![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I'm posting this here rather than the mid limit forum since there is so much discussion of the Ocean 11 game here. We are trying to trek down to Ocean's 11 at least once or twice a month. Most of the time when I am there the 20/40 has been played without overs (probably because the 40/80 was going) and I have played. I am not quite ready for playing using the overs button.
If I see a game with half the table is playing overs, is it still a good play for me? What if I am one of only two or three not playing overs? What strategy adjustments should I make?
I did talk to one famous (infamous?) poster but was hoping for a little more input.
Regards,
Rick
I believe Mason has an article in Poker Essays II (or maybe I) about playing the overs.
Hi, Can anyone tell me the relative advantages and disadvantages of dealing twice once all the money is in? Thanks!
the advantage is none at all unless you go on tilt when stuck.
the disadvantge is that if you do this with people they will be much more likely to call you when they have outs when you would rather they fold. if you only play with the nuts or giant hands maybe you want the calls but for most players you dont want them. what tends to happen is that your opponents make less folding mistakes when you bet. it also slows the games down and less people get stuck and steam. and less people get way ahead and give you the chance to break someone and win alot from maybe a bad player. another thing is that too many bad players get to see wqhat the good players are getting their money in on. all deals are bad for poker. the best hand should win all the money. however since they let you do it it should be done when you feel its to your best interests.
80/160 hand. I am UTG (seat 3) with AsJs. I raise.
Seat 6 calls (loose/aggressive player). Seat 7 3 bets (semi-tight/aggressive player)
I put seat 6 on a myriad of possible hands. I put seat 7 on a big pair or AK, AQs
One of the blinds call, I call, seat 6 calls.
Flop is 876 with 2 spades.
I check, seat 6 bets, seat 7 raises, blind folds, I call.
turn is a 9s - giving me the nut flush.
I check, hoping to checkraise vs a big pair or a T. And I don't necessarily mind if both check too, because I don't mind a free card in this instance. And there's a good chance if I bet out, that they would both fold...however if it is checked around on the turn, I don't mind betting or check/raising on the river.
They both check.
River is a 9c - board is 99876 with 3 spades.
I decide to check again, because I am almost sure that if Seat 6 also checks that Seat 7 will now bet the big pair. To my surprise Seat 6 bets....and Seat 7 calls quickly.
In this case, clearly I can beat Seat 7...but seat 7 probably won't call a raise...so the only concern I have is seat 6.
Seat 6 is very loose, very aggressive and very tricky. I think for a bit and decide that he either had a set on the flop and now has a boat or has only two pair or just a 9 (for 3 9s) and wouldn't call my raise. I don't put him on a T or 2 spades because I doubt it was likely he would have also checked the turn.
So, I think that either seat 6 has me beat or won't call a raise anyway....and I know seat 7 wouldn't call a raise.
So I decide to just call.
Thoughts?
Where is this game? If it's anywhere on the west coast, I would raise the river without thinking and then possibly fold if reraised. I just don't put seat six on a full. If he's really loose aggressive, he probably would not have checked the turn in spite of the board. I may be wrong, but I would raise the river.
I am in small blind with 87o. UTG (loose player) calls. Seat 6 (maniac) raises. Seat 7 calls, button calls.
First decision for me - should I call or not? I decide to call.
BB and UTG both call - 6 players see the flop, 6 BB so far.
Flop is 762 with two spades.
I check, BB checks, UTG checks, maniac bets. Seat 7 (ok player) calls, button (tight/aggressive, solid player) raises.
Second decision for me - should I call or not? If no one reraises, I am getting good odds. Given the possibility of straight draws and flush draws, and I may actually have the best hand or turn two pair / trips, I decide to call. But I think either way (fold or call), that it is close. Possibly I should have raised?
BB and UTG fold, maniac and Seat 6 calls. There are now 10BB in the pot
Turn is a Qc.
I check, manaic bets...Seat 6 and button both call.
At this point, I'm not sure I can pinpoint the maniac (pssibly has a Q, but maybe still only AK)...but I think I've pretty much pegged seat 6 and the button on draws, flush and/or straight draws.
So, my hand may be good right now....I call - 14BB in the pot.
turn is a 3h - the only draw that the river helps is 54, and I doubt seat 6 or the button would have played it...still, I'm not sure if I have the best hand, cause the maniac may havae a bigger pair anyway.
I check. Maniac bets. Seat 6 and button both fold (I was correct, they were on draws).
So, I am faced with 15:1 on my call with 87 and the board is 762Q3
I call - maniac turns over QJ.
What do you think about each call? Was I a stupid calling station, were the decisions close, would you have folded at any point?
You got sucked in playing small connectors out of position. Bad call every step of the way.
I would have folded on the flop thinking the solid player had an overpair.
I know there will be a lot of variability depending on what sort of game one wants, but if you were hosting a no limit game and were trying to establish a blind structure that would make the game fair but exciting, how do you decide on the size of the blinds, taking into account the # of players and the amount of money on the table.
Is there some formula to use?
thanks
I sometimes host small no limit games, and we have typically used the 1$ + 2$ blind structure, with buy-ins between 100$ and 200$. This has been pretty workable and effective, for similar reasons mentioned by Ray Zee. His suggestion for structure would no doubt work equally well. I would not make the buy-in to blind ratio less than what it is in my game as you will frequently get all-in too early to have good action in the game. You have to make the blinds relatively small in relation to the size of the blinds or else your opening bets have little opportunity to significantly vary in size.
dave in cali
An even more important benefit for Shawn is that going all in here will give him a Baptism in Courage. Going all in in this spot will take him a long way towards developing that let's the two of us jump over the cliff together brinkmanship no limit attitude. Courage, afterall, is the key to winning no limit holdem. Going all in here will install that all important balls of steel into Shawn's psyche.
Thanks for all the post guys!
I was gone for a few days and just back from NY so I haven't had a chance to respond to any of the recent posts. I think going all-in on the flop is definitely a reasonable way to go, although I think this opponent would probably still call me with top pair good kicker. Do you think this all-in play is better against an aggressive opponent who could easily be betting a weak hand, or against a tight opponent who could lay down a strong hand, but probably isn't betting a weak one?
Also it seems better to me to make a large raise on the flop (large enough so he would have to fold a draw) and then if he calls to slow down if you miss on the turn. I do agree with Tommy though that I am right on the chipcount borderline between plays. If for example I only had 800$ dollars I should probably put it all in on the flop.
Shawn
As you can probably tell, I just got back from a night of playing pot limit hold'em. I play a weekly pot limit hold'em game with a $100 buy-in , it has a $1 and $2 blind structure. You would be surprised how big this game can get. At least once a week we see a $500 pot. The biggest pot I've seen in this game was $1300.
One more interesting hand:
Tight Player raises from the big blind after a few limpers have come in and the button raised a couple bucks. TP makes it about 26 to go.
Middle Position Player (MPP) - who is slightly on tilt after losing to a one-out draw and then a two-out draw - says "TP, I think you don't really have it this time" and raises all in for another 35 (on top of calling the 26).
TP calls and shows 33. MPP shows A3. MPP was right that TP didn't have a great hand. Was it the right move to reraise with A3? When you know your hand is mediocre at best, should you risk trying to push off another mediocre hand that may be slightly better than you? In this case MPP probably thought he had one over card to a baby pair so the TP's threes didn't really matter that they were part of his hand too. When I say tight for the TP I don't mean stupid tight I mean plays solid cards but has been known to make a move. 33 won the pot when no ace came.
I don't think it was a good big-bet move. I realize you have to make moves on people playing big-bet but I still think you need to pick your battle hands more carefully, even when making a move. For example, A9 or A8 even might have been a better play giving him two overcards. With A3 I just think you're screwed making that move.
natedogg
I think they both messed up. With 33 and callers in front, play for the set. Call and hope the set comes. With A3, the only thing you can do is steal the blinds or defend the big blind.
Right, and an ace is of course a major possibility here. When I just imagine playing this hand, the call on the end seems quite unlikely to win, simply because of that ace having made it hard for the opponent to call on the flop with no pair. But players do make such calls for various reasons, so I guess it could still be close, depending on the opponent.
When the pot's only laying--- what was it? 4-1?--- I think this is usually a good place to fold. Especially if an A flop and a good player just calls, since he would probably check raise (or otherwise aggressively play) any hand that didn't beat KQ.
I have a different opinion of the older Asian Alex than you do. The guy's a good player, no doubt about that, but he is prone to play a few too many hands as well as bluff much more than he needs to. Especially given a sense of weakness. Even when there is no sense of weakness, he's willing to put in three bets on the turn and bet again on the river. (which is exactly what he did in a hand later that evening where I raised in late position pre-flop, he called in the BB...I flopped bottom pair, he checked, I called...turned trips, he bet, I raised, he reraised...I called....he bet out on the flop, I called, and he just mucked his hand).
Thanks for your input Tommy, always appreciated from a guy like you! But in this case, I have a slightly different opinion of the same player in question, which is why I brought his name up (I believe asian Alex would definitely have called on the flop with KQ, KJ, QJ, no doubt about it, which gives him an opening on the river to bet once it was checked on the turn). This is actually interesting for two guys to have a different opinion of a third guy. Either one of us is wrong, or we are just seeing different sides of the guy's play (like the blind men feeling the elephant!) I guess this means that when I "peg" a player's style, I need to be less confident about my peg than I am now, cause if a player like you will disagree, then there is a chance (maybe even a good one) that you are right and I am wrong.
What's up Doc,
Our differing views on this hand stem from the way Asian Alex views you and how he views me. The eye-opener was when you told me about him three-betting you on the turn and then bluffing the river. I think he gears down when heads up against me. A mild form of soft-playing. I think that he thinks I do the same thing against him. I'd like to think that I don't, and that I get away with more bluffs because he relaxes, but after reading your post, I can't make that claim.
In that light, my "give up" approach to this hand against Alex makes a bit more sense. But if I were you, I think calling the river is a good play. By the way, that WAS my first answer, based on your description of the player, before I knew who it was.
This is a recurring theme here. We try to describe the opponents, and our own styles, so that others can play along. But because each combination of two players has its own history, tendencies, and perceptions, a few adjectives can rarely draw an accurate picture.
Tommy
yes, I agree...so much of it depends on your opponent, and how your opponent views you. thanks.
