits hand

Agree, but he is not a nit.

You go for another explanation, a more complicated one that implicitly assumes nit played much with maniac.

I never said that he is a maniac. I said, that with so much deadmoney, we dont need much fold equity in order to push +EV. We probably need around 10-20% with QQ. So UTG has to bluff 4bet only rarely which is what I think very realistic even vs standard reg sqeeze, and even more vs a reg who sqeezes super aggressive. Games are nowadays much more aggressive preflop on micro limits, even nits are 4bet bluffing, 5bet bluffing etc. Most of players especially on non - pokerstars networks are bots, which know how to bluff 4bet even if the have nit vpip and pfr stats.

Wow. Again.

This picking apart posts (well, trying to) sentence by sentence is not something that belongs outside of academia, and even there it is for freshmen only because they should know how to do it and are therefore taught it. Here, it only makes you come across as a crackpot (not saying you are one) unable to listen to other people. Quoting a post is fine, quoting one sentence is fine too. But not systematic picking apart posts (or rather trying to) sentence by sentence is not. It is too tiresome to respond to.

And no - I am not running out of arguments. The two you just quoted are still valid and need no further elaboration. If you think yours are better, then go with them. Each to his own. In fact, what you will see at the micros is people folding KK 100 bb deep (because they believe people in general don't 4-bet bluff - much less nits). You'l find threads here on the subject. So many will not agree with you.

Looks like a fold to me, and a rather easy one too. UTG is super tight (low total PFR and he will open even tighter from UTG). We should be calling against that guy with a tight range and CO should not be bluff squeezing that much. Even if UTG would fold to CO's sqz, a big part of our calling range can call a squeeze too. So not too good spot for CO to bluff.
When UTG 4bets here, his range is mostly AA and KK, in some cases he can have AKs too. There are zero bluffs in UTG's range.

ps.
What did you mean by saying that we don't need much fold equity? It is clear that we don't have so much FE that we could get autoprofit -> we need some equity too, and it is also clear that we don't have that.
Also would be nice to see a hand where a nit 5bet bluffs on NL10. I think I have never seen a spot where a guy 5bets and then folds. Also 4bet bluffs are not that common at the micros even if the game is a bit more aggressive than before.

Originally posted by la55i
...
ps.
What did you mean by saying that we don't need much fold equity?
...

Some mean that overlay = dead money in the pot counts as fold equity. That's okay because there is no precise definition of FE. But one should not double count FE and dead money if one does keep them apart. Folding out KK would be FE, no matter how one defines it, but that will not happen. But there is a little dead money if the squeezer goes out.