Hand Discussion, 1/1 NLH (1 Viewer)

[HanShot1st]

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.

 

[kmccormick100]

5betting JJ is a huge overplay usuaally, especially with that short of effective stacks unless your villain is a maniac. I’m probably folding them to a standard sized 4 bet as well, he gave you a price to call.

I think the mistake is your 3bet sizing - my standard 3bet is going to be 3-4x the raise + any limps, so your 3b should have been to something like $24-30 which means his 4 bet is going to be close to a shove unless he clicks it back to $60-70. I’m probably calling a min raise 4 bet and folding to a jam. The call of the downbet on the flop is probably ok, though I’m expecting him to have a lot of AA KK and AK here, so a fold isn’t even unreasonable drawing to probably 4 outs.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Your 3-bet was too small. Villain's 4-bet was also too small, as was his flop bet.

Really, your best spot to fold was preflop, to the original 4-bet. You're not getting implied odds to set-mine with such short stacks, so either you should play the hand like you're ahead or fold it.

Then the flop bet. Villain bets less than the preflop raise amount. (We're calling this a "down bet" now? Don't think I've ever heard that phrase.) I can totally understand not wanting to fold to an undersized bet; I've totally fallen into this trap myself. But in this case, Villain has to have been basically BSing you the entire way for you to be ahead, and that doesn't seem feasible. All of the hands you assigned to his range are crushing you now, and you're not getting odds to chase a gutshot. Of course, you chased it and hit it, but run this out a few thousand times with randomized cards, and you'll be deep in the red by the end of the simulation.

IMO, JJ is actually one of the easiest "big" hands to dump preflop, especially sitting deeper than 100 BB. It would behoove you to think of it that way too. It's technically a face pair, but you're always going to be behind the range of someone who's exhibiting a high level of strength preflop. If you put in the first raise and everyone else is passive, JJ may well be good, but as soon as someone else starts pushing it, you're likely to be on thin ice or worse.

 

[JustinInMN]

Your 3-bet was too small. Villain's 4-bet was also too small, as was his flop bet.

I agree with this. Probably should have been in the 20+ raange for a 3 bet.

I concur after facing the 4 bet, calling is off the table. Putting in 25 more to win potentially 100 more it's not a set mine spot. So hero needs to decide about the opponent. Mainly how many unpaired hands does he have? Is it more than AK? Can he have pairs lower than JJ? If you are getting a bunch of noes I am okay folding here. If he's wider than the range you assign, then it probably is good to go for the 5 bet shove. A smaller 5 bet and a fold is atrocious.

The 5 bet shove is mainly for protection and can probably get called by AK or AQ if those are in villian's range. So I don't think it's a game theory disaster.

Then the flop bet. Villain bets less than the preflop raise amount. (We're calling this a "down bet" now? Don't think I've ever heard that phrase.)

I have heard this phrase recently, more in terms of tournaments, but it does mean exactly this.

As played the flop call is bad. It's 25 to win 90ish and potentially another 70 or so, which may be very difficult to get paid if hero makes a straight, not to mention the probability of full house redraws.

Turn play is obvious. Only good street imo.

 

[Frogzilla]

Preflop-decent. I’d prefer either a flat or a bigger 3-bet. At least $20, probably $25. As played, JJ can call here. 5-bet would be very nonstandard with JJ. Call > Fold > Raise

Flop I would consider a check-raise bluff here- only sizing is jam. It wouldn’t have worked this hand. Other than that, it’s a fold, never a call. Raise or Fold > Call

Turn, great check to lead it off.

 

[Highli99]

Your stack size is too small for the gutterball call on the flop. The implied odds are just not high enough. -EV move in the long run. I personally am not fond of the check/raise jam option on the flop either since that flop is just terrible for your range versus villain.

I’d probably fold this hand 80% preflop and 20% of the consider calling / jamming based on my confidence reading the player.

Like the way the hand played out for you though! Villain will be telling that bad beat for a while.

 

[MattyMatt]

I think I agree that on the flop the odds aren't there for a call. Getting roughly 4:1 when the out odds are, what... 11:1 against? I think even betting out there is difficult since we don't have a read on the villain and since the stacks are now so short. Any bet seems like we're committing no? So even if the villain sits on less than AA but hit the flop somehow he'll call and then if we don't hit - which we won't the vast majority of the time - we're pretty much committed and losing.

