![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Playning in Spokane Washington recently I came across a 10-20 game that had an unusual blind structure:
Little Blind $2 Big Blind $5
A player can call for $5 but to raise you need to make it $20 to go.
Otherwise it plays as regular 10-20.
This changes a lot. Could I get some enlightenment as to how this affects: Starting Hand Selection, Blind Stealing, Check raiseing before the flop, and the general level of aggressiveness.
The game seemed awful sluggish and slow to me which I attributed to these blinds.
Thanks A9s
it's 10-20 with tiny blinds, so you can afford to play SUPER tight. that first raise to 20$ means you will get a lot more respect when you raise BTF, but it's not worth raising as often because the blinds you might steal are so much smaller. overall, I don't like the structure and it's no wonder the game was slow.
Played in a pretty tight 30-60 game when i get dealed pocket Kings on the button. This hand was the first time that all players called to me ( usually only 2 or 3 players in the pot) . I didn't raise here because i thought i will probably be beaten with any kind of flop if i don't flop a king. Am i right here ? Or should i raise anyway ?
Look at it this way: If you are not going to raise with KK what are you going to raise with, wait for AA? Yes, your chances of winning have gone down with the large field but go ahead and raise, try to lose the blinds and make all of the limpers call a raise with inferior hands due to the big pot brewing.
I was playing a fairly typical 9-18 game yesterday with a wide variety of player types. I was playing extremely tight during the whole session and my chip stack was pretty stagnant. In fact, during one span of 3 rounds, I think I only saw 1 flop (other than my unraised BB hands). Well, I pick up KhQh UTG and limp. A loose/aggressive player (LA) who has been running bad raises two seats to my left. Four other players call including a tight/aggressive (AT) player in the cutoff. I call. We see the flop 6-handed.
Flop: Ks 9h 4h (great flop for me, I think).
I'm first to act and check.
Question 1: Should I have bet here? I believed that I was greatly handicapped by my position. In fact, I was planning to just flat call any bets (regardless of my big draw) because LA could have AK. Would any of you considered a check-raise assuming someone would bet the flop?
Anyways, LA bets, one limper calls, TA raises, I call, LA FOLDS! and limper calls. Now 3-handed. I guess LA had nothing (maybe medium or small suited-connectors).
Turn: Ks 9h 4h (6d)
I bet out because I put TA on a flush draw (just hoping it isn't the nut flush draw). Limper folds and LA thinks for a few moments and just calls.
Question 2: Would you guys have bet out on the turn? Or maybe go for a check-raise?
River: Ks 9h 4h 6d (Qs)
Of course I bet again. I missed my flush, but I have top two pair. TA thinks again, but quickly calls. I tell him I have top two and he shakes his head and shows me AhKd. I take the pot.
Honestly, I thought that I was winning all the way. I had some outs, but I definitely didn't win the hand the way that I thought I would. Anyways, would any one have played it any differently? FYI, TA said that he thought I made 2 pair on the turn not the river.
ouch he thought you had K6? so much for your table image eh? he shouldve raised you on the turn. he played weak tight. you should have bet out on the flop and let LA raise it for you. in this case it wouldve come back to you as 3 bets but so what, you have a great draw. you could go either way on the turn. your bet confused him and like i said already he was a fool not to raise you right there and then.
id almost like a check raise attempt on the river. you can be quite sure you have the best hand since you werent raised on the turn but the question is whether or not he'll put you on a busted flush draw and bet at you. im not sure he wouldve, he played the turn so poorly, but i think against a typical opponent this would have been your strongest play.
early player (EP) open limps, all fold to me in the cutoff. I have 66 and raise to get the button. big blind calls, limper calls.
the flop is all clubs with a 6c
blind checks, EP checks, I check.
Turn is a non-spade rag.
blind check, EP bets, I raise. blind calls two bets cold (shit) and EP calls. Comments? should I have raised?
river is another non-spade rag.
blind leads out, EP folds, I make crying call. should I make this call?
Bet the flop, if raised re-raise, the trun should EP now bet you can call to the river, if they check I'm driving the set to the river. They'll need dynamite to get me to release this hand.
SPM,...now I read the correct answer from Jim Brier...
I like the raise BTF. Aggression is good and on the button is a good place to show a little extra aggression. I think you absolutely should bet the flop. Make the singleton clubs pay for their draw. The raise on the turn is another aggressive move I like. You have the redraw in case they have a made flush.