Great situation. The game started as 40-80 and it has been raised up through increments, at the prompting of a highly competent floorwoman (who happpened to be rather a babe too, although disregard this. yes this influenced my opinion, so sue me.), to 100-200. My bankroll is sufficient to play here although I prefer a little lower. This is limit hold'em. There are two confirmed 30-60 players, teriffied, refusing to show it, in the game. They are weak players in 20-40, although they could hold there own at 10-20 or lower. It is 10 handed, more typical of an average 40-80-, whatever that means.
preflop the big sent it to three bets; no further raises. Apologies.
next time you can't wait to toss several hundred bucks overboard, check yourself, write me a check for the same amount, and I promise I'll burn the check once as soon as it arrives :-).
Mark - I don't get your answer. Apparently you disagree with backdoor's play...but what use is it to just tell him its bad, versus telly him WHY it's bad? I think lots of people would be interested in the why part, including me, so if you could, please elaborate!
Thanks.
Doc,
Normally in a lower limit, I would three bet him without hesitation.
With KQo???? From the small blind? Without hesitation? I have to admit I was amazed by this statement. Why would you do this in a lower limit but not a higher limit? The play is just as bad regardless.
natedogg
Yes I would three bet HIM without hesitation. His range of raising hands in a lower limit are much lower and he plays very predictably. I play him alot. I can push him off winners and trap him with second best underpairs. I hate KQ off and feel it can be folded with little loss in almost any circumstance. But Im not worried about a three bet in some circumstances against him. I agree its a horrible hand, though.
I know you got the Q on the flop did you get the other Q to flop.
Paul
You state that you "know" the big blind has Aces. When the middle position just calls, you have to put him on AK or AA. If you were willing to put in the preflop bets and then check-raise according to plan,it seems to me that folding is out of the question unless an Ace hits the board.
unbeleivable,im a stud player and i know you shaold be playinf 5-10,you whimp.two pair beats aces,Da
Calling from the small blind with KQo against a player who is over his head who you know has a big hand is a bad play. You are out of position and more than likely badly dominated. Then to compound things the big blind makes it three bets. When he made it three bets, for whatever reason and I'm not trying to be critical, your thinking became very fuzzy. You flopped about as good a hand for KQ as you can expect with two other opponents on bigger hands preflop. With me having top two I am going to be hardpressed to put one of my opponents on pocket Kings or Queens. Unless an Ace comes or the board pairs I am going to play my hand real aggressively and maximize my good fortunes.
Bruce
if you know that one must have AA and the other AA KK or QQ, then 2/3 of the time youre drawing dead or to 1 out, and 1/3 of the time (when they both have AA) youre going to win 80%. so mathematically you are going to win 1 in 4 times.
heads up theres so much dead money check calling should be right, but since youre going to have to be putting in multiple bets each round, i think that it was a good fold.
i think it works out the same if you put BB on AA or KK.
brad
You failed to take AK into consideration.
Bruce
well, i was going by original poster that BB had aces for sure and original raiser who was playing over his head was "large", which i guess i thought meant a big pair. i guess some pessimism rubbed off:) of course that analysis is only good if you can put both players (for some reason) on a big pair.
brad
What more could you ask for on the flop? Sure someone could have KK or QQ, but unlikely since the other 2 of such cards are exposed. Likely AA or AK, given the action. Just call and slow down. I would not have been surprised to see the turn or river get checked around.
On the flop, the real danger is that the board pairs, even more than another A. A must-raise situation. If you can't raise with this hand, when would you?
My thinking used to go down the same path as yours in this situation. I'm revising.
He flops top-2 and is being bet at by a big hand. I call here on the flop, and if the board doesn't pair or flush on the turn, I check-raise THERE. The check-raise on the flop accomplishes nothing; they keep coming. When you hit them on the turn, they may still keep coming, but they face a much worse price to come after you with.
I'm not really interested in the game size, as I've played with HE players in live games at a variety of limits up to 80-160, and I've never found that the higher limit players necessarily have a lock on good play, just more of a bankroll to make moves with.
Calling with K-Qo in this position before the flop seems suicidal, but if you can't like this flop, what flop can you like?
"Anyway, I'm sitting in the small blind, with the KQ off, which regard I as a trap hand, and it is raised to me from a middle positon from a confirmed 30-60"
we read the rest.....
TILT would be the verdict for me. You might have a different story to tell though. good luck.
P.S do you ever think if you had callen them down you would have been looking at 3K or 3Q. Nothing like a few good scars.
If you are going to call preflop, you have to continue. EVen if you know one has A's if you only assume the other has one of AA AK AQ KK QQ JJ TT, then only 2 of these 27 situations are you behind.
There is 1 AA, 4 AK, 4 AQ, 1 KK, 1 QQ, 6 JJ, 6 TT.
Even if you exclude JJ and TT, you are ahead in 2/15 of the situations.
Thank you all for the posts.
I am going to have to take exception with your statement about three betting from the SB with KQ against this player in a smaller game. I reread your original post and your new post to see if I was missing anything. I think this approach is way to cavalier and often times you will be taking the worst of it both in hand value and position. Unless your opponent plays so poorly and predictably in the sense that he will give up on the flop without hitting anything immeadiately, or he will not call you down with an Ace high on occasion, or sometimes not even make a play at the pot with nothing, this does not seem to be a profitable play. Finding an opponent like that is a definite rarity no matter how good the games are.
Bruce
Bruce
OK. Fair enough.
I had posted a response to your post directly that seems to have gone missing or didn't work. It went something like.....I posted this hand for similiar reasons that you posted your J8 in the big blind hand. I guess this is what I get for razzing u on that. Anyway the big blind and I actually made a good profit that night, and went out a drank too much. I was actually pretty inebriated (it doesnt take much) when I made that post but it is surprisingly coherent.
I agree with you totally if the raise comes from the button or cutoff. If I play the hand I'll reraise. If the raise comes from UTG there's a good chance I'll pass on the hand. The biggest problem I find when I three bet with KQ and I miss the flop is my opponent can have just about anything with his steal raise and it becomes very difficult to play the hand. Do I want to stop the bleeding and give up on the flop or risk losing more by playing my hand aggressively when my opponent can have just about anything?
Bruce
40-80 Hold-em, the game is shorthanded with six players. I have AK on the button. I am the first entrant and raise and both blinds call. The flop comes 2 4 Q rainbow. I bet and the big blind calls. A Ten comes on the turn. I bet and the BB calls. A Five comes on the river. BB checks and I check. Big blind turns over 35o for a winner.
I pretty much gave up on the end putting the BB on a bigger hand. I figure he had a pair or Ace high was good for me. Putting him on a hand is tough. He would automatically call on the flop with any Ace or King or any hand which would give him a backdoor draw. Did I miss a bet on the river? I have a tight image. I am pretty sure had I bet he probably wouldn't have called, but then again who knows? Comments are appreciated.
Bruce
I call the river if I am the big blind here, especially if you are a tight player.
To me, a tight player would usually only bet the river for value with AA, KK, AQ, KQ, QQ, TT, and possibly AT or JJ. The price is right given there are as many button-raising hands that I can beat (AK, KJ, K9, AJ, A9-8-7.)
Unless you frequently bet the river in similar heads-up situations with an unimproved A-big or medium pocket pair, it isn't even close for me.
I count twelve small bets by the river. The pot is thus laying you 6:1 on a river bluff (plus the added possibility that he'll call you on the river with a hand such as AJ). I would bet the river.
You played correctly. You got a cheap showdown and you can beat any non-pair hand. If he is enough of an idiot to call your raise with Five-Trey offsuit he will surely call any river bet you make when he makes a pair. He hung around and caught an open ended straight draw. He missed on the river but happen to snag a pair. Every player imaginable is going to call a river bet here in a heads-up situation like this with a big pot at stake and hope you were playing slick. Nothing to be done.
Bruce,
Like Jim says, if sounds like there is a better than 6-1 chance that he will call you with any pair. If that's so, then checking it down with the nut-no-pair makes sense.
However, if there is a reasonable chance that he will call you down with a worse ace-high, then a bet becomes profitable. Yes, is loses a bet when he DOES have a pair and calls. But that failed bluff might earn you some payoffs down the road. Hard to put a pinpoint value on that. Plus, there's always the remote chance that he WILL lay down a pair, if you have a history of not bluffing on the river.
Conclusion? I have no idea what the best play is. lol
Tommy
You made the right play. So did the BB by checking. But he would've called a bet here. Ironically, you only get your head busted if you catch top pair on the river.
bruce,
I find that head up most players are going to call with a pair unless the board is very scary and coordinated and they have no part or it except for their pair yet think you probably do (have part of it).
I like checking the river with the best ace high hand but may have bet with a hand like KJ.
Regards,
Rick
I think you're right, that given this board a guy probably ought to bet KJ and check AK. If the board was different than maybe not, but with the two wheel cards out there you got to figure in the chances that he called with a cheesy A and is looking for a wheel. Had the board come, say, 68T, then maybe a check with KJ wouldn't be a bad idea.
Very good point about beting the K-J as opposed to checking the A-K.
By the way, does everyone agree that the BB couldn't possibly have played the hand worse?
Yes, I think the big blind played poorly. He had no business paying money taking a flop with Five-Trey offsuit to begin with and then he fails to lead when he flops an open ended straight draw in this shorthanded pot. Leading is right here because he will occasionally win the pot outright against only two opponents, one of whom has checked to him, and he has lots of outs if he gets called. Whether or not he should lead on the turn is more problematic.
Andy,
Calling pre flop with 35 offsuit was weak, as was checking and calling when you flop a draw short handed and the board is likely to miss the pre flop raiser.
So let’s pretend I’m in the big blind and Bruce raised. If the small blind calls, they can fight over my money every time with me holding a 3 5 offsuit. But I probably will defend suited, not so much that it is that much better against two opponents, but that you need to defend short handed with more hands then you normally would feel comfortable with. So you might as well be suited when you pick your spots.
After the small blind checked, I believe I would lead into Bruce. He has a tough decision with the small blind still in play unless he has a decent pair, top pair or overcards. I think he would fold AJ and worse hands (hopefully Bruce will comment). So I will win often enough right there combined with my outs if called to make it worthwhile. If Bruce folds and the small blind calls then at least I have position on future betting rounds.
Fortunately, most opponents play like the big blind and not like Bruce.
Regards,
Rick
no text
The big blind plays quite passively. With his draws he typically checks and calls and when he gets there he typically will lead or try for a check-raise. He is really very easy to read and predict. Had he led on the turn I more then likely would have passed. I just don't recall him getting really fancy in these type of situations. I know his play real well. I have played with him at least 40 hours heads-up or shorthanded. I don't recall him checkraising on the come much. When he leads he more then likely has the goods.
Bruce
Bruce
I think betting or calling on the river is a function of what you know about the person you are playing against. Since I know the players in the game you speak of, i can give you an example. I would definitely Not bet against Josh or Jay, but I might bet against Sam or Jim.