Pre-flop I have less of a problem with though. But again, not knowing the villain who knows...

Another thought about this is that the game is playing big relative to the BB. I'd say playing very tight has to be right if your game plays like 2/5 and your stack is 135. I've been in games where one player has the bankroll to splash chips around and even declared "This is now a 2/4 game" when our game was 0.25/0.50. When that happens you'll just have to adapt I think.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

Honestly, and I'm not saying this to be mean, but you misplayed this at every opportunity. I just hope winning the hand doesn't reinforce your idea that you played it well, because over the long term you'll be losing money.

First of all, you three-bet way to small. You could have made it $30, and still found a fold to a 4 bet. Or you could have just called the $6 and not played a huge pot out of position, either option isok.

Secondly, you called the 4-bet knowing you were beat without the correct odds to set-mine. Even though his raise was only $25, he only had about $90 behind, and considering you flop a set about one in eight times he'd need at least $200 for this to be profitable, probably more because of the times he also flops a set.

Thirdly, you called with a gutter on the flop. $25 to win $120 means you'd have to hit the queen one out of 6 times to break even, but since there are only 4 queens to come, and presumably 45 cards that you don't know about, you'd need about $300 in the pot to break even. And yeah, you can talk about implied odds, but even if the queen hits, there still isn't $300 if you add the remainder of his stack. And if the queen doesn't fall on the turn, villain is likely jamming the rest of his stack, and then what are you going to do?

So in conclusion, bad play, lucky result.

 

[JustinInMN]

Preflop-decent. I’d prefer either a flat or a bigger 3-bet. At least $20, probably $25. As played, JJ can call here.

I think I am warming to the pf call line myself. Now if hero honestly thinks villian is only 4betting kk, aa, and ak as stated in the op, then really only a fold is acceptable.

But if the range is down to say 99 with some AK, aq, then maybe.

But flatting here means folding flops like these that hit even the weakest parts of villian's range pretty hard except for 99.

So yes, hero called 25 to win 90ish and potentially an additional 70. So best case 7-1 on a 10-1 draw that is even diminished by probable full house draws.

There is no saving grace on the flop call unless villian is maniacal enough to do this with under pairs.

 

[MattyMatt]

I always struggle with what to do pre-flop in these cases. While it may be correct one way or another mathematically we are dealing with human opponents. So granted, hero didn't know villain in this case, but I think there are other cases where you could argue that folding too much to that $6 raise is worse than calling, assuming we're not re-raising. After all, if we're either re-raising / folding or straight up folding then it shouldn't take too long for the villain to figure out that you're never ever floating with anything in early position. So wouldn't that make you predictable?

Granted, no matter how you slice it post-flop becomes difficult, but still.

And I'd like to think that after this lucky play the villain will now always have this in the back of his head. Pure math it's probably a losing strategy, but live if you adjust appropriately and exploit this? I'm not 100% sure it's that bad.

Or am I on cocaine?

 

[WedgeRock]

Im not gonna advocate that Hero played it well, but Villain made mistakes too. Top set on a Broadway flop and he bets $25 into $93?! What did he have for Hero's range? Unless it's air, he's inviting calling stations when he should be looking to shut it down before disaster ensues, IMO.

Say what you want about PF action, but if Villain bets $75 on the flop after it's checked to him, no way Hero calls.

 

[MattyMatt]

Villain made mistakes too. Top set on a Broadway flop and he bets $25 into $93?! What did he have for Hero's range? Unless it's air, he's inviting calling stations when he should be looking to shut it down before disaster ensues, IMO.

Say what you want about PF action, but if Villain bets $75 on the flop after it's checked to him, no way Hero calls.

I think I disagree with that though.

The villain made the call unprofitable to the hero, and over time the villain wins here.

"Shutting it down" is really leaving money on the table in the long run the way I see it. For cash games I don't think that's good. For a tournament if you're on the bubble then that's a different thing.

If anything this (to me) ends up being about how risk-averse you are as well as how you read your opponent's ability to do the math and then fold "correctly".

