about squeeze

[marvin]

P4 limp, P3 raise, P2 cold call, P1 e P0 fold, SB 3bet (squeeze), BB call, P4 call, P3 4bet, P2 call, SB and BB fold.
in this action,
1) if we want count the opportunity to raise a squeeze (about BB) it is 0, why he hadnt put money voluntary before the 3bet. right?
2) if we want count the opportunity to raise a squeeze (about P3) it is 1 and his stat (raise to squeeze) is 1/1. right?
3) if we want count the opportunity to doing a 4bet (about P3) it is 1 and his stat (4bet pf) is 1/1. right?

other situation:
P4 limp, P3 raise, P2 cold call, P4 3bet (limp reraise)
4) p4 is a squeezer in this action? or squeezer cannot be original limper?

[kraada]

(1) Correct, BB could have raised the SB squeeze but he did not, he called instead.
(2) P3 did not raise a squeeze - he squeezed. Only the BB in this example could have raised the squeeze as he's the only one that defended a squeeze.
(3) Yes, P3 had one opportunity to 4 bet and he did so.
(4) A squeeze must come from someone who had not previously put money in the pot.

[WhiteRider]

1. The BB is not facing a sqeeze because they haven't yet entered the pot, so don't have an opportunity to raise a squeeze.
2. Correct. P3 made the initial raise, and when the SB reraised after the cold call P3's raise was squeezed, so he faces a squeeze and has the opportunity to raise it (which he does). If anyone else had raised between the SB and P3 then he would not have had that opportunity.
3. Yes.
4. I tend to agree with Kraada, but in PT3 it seems that in this situation P4's reraise is a squeeze.

[marvin]

you say: "(2) P3 did not raise a squeeze - he squeezed. Only the BB in this example could have raised the squeeze as he's the only one that defended a squeeze.
BUT THE SQUEEZER I THINK IS THE SMALL BLIND...

you say "A squeeze must come from someone who had not previously put money in the pot." but you mean "Vouluntary put money"?, or put in each case (Then big blinds or small blinds cannot make a squeeze)?

[kraada]

Sorry the naming confused me a little. P3 didn't face a squeeze though - once there's a caller (BB) there's no more squeeze defense.

[WhiteRider]

Sorry the naming confused me a little. P3 didn't face a squeeze though - once there's a caller (BB) there's no more squeeze defense.

I don't think that is right (in PT3 terms at least). Anyone who had VP$IP before the squeeze raise - from limpers before the original raiser to the last cold caller will face a squeeze until someone 4-bets.

So in the original example:

P4 limp, P3 raise, P2 cold call, P1 e P0 fold, SB 3bet (squeeze), BB call, P4 call, P3 4bet, P2 call, SB and BB fold.

..P4 and P3 face a squeeze (the BB doesn't because they hadn't VP$IP before the SB's squeeze raise). P2 does not face a squeeze because there has been a 4-bet before the action gets back to them.

[marvin]

GOING TO CONCLUSION (ACCORDINGO PT3, NOT OTHER DEFINITION)...
1) blinds can make squeeze if some one has raised and at least 1 another player has put money in the pot (limpingo or cold calling)
1.A) i.e: P4 limp, P3 raise, BB 3bet (squeeze)
2) a limper can make squeeze if someone raise and another palyer call (according stato of PT3): es P4 limp, P3 raise, BB call, P4 3bet (squeeze). IN THIS ACTION P4 has incremented his stat of "limp reraise" and his stat of "squeeze executed".
3) for having opportunity of squeeze you must 3bet after 1 raise and at least 1 caller of that raise or/and 1 limper and not important if you was limper or blinds, or a player that hadnt punt money in the pot.

3.A) i.e: P4 raise, P3 cold call, BB 3bet (squeeze)
3.B) i.e: p4 limp, P3 limp, P0 raise, P4 3bet (squeeze: there is 1 limper and 1 raiser that are squeezed)

4) IF THE THINGS ARE LIKE I HAVE WRITTEN HERE, MAY BE THAT WILL BE CHANGED IN FUTURE? i.e: team of development modifes (squeeze opportunity) i.e.: p4 limp, P3 limp, P0 raise, P4 3bet (AND THIS MOVE WILL BE ONLY LIMP RERAISE NOT SQUEEZE)?

[WhiteRider]

1. Not exactly. You can only squeeze after a raise (2-bet) and a call of the 2-bet. A limp and then a raise does not make a squeeze opp, so in you A example the
Blinds can squeeze in that situation, though.

2. Correct.

3. Not exactly - See 1.
3A) Correct - this is a squeeze.
3B) No - this is not a squeeze because there is no cold call of P0's raise.

4) No need - this is correct already. See 1 and 3 (and 3B).

[marvin]

WELL it seems ok. last question (may be it was implicit by your answers but i wish a confirm):

P2 limp, P1 raise, BB call, P2 3bet (limp-reraise AND squeeze?)
i mean in this case, P2 has increased his limp-reraise and his squeeze correct?

[WhiteRider]

Correct.