There I sit in 40-80 limit hold'em, ten handed, UTG with 98suited. I raise. It is called in three spots: middle position, the button, and the big blind. Hmmm.
Backdoor,
I have just a few comments.
You wrote: ”There I sit in 40-80 limit hold'em, ten handed, UTG with 98suited. I raise. It is called in three spots: middle position, the button, and the big blind. Hmmm.”
I’m starting to think that this kind of raise is usually suicide UTG or up front. If you need to mix up your play and show that you can hit some middle cards, I think raising with A8 suited (as Abdul suggests) is much better.
”Anyway, the flop comes four handed: - - Ks, 9h, 6d -- Nice flop by my read. I am aware the button is almost certainly going to bet if checked to, and I doubt anyone, with the exception of the blind, has a king. If they have a king its medium suited. I could be wrong but its my preliminary assessment.
Why do you think the button would bet? You raised, the flop contains a king and is otherwise somewhat disconnected. I would bet here.
”The turn comes 7d. - - The board reads Ks 9h 6d 7d There is about 12 small bets in there now. Well now I was planning to bet but i decide to check...the button bets.... and I check raise again. Now we can't have them buttons running us over now can we? He calls, no hesitation. Not good?”
I’m not sure that I like the second attempt at a check raise (is this button on auto-pilot?) but I like the lack of hesitation on his call of your checkraise. I would think if he had anything but a draw he would have something to think about (which is why I take about one or two seconds on all my bets).
Regards,
Rick
My normal hands UTG are a little too tight TT-AA, AK, AQ. I think I have been giving up a little here, but I don't mind this as most oppurtunities arise in the later positions. So I raise with suited connectors once and a while. The problem with suited medium aces is that they are still on the high side and your opponents can put you off a medium straight board. Although I like Abdul's ideas and understand them fully.
Raising under the gun in a full tabled limit hold-em at the $40-$80 level with Nine-Eight suited is bad poker unless the game is extremely loose and extremely passive with no ever raising pre-flop. Since these games don't exist, your raise was a pure crapshoot.
Your "read" of this flop is poor. A King-high flop will frequently give one of your 3 opponents top pair since hands containing Aces or Kings are the kinds of hands people play pre-flop especially in raised pots. Your check-raise with middle pair and a bad kicker is pure gambling. You will frequently be getting out worst hands than yours and getting in heads-up and out of position with the best hand.
On the turn, you have an open ended straight draw so of course you have to play. The check-raise here is usually an expensive type of semi-bluff but what the hell you came to play!
Yes, being lucky is far more important than being good.
I'm not saying it is right, but one advantage of checking the flop if you are sure the button will automatically bet is that if the player in the blind now check raises you can be very sure that he has at least a king and can now fold.
Precisely, which was consistent with my read of the play. While card reading sometimes leads you astray, it tends to keep you out of losing streaks. It also lets you do some unconventional plays. When you are wrong you look pretty stupid however. But the long run is what counts.
My read of the flop was correct. No one had a king.
On your good days you look like a genius when you make a play like this. On your bad days your just like the other live ones. I have no problem with making a play like this. It's good for your image especially if you're playing with the same bunch of players. If I elect to play the hand I would probably come in with a raise also. This is a play I will occasionally make. When I get to show the hand, and believe it or not Jim you do on occasion, it does wonders for your image and you are rewarded richly in the future. This has to be a very situational type of play and if you are making it on a daily basis you are giving up too much. Your opponents will be remembering this for a long time now.
Bruce
But Bruce what is the likelihood that you will ever get to showdown with this hand? I would argue that most of the time the flop will miss you and you will simply be bet out of the hand and no one will ever know that you varied your play here. To re-phase my concern, how many times on the average do you have to jump the fence like this before you catch a good enough hand to survive a showdown?
We have had this discussion before. If you have a solid image you have multiple ways to win the pot. You may get a walk or a more likely scenario the pot is shorthanded and your flop bet gets you the pot. Lastly you might even wind up with the best hand and you get to show it. When I raise in an early position I don't want my opponents to predict with 100% accurracy what I have. You would be surprised how often you get to show a hand like this down, a lot more so than you might think.
Bruce
Jim,
I think when up against unfamiliar or unobservant opponents this is a poor play in the long run. But if you are in a game where most of the table is both tough and familiar with your play you just have to open up a bit more. Now Abdul and Izmet would advocate mixing it up with some of your weaker suited aces and medium pairs rather than hands like this and they make some good points in doing so. But tough, creative opponents will just get too much of an edge if your raises and bets almost always mean you are strong and your checks and calls almost always mean you are weak.
Regards,
Rick
A key point is whether your opponents are unfamiliar and unobservant vs. familiar tougher opponents.
Bruce
Okay, but if I am going to vary my play it would not be by raising under the gun with 98 suited against 8 or 9 other players. I would argue that you should do this with something like Ace-Ten suited or King-Jack suited or maybe even King-Ten suited. If I am going to raise and drive players out I still want some semblance of a hand, preferably with high card strength, to fall back on when I get called by the blinds.
Mr. Brier,
"On your good days you look like a genius when you make a play like this."
A very interesting post that I enjoyed reading. I found the following statement particularly interesting:
>>I may be getting overly influenced by some of the mainstream thought processes which will lower my ultimate potential. I am not interested in boring 1.5 bets an hour poker. That would drain my soul.<<
Conventional widsom has it that 1.5 big bets an hour in a $40-80 game over the long run would be a top performer. That makes it $120 an hour, about $1000 a day, and $250,000 a year. In my book that's something that is very good for the soul and I would find it quite exciting.
It could just be me, but I've seen a lot more of this kind of talk since "Rounders" was released-- young, white men, mostly under the age of 25, who have somehow become convinced that it's their mission in life to relieve everyone at the table of their bankrolls in the time it would take most of us to tie our shoes. I don't mind this kind of thinking, necessarily, except to say that it's usually overly optimistic. My hunch is that in twenty years from now these same people will be telling their co-workers around the water cooler how they hit 65% in the NFL for three years running.
Where is this game? AC?
I don't know of any regular, ten-handed 40-80 games right now. But I'm not in touch with a lot of areas, so am just wondering where it might be.
I think you played it very well. Gambling, yes, but the most important part of this hand was the attitude, "we can't let those buttons go pushing us around." I don't often play middle-suited connectors UTG, but if you play it the way you did, they will most assuredly be pushed off their reads. Score one for deception and score another for aggression. While you couldn't live on a steady diet of this kind of play, I like it enormously as a random move.
I played pot-limit hold-em last night with 10 and 25 blinds. I am in the big blind with A7o in an unraised pot with 5 limpers.
The flop comes 997 with a flush draw.
It's checked all the way around. Turn comes with a Deuce and no flush. It's checked all the way around again.
A four comes on the river. Again it's checked all the way around.
My A7 beats an 87.
Should I have bet on the flop or turn? Did I play the hand too weakly?
Bruce
Addendum: I was certainly able to apply this seemingly weak or tight play to my advantage picking up multiple uncontested pots on the flop or turn subsequently.
Bruce, I would have bet the turn, at least a small bet of about half the pot or so. True, you have to fear the nine, but why let an overcard hand like KQ or something a free chance to draw out on you? I don't think I would bet the flop though, but I am not an experienced big bet player, at least not playing for big $$ against decent opposition. So, that's just my opinion, comments welcome.
Dave in Cali
If I bet at all, it would have been on the flop. It's a scare flop. You're in the big blind, so you could have anything, including a 9. If you get called, you have the 7 as an out. If there is a raise, or another bet later, you're out of there.
If you wait for a later round it's an obvious steal and you may get callers who can suck out on you, and who can make the pot big enough for some end plays.
Big bet is often waiting for the big situation. A7o in the BB with this flop isn't a big situation, but is a chance to pick up five antes. This is what you did. There's nothing wrong with the way you played it, IMHO. The next time something like this happens, a bet will now seem stronger to those who saw this hand.
I liked the way you played your hand, Bruce. If you bet at any point and someone calls you're beat. My thinking would have also been to hope it gets checked around.
The best thing is that you took advantage of the change in your image that resulted from this play.
Your play is OK, but it does mean that you're going to lose the $150 or $160 that was in the pot pretty often when someone hits their overcard. My normal play here would have been to grab three $25 chipd and toss them out on the flop. Most of the time, I would expect to win right there. If called or raised, I probably shut down. The advantage of this play is twofold. First, you give no free cards, as mentioned above. Second, if you end up showing the hand down, then win or lose, you are more likely to get action next time when you flop trips or a full.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Doesn't betting up front look like a steal? Most players with a 9 would go for a slow play. Now, a later bet by you on the turn might be a steal, or it might be a 9 in the blind trying to start building a pot since nobody did it for him on the flop.
Fat-Charlie
Yes, it does look like a steal, if you would always or almost always slowplay here. That is why you shouldn't always slowplay when you flop big, so that you can steal more often (when the flop is scary), as well as get paid off more often when you do flop big.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
While some would argue that it's best to bet this hand on the flop, I disagree. You'll be called by flush draws, even if no one has a 9 or an overpair. A bet on the turn ends things because the draws don't have the price to continue, and if they are out, the bigger hands will move on you. In the event that someone gets lucky and hits an overcard on the turn, you can get your head out of that trap quick enough.
2-2-5, 10 to go.
On the button with 9Ts. 4 limpers, I call.
Flop is A93 of clubs (not my suit).
All check to me. The pot is 70. I bet 20. All fold.
I thought this hand was kinda strange because I figured my 9 was probably the best pair but any decent club would call me. I might be a little too used to limit where I definitely would have been called but in no limit that $20 bet represented my whole stack if I really had the flush. Obviously no one had the Kc or I would have been pushed back.
I was actually figuring a club or two would call my flop bet, then they'd check the turn where I'd bet like $60 and then I'd take the pot on the river if no clubs came. Was this reasoning a bad approach to this hand?
Second hand: I have AQd under the gun. The big blind is the weakest, stupidest player I've ever seen outside of a home game. Everyone else at the 7 handed table looks unhappy with their cards. I make it 40 to go and only the big blind calls. The flop is 3 babies. big blind checks and I bet 25. He hesitates and then calls. Turn is a 9. Big Blind nearly chokes. He is flustered and picks up some chips without much force, fiddles with them, looks confused, like a lightning strike victim, and checks.
I obviously check. The river is the Ace but it makes a 3 flush of spades. Big blind bets $20. The pot is a little over $150. I'm 90% sure he has A9 but I figure I'm almost getting 10-1 anyway so I call. He shows his SET of nines and takes it.