 

[HanShot1st]

Im not gonna advocate that Hero played it well, but Villain made mistakes too. Top set on a Broadway flop and he bets $25 into $93?! What did he have for Hero's range? Unless it's air, he's inviting calling stations when he should be looking to shut it down before disaster ensues, IMO.

Say what you want about PF action, but if Villain bets $75 on the flop after it's checked to him, no way Hero calls.

Agreed, any serious bet on the flop by the villain, and the hero folds.

In hindsight the villan’s inital raise to only 6 was to induce a 3 bet. Which the hero provides, albeit too small of a raise, which causes the villain to severely under bet his 4 bet.

Extremely poor bet sizing, essentially allowed this fiasco to continue. And essentially is what stacked the villain. This hand should have ended preflop.

 

[HanShot1st]

I must say, I am really enjoying reading this thread. Please keep the analysis coming, unless you feel it’s been beat to death, and we move on to another hand.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Another angle we could take is to question whether to 3-bet at all. (Just noticed after I posted that Chippy mentioned this above.) I'm not entirely opposed to simply flatting the $6 preflop raise in this hand. Obviously, in hindsight, flatting is best if we know Villain has AA, but I just mean it as a general approach to playing JJ.

Sure, in some situations, reraise all day. Short-handed game, short-stacked tournament spots, against certain opponents, whatever. But in general in a cash game playing 100BB+ deep, I'm not a fan of reraising with JJ unless the situation specifically calls for it. It's just not a hand I want to play a big, bloated pot with if I get multiple calls, nor do I want to find myself making a big raise and having to fold to a 4-bet.

Jacks are a middle pair as far as I'm concerned, and I don't mind playing them mostly as a set-mine. Not only does it put me in more manageable spots, but it makes my preflop flatting range more confusing for anyone who's paying attention.

 

[Frogzilla]

In hindsight the villan’s inital raise to only 6 was to induce a 3 bet.

“Only” 6bb open?

Top set on a Broadway flop and he bets $25 into $93?!

I see this mistake a lot in 4-bet pots. Folks get used to a “normal” flop bet, and underbet the c-bet. I’d guess that’s what happened here, especially knowing he is dominating hero and wants to extract value.

On this specific stack depth though his mistake isn’t the flop sizing. He is playing 95 back and a 93 pot. You have to get it in with top set. Flop overbet jam doesn’t get much value. 25 flop 70 turn is actually pretty decent line, much better than 45->50. I could also see 30->65, which is probably my favorite sizing combo here.

He followed it up with 35 on the turn...who knows what that is about. That’s the biggest error I think.

 

[Jimulacrum]

“Only” 6bb open?

It's funny, I actually think of 6 BB as being on the small side too, but it varies by game.

My regular weekly game (which I'm attending tonight) is $0.25/$0.50, and 6 BB is on the extreme low end of preflop raise sizes. Once in a while people will min-raise, and we have someone who likes to make it $2.25 or $2.50 sometimes, but generally it's $3–4 or more.

My average raise size is about $5, and I still end up playing a disproportionate number of raised pots with several players to the flop. Hell, even making it more than $5 rarely clears the field, and don't even get me started on straddled pots. I'll have a $1 straddle out, get 6 calls, and make it $15 to go. I'll be lucky if more than 1 or 2 of the limpers fold, and often that $15 is a significant portion of people's stack sizes.

Sometimes, I look back on the days when I thought 3 BB was a standard preflop raise and laugh.

I see this mistake a lot in 4-bet pots. Folks get used to a “normal” flop bet, and underbet the c-bet. I’d guess that’s what happened here, especially knowing he is dominating hero and wants to extract value.

On this specific stack depth though his mistake isn’t the flop sizing. He is playing 95 back and a 93 pot. You have to get it in with top set. Flop overbet jam doesn’t get much value. 25 flop 70 turn is actually pretty decent line, much better than 45->50. I could also see 30->65, which is probably my favorite sizing combo here.

He followed it up with 35 on the turn...who knows what that is about. That’s the biggest error I think.

Dude's probably just clueless about what he should be considering when he decides on a bet size.