I'm only wondering if my mistake was betting the flop. (For only $20 on the river I figure the call was marginal but not a BAD call.) If a weak player overprotects his big blind then checks to you on the flop, I'm assuming I need to bet almost regardless of what I have. Any responses?
By the way, this player busted out a couple hands later by protecting his $5 blind against a $35 raise with Q5. The flop came TJQ and he went all in and got called by the preflop raiser who had, of course, AK. At first I thought, "Wow, that's the first bluff he made all day and he run into the nuts" but then I thought further and I don't think he realized going in with top pair five kicker was a bluff. He probably thought he had the best hand. This guy was amazing!
This was the 2-2-5 no limit game at Artichoke Joe's.
natedogg
First hand, I do not think you played badly. All you had was second pair with no draw and you might be against a flush or a good flush draw. I would be hesitant to commit a lot of $$ to this one with such a mediocre holding. but you did have to bet so as not to give a bare club a free card.
second hand, I would have put him on a set of nines given his reaction. I think you had a genuine read on him and checking was obviously the best move on the turn. on the river, you are getting about 7.5 to 1 odds, so is there a 7.5 to 1 or better chance that you still have the winner? if so, call, if not, and you are very sure you are beat, fold.
dave in cali
I know the game, and I think I know the player you are talking about in the second hand. I think you played that hand fine, but there's a strong case to be make for checking the flop with no pair against a player like that who will take one off with anything.
On the first hand, I think your $20 flop bet into a $70 pot was a fine play.
Tommy
Dear Natedogg:
Either your game is improving or your posts are becoming more articulate. Most likely both.
nah.. I've just stopped playing low-limit hold'em. It is a waste of any skilled player's time. I haven't sat down at a 3-6 table in about 6 months and things are going much better for me. I haven't even so much as stepped into the Oaks Club to look around.
My dilemma is only that my bankroll isn't big enough to play bigger limits like 30-60 and no limit so I have to play in my pot-limit home game and low-buy-in no limit games such as the one at Artichoke Joes. As soon as I can build up a decent bankroll (like $10k) I'll be a regular at the Lucky Chances no limit game. I just don't have the funds for that game yet. But DAMN it's beatable.
To anyone who wants to win and have fun playing poker, do not under any circumstances sit down at a 3-6 hold'em game in California. Just play bingo or lotto. 3-6 hold'em is NOT beatable.
I'm sure Take The Points will recognize my mantra and shake his head. :)
natedogg
How often is your AJ's game spread? What is the buy in? Rebuys any amount? How big do the pots get?
Hand #1: Good bet. Hand #2: 99 is not a bad hand because he is up
against 1 player. He only has a problem against a bigger pair. With a baby flop,
if I had the 99 hand I would have bet. The
act of betting 2 overs is probably a marginal play, but not totally out of line. Your
opponent should have bet the pot at the river.
Hand #3: A VERY bad call will Q5. He deserved to lose.
The $20 bet is fine, as long as you sometimes bet a hand like that when you want a call. Interestingly enough, there are still some players out there who bet more or less depending entirely upon the strength of their hand, thus it's easy to call their small bets and you always fold to their big bets.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I think the $20 bet was fine on the flop where you had little and just whiffed at the pot to find out if you had the best hand. They either play back or fold, that's fine. However, I don't like your reasoning of betting $60 on the turn and then trying to take the pot away on the river -- you are just asking to get broke. A better player would just call your bet on the turn and then take your STACK away from you on the river. If a good NL player called my $20 bet on the flop, I'm done with it.
You're probably right. I was planning to make the turn bet ONLY if I put any callers on a one-club draw. If they are only a draw then they also have to fear the made flush I might have.
If I felt anyone was slowplaying, I'd probably check the turn as well and still hope to show down a winning pair on the river. If someone goes all in on the river then they win. Although next time I flop the nuts against them I know to play it the same way and hopefully bust 'em. :)
However, there was no way I was going to jeapordize my whole stack on this hand. So betting $60 on the turn may have given away the pot to an all-in reraise but it would NOT have cost me my stack. I think your key point was "if a good NL player called me". Not everyone at the table was a good NL player.
natedogg
been playing only 9 mos. so be gentle
i'm in bb w/ J 3, utg calls, wsop bracelet holder in mid pos calls , button calls, sb calls, i check
flop 3,3,10 no flush sb check, i bet ,utg calls, wsop raises, button folds ,sb folds, i reraise, utg folds, wsop reraises. i go into check and call mode is that too weak to check and call to river? i've got many more hands to post if anyone is interested
I think you're check-and-call mode is just fine, because of the extra raise on the flop. At first you represented at least top pair. With the extra raise, you're saying you have a three.
If the turn betting went check-bet-call, and the river betting went check-check, and you feel like you lost a bet, I'd write it off to being outplayed, shrug inside, make a mental note, and go on to the next hand.
Tommy
the hand you are afraid of is A3 - the guy would've most likely raised with TT. I would do as you did on the flop, and then check/call on the turn, and then bet out on the river unless another T comes. This is to prevent him from checking down JT on the river. if he has you beat, you'll lose one big bet....but most likely he doesn't have you beat, in which case you may gain the river bet that he may have checked with. of course, if he raises you, you will have to call, and thus you lose one bet.
...notice that if you bet out on the river, if he had A3, he will probably just call too (and he would've bet if you checked), so you don't lose anything by betting out.
Nothing wrong with your approach. We are talking about fractions of a bet here. You are never folding and the pot is already big once the turn comes. Check-calling on the turn is fine. If he checks it back on the turn, then you should bet the river. Otherwise just playing it like a little girl by checking and calling is fine.
No big deal about missing a bet on the river. That's why they say hold-em is a positional game. As a new player it's easy to get intimidated by the bracelets. Chalk it up for experience.
Bruce
lost to A-3
I think you WON to A-3, to the tune of at least one small bet. In other words, if you had played the hand any way other than how you did, you would have lost more.
Tommy
Only 9 months, and you're in the 80-160 game at the Bellagio?
Either you're a prodigy, or you're a major supporter of the game (i.e., you're losing a lot). If the former, congratulations. If the latter, I hope you can afford it. Also, if you're not already doing it, start recording all your session results, to the dollar. This way there will be no fooling yourself about your results. You will know whether you're ahead or behind, and by how much.
Good Luck, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I have had limited experience in pot limit holdem and I recently found myself in a game where i was unsure of the correct course of action. The game had 5-10 blinds and I had around 1k on the table the other players around the table also had deep money many of them having several thousand. In such a situation I was quite unsure as to the correct play of big pairs from early postion. The first raise being only $35 was not substantial enough to shut anyone out of the pot as early postion raisers were commonly getting three to five callers. I was unsure whether it was still correct to raise under the gun in these game conditions or limp hoping for a raise in order to get a substantial part of my stack committed pre flop. Part of the problem in my opinion is several flops may see me commiting a large portion of my stack in an unfavourable situation. I realise my question is a touch on the vague side and the answer would nearly always depend on specific game condtions however i would greatly appreciate any help posters could give me with the correct thought process in such situations.
Usually raise the max with big pairs. If you limp and 6 people call your in trouble. The value in limping with a big pair is if you miss the flop, it does not cost a lot to fold.
It really depends on the texture of the game. If you limp you run the risk of having a multiway pot with a bunch of limpers and if you don't flop a set you really have to proceed carefully. Putting your opponents on hands in pot-limit in this type of situation is difficult where some players will literally play just about any two cards. I would only limp if I really felt an aggressive player would raise in the back otherwise I would raise the maximum in early position and proceed from there. You have to play carefully. If you have a big pocket pair and you don't flop a set and you're against a skillful player watch out. You may be in bad shape.
Bruce
These are good questions. It can be very hard to play these hands well when the money is deep and you are facing some tough opponents. I prefer no-limit for some related reasons.
You are really trying to flop a set, or to get a ragged flop and hopefully you will be against a rather predictable rather than a tough tricky player. You have to be willing to pressure the hand if the flop does not appear threatening, but remember if you are out of position you could still easily end up in trouble. If you get enough of your stack in preflop and on the flop this all becomes less important. However if the money is very deep you must be leery of overcommitting to anything but aces preflop. With 1K on the table you don't have to worry about this to nearly the extent that you would if you had 3K on the table, but these are all considerations. If you had 3K on the table now you have to have good judgment throughout the hand since you probably can't get most of the money in preflop or on the flop.
If you are up against really good readers you may be in serious trouble especially if you have tells. If you are a good reader too then you should be OK if you play very solid upfront.
If you don't like the idea of committing 1K in a few chunks on one big pair with a ragged flop you should probably put less on the table to start with. If you are mostly a math-type player as opposed to a people player you should probably put less on the table to start with too.
Although you must play solid upfront don't be afraid to mix it up a little in the back with hands that can make the nuts and might surprise your opponents.
All in all, the more money on the table, the better judgment you must have. Choose your buy-in carefully to fit your style, and try to choose an amount that will give you some implied odds yet one that you still feel reasonably comfortable with. You must be willing to back a strong hand strongly in many situations even if it is not the nuts, and the extent to which you can do this is initially determined by your buy-in.
how well you play your big pairs has a great effect on your win. they are easy to play against bad players but difficult against those that can run you off, and tax you when beat. with so many callers it must be hard to lose in that game. just raise with all your good hands and play them properly. milk the players that are callers and bluff out the ones that dont call enough. learn when to fold the pairs when the board is tough or you read your hand as a loser.
Please keep in mind that the following advice is a GENERAL approach and should be modified especially when playing against players who will catch on to your play. so here goes:
If you see a flop with multiple opponents your big pair is likely to lose. Two opponents with KK maybe, but if you are facing 3 or 4 opponents with QQ or KK you will usually lose this hand by the river. AA can do better but not great. With big pairs it is ESSENTIAL to limit the field before the flop in pot limit. The nature of pot limit makes it worth a call pre-flop when someone raises the pot early. If you raise under the gun with KK in a game where 4 to 5 will usually see the flop, you can't expect many players to drop out. The KEY to playing big pairs up front in pot limit is being able to reraise, and this usually requires a limp-reraise.
Let's say you're playing $2 and $5 blinds. you call and raise $12. Big deal. The chasers will still chase and see the flop. You do not want this to happen with a vulnerable hand like QQ or KK and especially JJ. (Although I personally feel JJ should be played similarly to baby pairs: no set no bet.)
With a big pair, you are praying for a reraise so you can make the bet so big-preflop that you are happy to take it down right there and if not, you will only be heads up.
Also, you want to make the pot so big that on the flop you can go all-in if you like it or back-off if you don't. You DON'T want to be playing guessing games on 4th street or the river. This can be disastrous.
If you are playing in an aggressive game, go ahead and raise up front, hoping for a chance to re-raise any re-raiser. This is the perfect situation for you with KK or QQ. If the game is semi-aggressive, like there's only about a 50% chance of a pre-flop raise, I'll often still just call under-the-gun with big pairs and hope for a raise. This gives me two opportunities to outplay my opponents. I can reraise them if it gets raised in back and really put the pressure on preflop. Usually this will push out all the marginal pre-flop hands like AJs and 55 and the like. If you get one player to stay, he's either got a smaller pair or big suited connectors or AK so you usually know whether or not the flop was good to you. He could be slow-playing AA too if he's tricky.
You're now in a good position to play the flop heads up and possibly get away from your hand if you need to.
If nobody raises you, you are STILL in a very powerful position to maximize your hand by getting all-in on the flop against top pair - presuming your pair is higher. You are also going to do great if you flop a set that NOBODY will suspect. So checking up front will allow you to reraise big if possible or at the very least give you a lot of deception on the flop.
Personally, I check up front with QQ and KK and even AA about 70-80% of the time. Of course I reraise with them when possible about 95% of the time. When the flop comes unraised, I only stay in if the flop looks good to me. If an A comes and a player bets, you should fold. He has no idea that you had a monster preflop. He's not representing an A to a big pre-flop better who may have a big pair in an attempt to bluff him out. He doesn't know anything about your hand. You limped. He's betting for value and you can get out usually without regrets.
This is getting long so I'll stop now but I'll just say that in pot limit and no limit, I think the costliest and stupidest mistakes are made by people who play their big pairs wrong. You are doing the right thing by thinking hard about these hands.
natedogg
I agree with most of what you say, but I think it can be distilled down to a couple of key concepts, one of which you mention. TJ/McEvoy phrase it best in their book, "if you limp with Aces, you'll never get broke with Aces." To my way of thinking, this advice applies double to other big pairs. About the only way you can force a laydown from an early position with a big pair is to limp-reraise. And if you don't get to reraise, then what have you lost if you have to toss it in the muck after the flop? Just the lousy blind. Perhaps most limit players go astray in PL/NL when they start thinking big pairs and expected value and pot odds. Implied odds is the key to this game. With big pairs up front, quite often you'll have to give your opponents those implied odds, and when that happens you'll have to surrender those big pairs in a hurry.
IMO, you should consider how this game is playing and play your big pairs in order to take advantage of the game conditions. You said that small raises of 35$ were not driving anyone out of the pot. with such large stacks, this is not that surprising. So perhaps you should increase the size of your raises to some amount which would be more effective in driving people out of the pot. limp-reraising with your best hands is a good play some of the time, but if there is not a lot of raising, such as in a pretty passive game, then this is not as effective. Play in order to maximize the use of the game conditions.
dave in cali
Maybe you should raise preflop with most (all?) of your pairs, such that your opponents cannot put you on a big pair postflop?
Actually, any strategy that is static and absolute will suffer in the long run, at least against aware opponents. So, mix it up, at least enough that they don't know your preflop raise almost certainly means big pair.
Then, they can't push you around so easily when the flop comes 3 middle to low rags, since you could still have a set.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Here's a pot limit hand I was in last week. Blinds are $1 and $2. I'm in the big blind with T8o.
About 4 limpers come in and I check. Flop is 862 with 2 hearts. I bet $5, UTG raises $5, all fold I call. UTG is slightly steaming and loves to over-bluff once he starts losing. One of his favorite moves is to raise big with a big draw.
The turn comes a 2 of diamonds making 2 diamonds and 2 hearts on the board of 2468. I bet 20 into him because I was pretty sure he was betting a draw or middle pair with a gut shot and he reraises me the pot putting me all in for another $70 or so. I call instantly and the river pairs the deuce. I win with my pair of 8s.
I love getting all-in against the draw but I realized that I don't like doing it against a draw with overcards. He may have had a KQ of diamonds or something which gives him a lot more outs to beat my mediocre top pair. In other words, I don't know if it was a good play to bet into him heavily knowing he might reraise all in on a 15 outer. I just don't know.
I feel much safer when I have a pair of kings or aces and then get played at by a possible draw. Even if he pairs his J or Q or whatever I'll still be good.
So the issue brought up by this hand is should you go all the way with your top pair when you suspect a draw if the draw can easily have overcards to your pair? I love going all-in against 9 outs but not necessarily against 15 outs. That's a huge difference. Hell, I rarely bet a draw in pot limit but with AKs and 3 of my suit on a garbage flop, even I will play pretty fast that's for sure.
I'm probably still slightly favored with top pair against a flush draw and overcards but with pot limit I prefer to get my money in when I'm a big favorite. Any comments? With 15 outs we're pretty close to even money right? I hate going all in with even odds. we might as well flip a coin.
natedogg
Natedogg,
I personally feel that your right, and I feel the same way, your top pair, was good in this scenario and I feel you played it the right way, but the 9 outs is even a lot to go in against, however 15 is ALOT more. with 15 outs your opponent has a 54.1% chance of making his hand, and I definitely wouldn't want to be all in like that. So I think that your appraisal of the situation is correct. However this also is going to depend on whether the player is weak or strong. Can he be bet or raised off his draw? Or will he take that draw thru to the end. If he is indeed weak, then it may be more profitable to go all in and put him on the defensive, but those factors are related to the individual game, and would take a book to sort them all out. Again this is my opinion, and I am by no means a pro......hope this helps.
If he has 15 outs on the flop, then he is a small favorite and should move you all-in; if he has 15 outs on the turn, then you are about 2-1 favorite and should move him all-in.
That pretty much sums it up in one sentence.
On the button with any two random cards. I vote for limping in if several other callers are also limping. In pot limit implied odds are so important that a hand like 5 9 offsuit could take down a big pot if you are lucky enough to flop two pair and someone else flops top pair or a draw. A flop like 59k or 59? with two suited cards could develop into a big pot.
Oh boy. In short, NO.
You might limp on the button with almost any 2 cards, but not because you might flop big and get paid off. It's because everybody might flop nothing, and you are in the best steal position. Especially if you're good at reading your opponents, and you can resteal from them in a timely manner. Even then, you need to be a great player to do this for any big profits.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
If 6 or more people have already limped, limping with anything is a good implied odds play. I once limped with 72o on the button when 6 players limped. I broke three players when I got lucky. A 2 dollar call cleared me 600+. It's very easy to fold total garbage if you don't connect.
Top and bottom pair or bottom two pair probably lose more money in pot limit than any other hands. Before playing trash, make sure you know whathand you are looking to make and play strong.
You can certainly lossen up if you have position and can get in cheaply, but I would avoid the worst 15% of your hands. Unless you come in raising;]
Can anyone make a case for NOT playing trash in late position against several limpers in big-bet poker?
Too often you will win a small pot or lose a big one to a bigger 2 pair, a set, or whatever. Work on your postflop play rather than trying to find extra hands to play.
If you don't understand why this sort of thinking is dead wrong, it's time to find a good book. Here's a start: what sort of action, and from who, do you expect to receive when you flop, let's say, top-2 pair with 9-4? Who is going to be in there with you? Someone with A-9 or A-4? Not if they are decent opponents. Someone with a gutshot straight draw? I hardly think so. Even worse, what happens when you flop bottom-2 pair with this hand? And do you really think a good player is going to play a big pair strong when the flop comes something like 9-9-x? Unlike a limit game, the only hands you'll face are likely to be hands where you are way behind. The rest of the time, you'll be giving away your money in little dribs and drabs preflop.
To answer the question whether it's correct to play trash in PL, you only need to ask yourself Bob Ciaffone's rhetorical question: "what sort of hand are you trying to build"?
I don't worry about losing money "by dribs and drabs" before the flop (well put, by the way) because I don't intend on getting married to the hand if I catch a piece of the flop.
My plan is to either get lucky and get paid off with a good hand, bluff, or give up immediately.
I'm willing to play 43s and 85s but I cannot see any implied odds with A9o no matter the circumstances.
4-3s is not trash and certainly playable for the right price and the right position in PL or NL. A big difference between that hand and a 3-holer (or worse). The more of a gap, the more potential for trouble and the less probability of making a nut hand.
I prefer to raise, trying to steal, especially against agressive opponents who are supposed not to have much since they would have raised with some strength.
2 months ago, in a tough triple blind 5-5-10 session, not having played a hand in 40 mn, comes a hand when 4 guys limp and I raise the pot (100) with 94o on the button, thinking they all would fold including the blinds, given my tight image this night.
Well the BB blind calls and the 4 limpers call making the pot 610 !!! I am planning to fold to any bet on the flop, but it comes K72o, perhaps the best flop to steal on since there are no draws and I can easily represent AK.
They all check to me, I bet the pot and they all muck (it is very difficult for any hand except 77 or 22 to call here, even a K will fold).
Then a guy aks to see the 4th card, I agree and the dealer shows a 9. I have already my cards so I show my 9. What are they going to think now ?
I ended up this night to win the biggest pot of my life 15 mn after when my A8 beat the K8 of my loose opponent with a flop of 558 2 7. He probably was thinking I was already bluffing !
The truth is I never tried this play again, but perhaps one of these days ...
I agree, but is very important the pot be unraised.
I recently started playing pot limit, and I agreed with your theory, but now I couldn't disagree more... here is why.
You have 9-5o, and limp for $2 in a 1-2 game, there are 7 callers including the blinds ($14). Flop is 5-9-K with 2 of a suit checked to a middle position who bets pot ($14). Folded to cut-off who calls. Now what do you do? You have bottom 2 pair and there is ($42) in the pot. At this point I believe I am beating the original raiser, but why would someone cold call $14? Is he on the nut flush draw, he has a weak K (say k-j), he is slow-playing a set, he has k-9, k-5s, or 5-9. Turn is a blank, Giving him 2 more outs to pair the blank (not counting the suit). So he now has 15 outs, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THIS? You could already be losing. What do you do on the turn?
People will notice you playing random cards from the button, and they WILL outplay you for your stack when they flop better than you. Also, the people on draws will hurt you (not as much as you hurt them), a person with a strong king is a worry because he may not fold out of the pot...
this is my opinion only, and I am new to the game. I haven't had an opportunity to practice what I preach yet, so take it with a grain of salt.
Derrick
Yup, 59 on a 59K board when somebody has at least top pair is a license to print money.
I have pocket Queens second off the button... 4 limpers call and I raise pot...2 back out and the the other 2 call...