 

[Jordan Downs]

I agree with the opinion that you over played your JJs. Plus you are being "Results oriented" in saying or thinking you wouldn't have had the opportunity to win the hand if you folded. As mentioned by several already, you lose in this spot much more than you win. Further, to stay in the pot when every card on the flop hit the range you put him on is also a very bad play, regardless of his downbet size. You're drawing to four Qs, which on the turn is 17% and the river 9%. You can add runner runner Js to your outs, which are respectively another 8% on the turn and 4% on the river. So basically, you're missing the turn 75 out of 100 times and the river 87 out of 100 times. A losing play long term no matter how you slice it. You're best to just say you sucked out on the turn when you shouldn't have been there and move on. IMO this whole line is an example of what not to do.

 

[MattyMatt]

I'm not sure I see the point in having a blind that low and then ending up with constant 6BB raises pre-flop. Seems like the blinds could come up in that case.

To me 6BB pre-flop is pretty darn hefty.

 

[HanShot1st]

I'm not sure I see the point in having a blind that low and then ending up with constant 6BB raises pre-flop. Seems like the blinds could come up in that case.

To me 6BB pre-flop is pretty darn hefty.

Not my home, not my game.

 

[HanShot1st]

I agree with the opinion that you over played your JJs. Plus you are being "Results oriented" in saying or thinking you wouldn't have had the opportunity to win the hand if you folded. As mentioned by several already, you lose in this spot much more than you win. Further, to stay in the pot when every card on the flop hit the range you put him on is also a very bad play, regardless of his downbet size. You're drawing to four Qs, which on the turn is 17% and the river 9%. You can add runner runner Js to your outs, which are respectively another 8% on the turn and 4% on the river. So basically, you're missing the turn 75 out of 100 times and the river 87 out of 100 times. A losing play long term no matter how you slice it. You're best to just say you sucked out on the turn when you shouldn't have been there and move on. IMO this whole line is an example of what not to do.

So at no point do you feel that protecting your 3 bet is important, or your big blind? Does that not make you exploitable?

Discuss...

 

[BGinGA]

Protecting your 3-bet or blind is just as exploitable, only usually more expensive. If you would 3-bet/call wirh both total air and/or pocket aces, then by all means do so with JJ, too.

But I prefer to put chips in the pot when either ahead, or getting the correct odds to do so.

 

[1A25R]

I'm still very green when making analysis of someone else game, but I'll give a try and I allow myself the right to be wrong;


Raise pre-flop of $15 is too light into a $18 pot and 3 act. I do not consider that a 3 bet but a miss-click.(*)
Eventually if UTG had flat the $15 you could had a 4 way flop ( then a different hand, with a different result )

Flat the $40 raise is OK to see the flop because is JJ and it's cash game, but in the context that you explained (is giving villain credit for a premium hand here. AA, KK, or AK) I fold.

V: raises to 6
call 6
call 6
H: raise 15
UTG +2 raises to $40

H: 20%
V: 80%
JJvs AA = 1:4
$25 to call into a $73 pot = 1:3



FLOP
$98 in the pot
Flop A, K, 10 rainbow
V bet $25 into a $98 pot = 1:4
H: 15%
V: 85%
JJvs AA = 1 : 5

I stick to "hero given credit for a premium AA, KK, or AK"
So : fold, no doubt. And keep my lost to a minimum.


Then, well...

turn Q

H: 75 %
V: 20 %
Tie: 5%

so why not All-in, but in that situation.... why all-in with 75% chances to win is OK but not folded at the flop with only 15% ?


(* yes I know it was live... Ho! c'mon, why so serious?)

 

[MattyMatt]

Not my home, not my game.

Oh I wasn't criticizing you. I just think it's odd to hear about games that work that way.

So at no point do you feel that protecting your 3 bet is important, or your big blind? Does that not make you exploitable?

Discuss...

If you are referring to the post-flop play then I don't think that's a good option. I know there's this common discussion about ranges and GTO, but at some point you also have to win pots (exploit). So, if this is a losing play if you do it all the time then what you're left with is protecting your range, but I think what's missing in the discussions about protecting your range is that in live games it's only of value if your opponent is a) capable of perceiving any range you might have at all (most don't), and b) then properly (from your perspective) adjusts to it. I don't think "b" is necessarily true either.

So in other words I doubt you will in the long run actually protect your range and avoid exploitability by playing the way you did post-flop. Pre-flop is a different matter...

in my opinion.