Flop comes 4d 6h 7d... Checked to me... I bet Pot, $40... Both think, and call...
Turn comes 5s... It's checked, then Bet only $40 by a tricky player in middle position... I think about it, and don't put this player on a straight and think he's representing the straight but likely has top pair, good kicker...
I raise Pot All in $150... probably Stupid... But my judgement at the time is that if I don't think he has the straight, why let him draw... First position, who has built up a stack over the last few hours Check-Raises All in... the better folds... He shows me 9c8c...adding "if you have diamonds you can still win"... I laugh, muck the hand and go home...
Now, quite simply... I was trapped into a stupid bet that I shouldn't have made... But for my future pot limit games... Is calling that hand open ended with 2 bad overpair worth it? I had a strong table image that both these players knew I was raising on solid cards... And let's say it's not 1-2 pot but 5-10, or 10-20 pot... then what? Same play...
Thoughts?
The money was relatively deep compared to the blinds, so these guys have got implied odds to butt heads with you. When the flop came that coordinated, you have to consider slowing down. Since I wasn't there, and since I have no clue what range of hands these guys might call your raise with, I have no idea what you should have done. And you're right, you'd hate to give a free card and lose to A8 that would have folded to your flop bet. However, you should always consider all the possibilities. What about betting less than the pot on the flop?
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I have AQs under the gun and raise to $7. There are 7 callers including SB and BB for a total of $49. This is quite common in this game to an early raise.
If the guy was drawing to K-high hearts, and had a pair of nines, then he was drawing to the nut hearts. The only way he could have flopped a pair and heart draw is if the board were Ah9x4h, and he has Kh9h.
Anyway, his call on the flop seems ok to me, because he only has another $136 behind the call. He has position over the original bettor, and if some reraise behind him, he probably will have odds to call all-in with two cards to come. The flush is live for sure and he has alot of outs against any top pair except for AK.
The call on the turn is a mistake, but not a huge one. He is getting about 2 to 1, and has at least 9 flush outs. If that were all he had, he is about a 4 to 1 underdog.
But if he thinks the 3 kings and 2 nines are also good, he then has 14 outs, which is only a 2.1 to one dog. Since you played the hand like you had AK, and there is no more money left to be won, he probably should have passed.
But given your actual hand, his call wan't a "theoretical" mistake or money maker for you.
I am 2nd to act and have pocket Q's. UTG calls, and I make it 9 to go. There are 3 callers, and a very good player raises pot ($41). There is now $80 in the pot. I know she wouldn't just make this play with nothing, and I put her on a Group I hand AA KK QQ JJ or AKs. I rule out QQ. What is my correct move? I went all in for $78 more. Everyone folds to her... she is a good friend and respects my play. She thinks for a while and makes the call. She has KK in the same suits as my Q's. I am a huge dog. I guess I should have folded.
Board comes 6, 4, 2, 5, 3 for a straight and we split. I am very lucky this happened. Would anyone else have called the $41 raise?
Derrick
If those are the hands that she would reraise with, you made a mistake. I'll let you do the math, but it is based on the premise that there are 6 AA combos and 6 KK combos that bury you. There are 4 AKs combos over which you are only a slight favorite, and only six JJ combos over which you are a material favorite. The last combo is the other QQ.
The short answer is, based on your read, you are either a slight favorite or a big dog. A pass is in order.
4 AK combos? Why not 16?
He said AKs.
However, I think anyone who will make that play with AKs will also make it with AK. Probably makes the math a little closer, but I don't think it changes the proper play.
QQ is the big pair that people overplay too much. You got lucky by chopping with KK which was practically impossible.
In big bet poker, you have to believe in your read on other players. Your read on your opponent was correct and you should believe in it enough to lay down QQ preflop if necessary. Of the hands you knew she had to have, only one (JJ) makes you a big favorite. Even if she's got AK you're only a slight favorite and with KK or AA you are of course a huge dog.
That is the cardinal rule of big bet poker. Don't get involved in a situation where you are either a big dog or basically even (with QQ vs. AK you are about an 11/10 favorite).
The ability to read a player for having a pair bigger than yours, even if you have QQ, can save you stacks and stacks of chips and will be one of the things that differentiates you from the losers at no PL/NL who fall in love with TT or JJ too easily and get all-in everytime. I've made a lot of money off those guys! :)
natedogg
Thanks for your responses. This was only my second time playing pot limit, and I know I should have folded. I got really lucky.
Thanks,
Derrick
1. Fold to the reraise BTF. QQ is very vulnerable in this spot.
I was in Vegas on the weekend. I had heard they had live NL Limit play at the Stratosphere. I played a tourney there and when I busted out I decided to try to get a seat. After waiting for a bit, I sat down at seat 3.
The minimum buy-in is only $50. I decided to start with $200 which was what most players had in front of them. The blinds are only $1 and $2.
Here is my 7th hand. I am in the small blind.
Position 4 raises to $12. Position 5 and 6 calls. I look down and see KK. I raise to $24. Everyone calls.
Flop comes AKx (Rainbow).
I bet $40. Position 4 folds. Position 5 calls all-in with $30. Position 6 raises $40 more. I re-raise all-in and position 6 calls.
Turn and river are nothing scary.
I win a nice pot.
I had always wanted to play no-limit, and this was quite the hand for me. I am not sure if my initial raise was too small and if my bet on the flop was okay.
Any comments are welcome.
Ken
Nicely played. I like sets in limit, but I love sets in no limit. I like the way you bet right out on the flop and resisted the urge to slowplay. With 2 cards to a broadway and 3 guys in the pot, a free card is more likely to break you than one of your opponents. A couple suggestions and questions:
1. I would have reraised a lot more before the flop from the sb. After a mid-position raiser and 2 cold-callers, you probably have the best hand, but KK can be very trick in no-limit, in a multiway pot, when you are out of position. After the two cold callers, there is almost 40 bucks in the pot. I would move in about $100.
2. On the flop, your $40 bet was a little weak into a $100 pot. I would have just moved all-in.
3. What could these other guys have been calling with? I wouldn't even be in love with AK given the action on the hand. Seems like a soft game.
Good luck, but don't play too much big bet or you will not enjoy limit poker anymore.
"don't play too much big bet or you will not enjoy limit poker anymore"
This statement has some truth to it. To illustrate, I played in home poker games both in college in texas and when I lived near atlantic city. Both of these games were dealer's choice. I introduced no-limit holdem to both of these groups of players. once I did, in both instances, the home game changed from dealer's choice to solely NLH after that. Now that is all any of them play anymore in home games. No more stud, draw, acey-deucy, etc.... All they want to play is NLH. Very addictive.
dave in cali
I tend to agree my initial raise was weak. I was so shocked at seeing the KK that I just doubled the initial raise. I think I should have raised the size of the pot.
I didn't see any of the hands. The guy that initially went all-in on my flop bet seemed to be a fairly weak player. I saw a few moves he made that did not work well and cost him lots. The guy that re-raised me most likely had AK or possibly the smallest set. I was confident he didn't have pocket aces since he didn't do any raising preflop. A few hands earlier he lost a huge pot with pocket aces against KQ.
As one who normally plays low limit and has complained when my high pockets get killed by 74o, it is nice playing no-limit and making a person pay to play.
Ken
The only comment I might make is that I might have raised a bit more BTF, but I am not the NL expert. I think you played fine on the flop. I have played in the stratosphere game and it is quite a good experience. I will play in it again the next time I go to vegas.
dave in cali
It sounds like you were fortunate enough to be facing AK. What a great flop!
Since KK is actually a fairly vulnerable hand, your raise pre-flop should probably have been a little bigger. You want to try to push out all but one player, and you won't be too disappointed if you just take it down right there. I think $40 to $50 would have been right. Since you flopped a set, it worked out perfectly anyway.
With AA, you definitely want one player to stay with you but with KK there's a 20% chance an A will come on the flop and then you're paralyzed. You HAVE to give up the hand if you face any heat with an A on the board.
Once you flop the set you did everything just about right. You wanted to bet into the opponents and give them an opportunity to raise your weak bet. Then you've got 'em and you go all in.
natedogg
A bigger raise was in order before the flop. I might've even moved it all-in, since the pot was big enough at this point to where I only want one opponent, and it appears you have a lot of calling stations in the game (requiring maximum pressure to separate them from their hands).
1. With KK, a reraise of about 4 times the previous
raise would be correct (around $50) 2. You were fortunate to get all-in on the flop, but it is clearly correct to move in with 3 kings. I would have either bet the pot or check-raised all in.
Hi Again,
I was playing 1-2 pot limit holdem again, and I played the following hand:
I am 2 away from the button with black 10's. Absolutely everyone calls to me so there is $13 in the pot. I call and raise pot. So it is $17 to call behind me.
The button calls $17 cold, and BB calls $15 more, so there is now 3 people in the pot. I don't mind raising here because I would rather spend $17 finding out there is an overpair out there. Plus I like controlling the betting.
The flop comes 7s, 6h, 3h. I have an overpair to the board. BB bets $20 into me. I am a little scared he has an overpair as well, but I put him on a heart draw with overcards to me. I think there is enough in the pot that if he had an overpair now he would bet pot.
I raise pot... I think is was $82. The button cold calls $82. What is going on? BB also calls. I now feel I am behind to an overpair or a set. There is $246 in the pot.
Turn comes a 2c's. BB checks (he has about $70 left.) I watched the button when the flop came over, and he looked irritated. I think he may be on a draw. What to do... I bet $100 and the button folds. I was definitely happy to see that. The BB calls me all in for $70. There is $386.00 in the pot. As he calls he says I am way ahead.
I turn my 10's up and he turns up 7-4 of hearts he has a gut shot straigth, top pair and a heart draw. I would hardly consider myself way ahead. He misses and I take down the monster.
Did I play my 10's too strongly? I swear I almost had a heart attack. would you call 7.5X your original bet to play 7-4 suited? After that I just determined there was no way to put that guy on a hand. The button is a tricky player. He generally wouldn't waste money on nothing, but I didn't get to see his hand. Any comments are welcome... Main question... Did I over play the medium over pair?
Derrick
you played perfectly.
This pot and the way you played your hand is EXACTLY what people like Ray Zee are talking about when they say your big pairs are your big moneymakers in PL/NL poker.
You read your opponents perfectly and extracted the maximum to draw against you. You took down a HUGE pot and just remember that one when they DO finally hit their draw because it will happen but when it does, you'll be free-rolling that pot with their money.
You played it excellently.
natedogg
Assume the button knows what he's doing(which he likely doesn't). I have to put him on two big Hearts. I say make it tough for him. $100 is laying him the right price, with the BB's expected call. I guess he had AhK(or Q)x.
Novice questions: Assume the button has either Th9h or 9h8h. Would he be right to make it $246 to go on the flop, forcing the BB to call for his last $132 all at once(maybe he folds a higher flush draw..?), and possibly getting a free card on the turn? How does this answer change depending on the the size of button's and Derrick's stacks?
Well played, though, and natedogg makes a great point about the value of big pairs in PL/NL.
Good thread.
We'll not look at the BB's call preflop, but the play on the flop is what I find interesting.
The BB has flopped a pair + a flush draw and and gutshot straight draw. If he knows he's against an overpair, he's got 9(possibly 1 straight flush out if button is on hearts which is a good possibility - but we'll assume 9) + 3 for the non-heart gutshot 5, plus 2 more 7's, plus 3 more 4's to beat the TT. That's 9+3+2+3 = 17 outs on the flop and most pretty solid outs as the TT has a 2 out redraw in most cases(ignoring pot splitting outs w/ the made straight on board).
With 17 outs, wouldn't the BB be playing correctly going all-in on the flop and trying to get heads up w/ the over pair which he is a favorite over? I hope my math is right here, but 17outs w/ two draws is 30/47 * 29/46 = .402 = 40% chance of missing meaning the pair + flush draw + straight draw is a 60:40 or 3:2 favorite over the TT.
My question is that knowing the hero has the TT, what's teh correct play for the BB? Even w/ the button in I'd be tempted to get all in on the flop and try to get the button out so I'd be the favorite.
Any thoughts?
Patrick
Yes, the BB had to decide to move in. He was in a good spot to semi-bluff and maybe win the pot. I think the cold call of $82 was very soft.He should have moved in after the tens raised or folded his hand. However, I agree with your analysis, either a pot sized bet or an all-in check raise would be correct.
You bring up a very interesting point. I think I would have folded if he had bet pot... putting him on a bigger pair than mine. Would you have folded had this happened to you?
Derrick
I think the BB played very weakly against a suspected overpair. He needs to re-raise allin on the flop or check raise the max.
If he plays this way, you have to lay down your TT b/c either your in a coin flip situation 12 outs w/ 2 draws(Ax flush draw) or you way behind a set or overpair.
It would depend on my read and my stack size. With a "large" stack, let's say $1000, I probably would have folded. However, with only $100, I would have went all in with the 10's. The other danger is if the 10 of hearts hit on the turn or river. He has a flush, you have 3 tens. You raised the max with TT pre-flop, so a pot bet on the flop would get me worried. From what you described, I probably would have let go on the flop.
I do not think you overplayed the pair at all. Actually, I made a mistake playing a pair in a no-limit game which you avoided in this case.
I was in the BB with pocket 99. Several loose limpers called the blind. I was fairly short stacked, having only about 25 times the blind left in front of me. I decided to just check it and see what the flop brought before commiting my chips. In hindsight, this was a mistake. I should have raised all-in right then, hoping to drive out some of the limpers and get it heads up with a hand that I was a favorite over. The flop came 337 and I bet all-in. I got called by someone holding 35s and was knocked out. Had I raised, he probably would have folded. Turn and river were an 8 and a 2, so I probably would have won against any other callers who happened to stay in.
Now I was playing no limit, so I could raise anything I chose. In your pot limit situation, raising the pot is definitely the correct play.
Do you agree with my analysis of my mistake in the hand I described?
comments welcome
dave in cali
You got "knocked out"? Was this a tourney?
Irregardless, I don't go all in, tourney or live game, w/99 in this situation, esp. when I have 25x the BB left.
It was a live game, sorry that wording did make it seem like a tourney.
I felt that going all-in was probably the best move here because I only had 50$ left when the minimum buy-in was 100$ and most players at the table had about 200-300$.
I agree, IF a lot of the limpers are disciplined enough to fold their overcards. And "irregardless" is not a word....
.
I don't quite follow you ? Irregardless isn't a word according to:
1) the 280 grammarians who say it isn't, or
2) the 100 million english speakers who use it from time to time anyway?
i have no problem with language changing, but "irregardless" would be a stupid word. we should protect whatever we value from detrimental change. that is how we ensure that change is, in fact, for the better. if there were no reluctance to follow trends, no establishment endowed with inertia, progress would be reduced to a random walk. as far as i am concerned that's fine for unimportant things like the economy and politics, but i'll not allow "irregardless" to pollute language.
i highly doubt 100 million people have said "irregardless" not in direct jest. if you are correct then i am going to cry.
scott
Actually, I never use the word by choice. But it is used A LOT more than you might expect, mostly by lawyers. And if only half the lawyers use the word regularly, then my estimate of 100 million english speakers is way low.
:)
My comment is more generally a pet peeve comment about "prescriptive grammar."
I am a lawyer and I have never heard any lawyer use that word unless he or she was doing so in jest.
If one of my cohorts does use that word seriously, I think that the State Bar of Illinois imposes an ethical obligation on me to report it.
And just because you're against prescriptive grammar (as am I), that doesn't make it wrong to make fun of those who use stupid unnecessary "words."
You've obviously trained those Illinois attorneys much better than the ones I practice with here in the wild west of Phoenix.
Making fun of anything is always important. Especially making fun of yourself.
Irrespective of your true vocation (you're a columnist (card carrying?), not an attorney), I've heard many lawyers use the word seriously. But not until their third highball.
nt.
Anyway, I'm sitting in the small blind, with the KQ off, which regard I as a trap hand, and it is raised to me from a middle positon from a confirmed 30-60 (see above) player. No one else ready to rumble.
Normally in a lower limit, I would three bet him without hesitation. But he is playing scared and I know it. He's large. I strongly considered folding.
I call, very hesitantly (in my own mind, I dont think I showed it, but we all live in a dream world....), and the big blind ( a solid excellent player, in any cirmcumstance; u dont want to mess with him short, I assure you,_ sends it to four bets.) Well, well, I have pot odds so here I am with the best looking dominated hand in the world; I call.
Well here comes the flop. I dont want top pair. In all truth I want to take my money back and go home. I would be rather pleased with nothing, but.....
The flop comes three handed:
Kh, Qs, 5h, now aint that a flop?
I am first to act. I really need a few seconds to think so I check. Check raise is booming in my head. Nonetheless I am none to happy. In my bones I feel that I may be dead anyway.
Well, well, what to do? In my mind I go through the hands that they could have. This is quick in my lowly opinion. Well, in a fit of aggression (which I am prone to) I launch it, making it two bets for the Big to consider. There is no hesitation whatsoever, he makes it three bets. He has rockets there is no doubt in my mind. I know him. I think I am right. If it isn't rockets its even bigger: rockets are the best case scenerio, in my feeble view. Shoot. I look briefly at the floor who is gazing over her table. Boy she has nice hair. The middle position calls.
To make a long story short I fold. Yes I fold. I have top two on the flop. I fold.
By the way they both held the aces. Ok, I'm a silly bugger, so be it. The turn and river were blanks. I folded the winner.
Comments? Thank u all.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 12:54 a.m.
Posted by: Mark Harris (MHBookster@aol.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 4:34 p.m.
Posted by: Doc
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 8:14 p.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 3:56 a.m.
I suspect you hate the way this hand was played too. But I know you have experience at these levels and your posts indicate high competence. Can you make a case for this play? If you recall, you posted a question regarding AT offsuit in the small blind facing a button raise. Which I was one of the response posts. I believe the same logic applies here to the small.
Anyway good luck.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 4:45 a.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 3:04 p.m.
His predictability is one of the reasons I knew he had a huge hand on the flop. Between the two of them I thought for sure one of them had QQ, or KK.
Posted by: Paul Feeney (Feen9876@aol.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 5:33 a.m.
Posted by: Jay (Alig8rJ@aol.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 8:24 p.m.
Posted by: JAMESGUEST (jamesguest@earrthlink.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 11:24 p.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 1 October 2000, at 11:27 p.m.
Posted by: brad (bradley_abc@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 5:28 a.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 12:24 p.m.
Posted by: brad (bradley_abc@yahoo.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 7:13 p.m.
Posted by: rob (r_sch@msn.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 9:37 a.m.
Posted by: KingCR
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 4:41 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 3 October 2000, at 4:23 p.m.
Posted by: berya
Posted on: Tuesday, 3 October 2000, at 3:20 p.m.
Posted by: suspicious
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 5:28 p.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 3:44 a.m.
Regarding preflop call. It depends entirely on the average hand the raiser will hold and whether you are a decent favorite or not to this hand. Some consideration is given to his play after the flop and to the big blind ,who usually will be out (both of these factors are very secondary ). A three bet against this player at a lower limit would be unequivocally correct. Anyone who doubts this does not understand preflop theory. At a higher limit it is more doubtful that KQ is a fav(because his hand average may have changed) but I still called, not actually certain of his average due to lack of evidence. This is, plus the fact he was easier to read, is why the limit has bearing. You must keep in mind that I have played with with him many times and have a good read on him. In my original post I stated he was large. This read was more after the flop than before. I did not use bayes theorem or some mathematical construction, I used my human judgement( which is right much more often than not). If i was beat I was drawing dead practically. Live by the sword die by the sword.
Anyway, the turn was going to get nasty especially if I was beat. I decided to cut my losses and run.
The big blind, who happens to be a prominent poster here, and asked not to be identified, actually told me later he thought his aces were beat on the flop. He even later asked me if I dropped KQ (this is how good he is) and I told him yes. The reason I posted this hand was because I knew people would think it was wrong. I had hoped some of you would, even as a mental exercise, postulate reasons why this fold or play was correct, or at at theorectically could be.
Any way good luck all. Take care.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 7:50 a.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 3:13 p.m.
What if the raise had come from the button?
Would you now agree with the three bet?
If so what has changed?
Well, if you agree, you might say that it is probably a steal. Which is another way of saying his average holding is weak. Which means if he holds an average holding that KQ is a decent favorite too, the small blind is correct to reraise.
Consider the following:
1)what the raisers average holding likely is
2)how you both play after the flop (this reduces the effect of position)
3)the tendencies of the big blind
The first factor is overwhelmingly the most important. Now if you would agree that three betting a button raiser is correct (if you disagree let me know), then what difference does it make where the bet came from. It could be from under the gun if these conditions are met.
None of this means I played that hand well, but I don't think it was as bad as I did when I first posted it.
Anyway good luck. Thanks for your response. Let me know what you think. I suspect we play in similiar type games.
Posted by: backdoor
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 3:23 p.m.