 

[MattyMatt]

in the context that you explained (is giving villain credit for a premium hand here. AA, KK, or AK) I fold.

I understand the odds as a rationale for this, but I still have to question why we do this. Sure, this isn't a tournament, but the odds and the way they're relevant surely depend heavily on what our intent is. If this was an all-in situation in a tournament then of course we're solidly behind and can fold without any problems (assuming the read is correct), right? But suppose we're actually good players and generally outplay our opponents post-flop in cash games: Is that still a fold?

Looking at it a different way:

Clearly we haven't seen this villain before and we don't have a lot to go on. And we certainly don't have the proof in this hand that the villain is sitting on AA / KK. So, if we start folding everything other than AA/KK then we're super exploitable. I mean, suppose you then have AA later in the evening and the hand plays out about the same pre-flop but post flop it's all medium cards and possibly two or three of the same suit; the villain is going to be very comfortable with you having an over pair and outplay you with little effort. It's really not that hard to lose a lot of money with AA post-flop if you don't hit...

Actually, seen from this perspective I think even calling $6 pre-flop rather than re-raising makes sense. I know the mantra is to be aggressive and to push out others and polarize, but with a medium pair why not see the flop cheaper if possible...?

 

[DrStrange]

Tldr; call $6, fold to the 4-bet, fold flop, Jam turn.

Late to the thread, but that doesn't matter much because:

It is best not to post the results in the opening post of a thread. Let's have time to discuss each decision point without knowing what is coming next. You will get a far better range of opinions when the "right" answer is unknown.

Preflop: Hero is out of position, leading me to want to play JJ as a set mining hand. There would be tables where a three-bet would work, but we don't know that about this table. If three betting, it needs to be much larger than $15. The pot will be $25 once Hero catches up to the $6 raise - I think a full pot size raise is in order, $30 all day. Preflop is call >> raise > fold. The shallow effective stacks makes a 3-bet almost pot committed vs a four bet. I have to wonder what the plan would be if the 3-bet gets flatted and Hero has to see a flop. Does he JAM or fold on a flop with over cards? The stack to pot ratio will be close to one.

Hero should fold to the 4-bet unless villain is a complete LAGtard.

Flop: [ let's assume villain is semi-competent or better ] Villain's micro bet is really polarized - top two pair+ / third pair or worse. Hero is in a reverse implied odds situation meaning he can lose more chips than he will win if JJ is some how ahead on the flop. Hero is often drawing to six outs or less. I am assuming Hero plans to fold to turn aggression missing the flop.

The micro bet looks callable - risking $25 to win $148 plus implied odds. Let's assume villain stacks off 100% for the extra $70. Keep in mind villain has a redraw - 20% holding a set + 7% for a chop or 10% with two pair + 7% for a chop. Be lazy and call the redraw 20% knowing that is a bit high. Hero is risking $25 to win $218 on a 4-out gut shot. That is a money losing draw. BUT it get worse because 20% of the time the villain's redraw comes in. My quick EV calculation is calling $25 leads to an expected loss of $20. Calling $25 will be one of the worst decisions hero makes this session but not THE worst.

I didn't consider the impact of Hero spiking a set on the turn. That could lead to a set vs set disaster for hero or a set vs top two pair situation favoring Hero. On a bad day, villain holds AQ - not in villain's main range but AQs is a marginally plausible 4-bet.

On an UGLY day villain played AJ or QJ as a 4-bet hand. It would a dubious 4-bet at best but Hero would be truly screwed should those hands be in play.

DrStrange

PS don't worry much about meta game and exploitation at the moment. Make the best decisions even if really observant villains might be able to take advantage of you. Basic plays are better than fancy plays at the moment.

 

[Jordan Downs]

So at no point do you feel that protecting your 3 bet is important, or your big blind? Does that not make you exploitable?

Discuss...

Pre-flop, as you already stated, your 3-bet was on the smaller side. His 4-bet is almost a 3x raise, (IMO appropriate for him). I'm not gonna fold JJs here and playing against a villain with no history as you described, I'd call and have him on the same range you put him on AA, KK, AK. I'm okay with all of that.