I had also elaborated on the reasons why I did it but I think I covered it here. Thanks for your response; the criticism is very helpful, sometimes I get awful arrogant.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 5 October 2000, at 4:59 p.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 5:15 p.m.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 6:13 p.m.
Posted by: Daniel Zarchan (zarchan@fas.harvard.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 7:18 p.m.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 10:31 p.m.
Posted by: Tommy Angelo (Tomium@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 2 October 2000, at 11:19 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 12:08 p.m.
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 3 October 2000, at 3:13 a.m.
Posted by: GD (guydowns@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 3 October 2000, at 10:32 p.m.
Posted by: Andy Fox (andyfclg@ni.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 12:30 a.m.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 1:41 p.m.
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 1:55 a.m.
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 4:31 a.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 12:21 p.m.
Posted by: anonymous (patchu@prodigy.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 4 October 2000, at 6:16 p.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 12:04 a.m.
The game is average with normally about 3-4 people seeing the flop. No easier game exists presently.
Anyway, the flop comes four handed:
Ks, 9h, 6d
Nice flop by my read. I am aware the button is almost certainly going to bet if checked to, and I doubt anyone, with the exception of the blind, has a king. If they have a king its medium suited. I could be wrong but its my preliminary assessment.
The big blind blind checks, I check, the middle position checks and, as predicted, the button bets. So far so good. The big blind folds. I raise with my enormous pair of nines. The middle position folds, muttering, "big king again...damn you always hit...". The button calls.
The turn comes 7d.
The board reads Ks 9h 6d 7d There is about 12 small bets in there now.
Well now I was planning to bet but i decide to check...the button bets.... and I check raise again. Now we can't have them buttons running us over now can we? He calls, no hesitation. Not good?
The river comes 4h
Final board: Ks 9h 6d 7d 4h
I check and he thinks for a second the checks and says, "You're good", turning over QJdiamonds.
I turn over 98spades, and take it. Even blind squirrels find acorns, I guess.
It's better to be lucky than good. Take care all.
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 12:57 a.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 7:59 p.m.
Yes I think you are correct that the button's lack of hesitation is good, but he is the call down with ace high type.
Thanks for your response.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 3:18 a.m.
Posted by: Mason Malmuth (MasonMalmuth@TwoPlusTwo.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 5:47 a.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 8:21 p.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 8:13 p.m.
My check raise with the medium pair is consistent with my opponents belief that I might have a strong king. I also believe I am leading. When I believe I am leading I play aggressively and when I think I am not, with little or insufficient outs I fold. It's a simple philosophy. It has worked successfully for four consectutive years.
The check raise on the turn was again because I thought I was leading. It is bold and it is aggressive. It also is great for image. I am known (believe it or not) as very tight unless it is shorthanded. I realize this is difficult for the less intuitive types to understand. When he called he may very well have been leading, hence the check on the river. It may also induce a bluff because I am certainly going to call.
I am on a fourteen day winning streak and I am getting a bit off beat, I'll admit. I am intentionally posting my "mistake" or less obvious hands because who needs to read that I did that play with pocket kings? Who can't do that?
Your response is appreciated.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 1:11 p.m.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 3:12 p.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 3:26 p.m.
Posted by: Rick Nebiolo (ricknebiolo@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 3:52 p.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 5:05 p.m.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 7:57 p.m.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 8:27 p.m.
These type of hands are going to be dominated when called. Additionally, when the flop comes low, you can be put off that board a little too easy.
I am coming to think it is probably better to just play a little too tight early and forfeit this small loss.
Posted by: backdoor (frankensteinross@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 8:53 p.m.
You are absolutely correct. I decided early on that I would spend alot of my effort in reading other people and their hands. I act ruthlessly on these opinions. This leads to bad folds and bad aggression. But my good days are aplenty.
Anyway, I am reconsidering posting here. The other prominent poster who I play with told me about this site perhaps months ago and I think it is good but the reality of it is that most of the winning in poker is done using experience and judgement. This does not easily transmit over this medium. I may be getting overly influenced by some of the mainstream thought processes which will lower my ultimate potential. I am not interested in boring 1.5 bets an hour poker. That would drain my soul.
Take care.
Posted by: Tom Haley (CodeSavvy@aol.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 7 October 2000, at 11:14 p.m.
Posted by: GD (guydowns@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 10:18 p.m.
Posted by: John Feeney
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 10:41 p.m.
Posted by: John Feeney
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 1:10 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 14 October 2000, at 2:31 a.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 5:21 p.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 7:09 p.m.
Posted by: Phat Mack (phat_mack@bigfoot.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:22 p.m.
Posted by: Take The Points
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 12:50 a.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 10:38 a.m.
Posted by: Fat-Charlie (charles_parker@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 5:12 p.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 5:26 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 11:14 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 5:25 p.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 7:05 p.m.
Posted by: Tommy Angelo (Tomium@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:35 p.m.
Posted by: Take The Points
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 12:43 a.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 3:31 p.m.
Posted by: Phat Mack (phat_mack@bigfoot.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 3:17 a.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 9:14 a.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 10:44 a.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 5:21 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 5:48 p.m.
Posted by: brett (user609919@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:07 p.m.
Posted by: Tommy Angelo (Tomium@aol.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:31 p.m.
Posted by: Doc
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 9:58 p.m.
Posted by: Doc
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 10:00 p.m.
Posted by: Jim Brier (jbrier1@msn.com)
Posted on: Friday, 6 October 2000, at 11:53 p.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 7 October 2000, at 1:22 a.m.
Posted by: brett (user609919@ao.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 7 October 2000, at 6:37 a.m.
Posted by: Tommy Angelo (Tomium@aol.com)
Posted on: Saturday, 7 October 2000, at 11:06 a.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 10:48 a.m.
Posted by: RichardF (fakhry@chariot.net.au)
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 9:06 a.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 9:19 a.m.
Posted by: bruce (bru7ce@home.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 12:16 p.m.
Posted by: M (mmmmmm@excelonline.com)
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 7:19 p.m.
Posted by: Ray Zee
Posted on: Sunday, 8 October 2000, at 8:36 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 2:10 a.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 12:20 p.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 1:35 p.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 1:47 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 6:52 p.m.
Posted by: JRounder2000 (theaterluvr@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 7:16 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Monday, 9 October 2000, at 7:58 p.m.
Posted by: Joe Medwick
Posted on: Thursday, 19 October 2000, at 1:19 p.m.
Posted by: quakey (jtb3@haaga.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 12:16 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 12:39 p.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 1:00 p.m.
Posted by: Mojo
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 1:56 p.m.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Tuesday, 10 October 2000, at 2:11 p.m.
Posted by: Take The Points
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 2:29 a.m.
Posted by: DeadBart (dsb12@cornell.edu)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 3:23 a.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 7:50 a.m.
Posted by: Take The Points
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 3:23 a.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 2:42 p.m.
Posted by: Kerbernes Kid
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 8:10 a.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 14 October 2000, at 6:20 a.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 3:02 p.m.
Let's say you make the choice to call and raise pot...($60 in total)... Now the first guy thinks about it and folds, and the second guy cold-calls. Are you the best? Say he has AKs in the suit that is on the board, he can hit his A or the suit on the turn or another K. Assume first bettor folded 1 king. He has 13 outs for the turn card. You have 4 outs to improve. Your chance before the turn is about 55% of winning the hand.
Posted by: joeschmoe (joeschmoe@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 18 October 2000, at 10:02 p.m.
Posted by: ClubRoyal (euro9876@home.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 3:27 a.m.
Posted by: Greg Raymer (FossilMan) (raymers@worldnet.att.net)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 9:55 a.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 3:07 p.m.
Flop comes A 9 4 with 2 hearts. I bet pot ($49) next to act thinks about it a second and calls. Everyone else folds. I now think that he is on the heart draw, but I am a little worried. I think if he had AK he would have hit me back, but I am not sure. Turn comes 8 offsuit... still leaving 2 hearts. What is my correct play? I bet pot ($147). He thinks for a while and calls all in ($136). At this point I thought I may be drawing dead... why would he call me? It turns out he was drawing to K high hearts and he had a pair of 9's. River was a blank and I took down a monster ($419)... When he called me I thought he was playing me, did I bet this properly? I put him on the heart draw, but I thought he must have the nut hearts to even try. That meant he had a pair of A's. I think I was lucky he made a poor call, and he didn't hit.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 3:38 p.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 3:14 p.m.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 4:25 p.m.
Posted by: Phat Mack (phat_mack@bigfoot.com)
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 6:01 p.m.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 October 2000, at 6:06 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 1:55 p.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 2:47 p.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 14 October 2000, at 5:59 a.m.
Posted by: ohKanada (ohKanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 1:02 a.m.
Posted by: Michael 7
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 10:32 a.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 1:51 p.m.
Posted by: ohKanada (ohKanada@hotmail.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 4:52 p.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 1:33 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 1:48 p.m.
Posted by: Earl (brikshoe@iquest.net)
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 8:16 p.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 14 October 2000, at 5:58 a.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 3:05 p.m.
Posted by: abe
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 6:03 p.m.
Posted by: natedogg (nate-web@thegrovers.com)
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 6:56 p.m.
Posted by: BillM
Posted on: Thursday, 12 October 2000, at 11:30 p.m.
Posted by: Patrick
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 1:46 p.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 14 October 2000, at 6:10 a.m.
Posted by: Derrick Ashworth (ashworth@powersurfr.com)
Posted on: Monday, 16 October 2000, at 2:19 p.m.
Posted by: Patrick
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 4:23 p.m.
Posted by: TR (tomcrich@earthlink.net)
Posted on: Saturday, 21 October 2000, at 2:45 a.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 2:03 p.m.
Posted by: BillM
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 2:19 p.m.
Posted by: Dave in Cali (grimreaper777@juno.com)
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 3:07 p.m.
Posted by: Scott Wyler
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 3:52 p.m.
Posted by: BillM
Posted on: Friday, 13 October 2000, at 5:35 p.m.
Posted by: David Rodgers (DDaveRodgers@aol.com)
Posted on: Monday, 16 October 2000, at 4:06 p.m.
Posted by: scott (sms134@columbia.edu)
Posted on: Monday, 16 October 2000, at 4:57 p.m.
Posted by: David Rodgers (DDaveRodgers@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 4:07 p.m.
Posted by: William Safire
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 6:04 p.m.
Posted by: David Rodgers (DDaveRodgers@aol.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 8:29 p.m.
Posted by: Phat Mack (phat_mack@bigfoot.com)
Posted on: Tuesday, 17 October 2000, at 8:31 p.m.
Posted by: William Safire
Posted on: Wednesday, 18 October 2000, at 1:48 p.m.