It's from the flop on that I believe your play was a losing strategy. Based on the range you put villain on everything got there. I wouldn't necessary say you're only set-mining here, (it would be flop dependent) but with the flop that came out, I certainly would not have continued on with the hand. You lose in that spot much more than you win. That fact is mathematics and not debatable, it's just a fact. Of course there are many other factors that come into play but much of them are unknown due to your lack of knowledge or history with this villain. Even if all the cards were face up, villains set of aces still lose a percentage of the time. Over the long period of time though villains hand wins the most money in this scenario.

That's the point I'm trying to make. I hope I explained my stand point well enough. In any case, thanks for sharing and starting a good thread.

 

[1A25R]

Well you can get out the odds as a rationale from the equation and then is just luck. Then I can go all-in with 4 - 8 off because it's my preferred hand and it will be an OK answer in that context.
But because is a cash game, in the long run I will lost money, that's the other part of the rational and odds.
If I take the flop example (because is when I would had fold 100%) over 1000 hands played in the same way, with a $135 stack, I'll win win $27'000 but lost $108'000

Again, one important piece of information to deal is that hero put Vilan on AA, KK or AK. Therefore I'm way behind independently if is true or not, if we ignore this the analyze is result oriented.

Sure, this isn't a tournament, but the odds and the way they're relevant surely depend heavily on what our intent is. If this was an all-in situation in a tournament then of course we're solidly behind and can fold without any problems

This would be a different hand, with a different result. What I mean is that if we translate the same hand to a tournament there are other information to consider such as : where you are in the tournament, close to the bubble? ITM? Vilan Stack? Blinds? Average stack? Those points can made that it's more than OK in certain circumstances to go all in pre flop, even against AA.

But those infos are not relevant for a cash game because you don't play for all the chips in game but for the amount of your stack

suppose you then have AA later in the evening and the hand plays out about the same pre-flop but post flop it's all medium cards and possibly two or three of the same suit;

In that case it's a different hand with a potential different result. And as it's an hypothesis, anything could happen in THAT hand (for which the info in incomplete.) As we say here "avec des si on refait le monde" ( with IFs we remake the world)
(in US you say : If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride?)


But again, I can be wrong

 

[MattyMatt]

This would be a different hand, with a different result. What I mean is that if we translate the same hand to a tournament there are other information to consider such as : where you are in the tournament, close to the bubble? ITM? Vilan Stack? Blinds? Average stack? Those points can made that it's more than OK in certain circumstances to go all in pre flop, even against AA.

Possibly, yes.

All I meant to say was that comparing the strength of hole cards can lead to different conclusions depending on whether it's a cash game or tournament. I think we're saying the same thing.

In that case it's a different hand with a potential different result. And as it's an hypothesis, anything could happen in THAT hand (for which the info in incomplete.) As we say here "avec des si on refait le monde" ( with IFs we remake the world)
(in US you say : If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride?)


But again, I can be wrong

My point was to reflect on potential table images and the possibility of being exploited. We can either consider those things or we can ignore them. If we choose to consider them then we won't have to make the caveat you made above because that will always be the case. The possibility of having the exact same hand happen again is near zero, so it's always going to be "a different hand with a potential different result".

I think my line of reasoning was good. If you are guessing that the opponent has a hand like AA and you fold, and the future villains sniff that out, they're going to bet you out of pots continuously when you're in early position even with JJ. And then the only time you call they'll know you have AA / KK and can adapt. What then follows on a board like 10d, 9d, 8h is that they bet and you're in a tricky spot. What would a typical villain bet in position pre-flop? Certainly 10/10, no? So, now you're behind. Would they bet Q/J suited? Probably. Now you're behind. Ok, so bet/call. Turn is a diamond. Now what? Would they bet/call KdQd? Probably. Now you're behind again. All of this would be a lesser problem if they didn't know what you had - in general - which in turn means;

at least some of the time we probably have to play hands like that.

 

[1A25R]

My point was to reflect on potential table images and the possibility of being exploited.

That's correct, it's a point to consider when analyzing a session and not a single hand (or if you play regularly against the same player(s))

Now, let's go to the other side of the fence using your point of table image and vilan capacity to adapt.
What's the image of Hero that called with JJ into flopped AAA ? How Vilan will adapt? Should he adapt?