When thing I consider when deciding to just call for two bets (with AK) or raising to three out of the blinds is whether my raise will eliminate limpers. So if the first person in raised there are no limpers to eliminate, or if the limpers are the kind of opponents who will now automatically come I'm less inclined to raise.
Thanks for explaining the concept. I did some modeling of EV in this situation and my conclusion is that this strategy is well supported mathematically which I'm sure you already knew.
The other night when I was at the Mirage I asked a number of good players what they would do if a decent player limps in under the gun, a solid player raises from early position, and everyone folds to you in the small blind holding AK offsuit. The majority of them would just call but there were some who would 3 bet to make sure the big blind and the limper got out of the hand. The point is that Mason stated that many players would 3 bet in this situation. I was amazed to learn that this was indeed correct.
Of course, I still don't like the play under the circumstances described since I believe that all you are doing is locking up a good second place finish for yourself. Now if they would just pay for second place....
The interesting thing is that you have asked precisely those players who would be less inclined to three bet. Only the very best players and some exceptionally weak ones would know not to three bet in this spot. Virtually all other players would.
By the way, unless you can be accurate with this sort of thing, your ability to read hands will be diminished and your overall win rate will not be that high because you won't be able to identify those situations where a seemingly unusual play (such as a fourth street raise with an AQ when the board is ATT8 - two hearts) is correct.
"Only the very best players and some exceptionally weak ones would know not to three bet in this spot."
Interesting. Don't get me wrong I'm not proposing that this situation is an automatic three bet but Mason is wrong if he thinks a three bet is not a good play in this situation. Which is what the above statement means to me.
Vince
All I'm saying is that three betting may not be right if the blind and the original limper are likely to come. What I am saying is that the best players are probably going to consider this option (of not reraising) while the typical player would never consider it.
nt
O.K so you are correct. Big deal.
Vince
I am usually less inclined to three bet from either blind with AKo because in the games I play in, doing so will rarely eliminate anyone, plus I am out of position, and if I get raised again it will almost always be by a big pair. See the flop for cheap unless limpers will be eliminated. it is possible to make your opponents make a larger mistake by calling your bet/raise if you haven't made the pot so darn big by reraising. Suited I would reraise almost every time because like I said, it won't eliminate limpers, but suited my hand likes the extra $$ in the pot more. Also, It somewhat depends on the raising requirements of the initial raiser. If I am so unlucky as to have a maniac on my immediate left, I would reraise with AKo or AKs because my hand would likely be better than his (and everyone else's).
Odd, I would think reraising w/AK is routine especially if you are in a position where your reraise would force the others to call 2 more bets cold and thus make them likely to fold. If you could get it heads up if just one more bet, "then this is an expense you should not worry about." (or something like that).
I don't like JB's comment/inconsistency, he seems to be saying the play of reraising is coorect yet costing you money. I don't think the correct will cost you money in the long run....
Actually, I don't think he ever stated that reraising was correct so I don't know that there was any inconsistency in his commentary.
I do (and have) questioned his assumption that Mason (in that example) likely has a better hand than AK and his assertion that chasing out the limpers may not be worth very much because you are going to finish in second place in any event.
It is not hard to imagine a scenario where you outflop Mason if he had something like QQ and yet lose to one of the other 2 limpers. That's one reason why getting out the 2 players in between you and Mason is important with a hand like AK out of the sb. You get dead money in the pot and increase your chances of winning the pot at the cost of one extra bet preflop.
The fear of being 4 bet is not something that one should worry about very much. Firstly, 4 bets preflop are uncommon. Secondly, if Mason does 4 bet preflop, it could save you money on later streets with the info you have on his hand.
suspicious let us review the original operating assumptions that were in place when this question got generated. You are in a $30-$60 game. A decent player limps in under the gun. A solid player, Mason in this case, immediately raises. Everyone folds to you in the small blind holding AK offsuit.
I believe 3 betting is a mistake. Mason's point was not really whether or not 3 betting was a mistake. Mason's point was that many decent players will in fact 3 bet here. I thought he was wrong. Based on my little informal survey of good players I talked to at the Mirage, it turns out that some of them would in fact 3 bet for the reasons skp and yourself mention. So Mason was right in stating that many good players would 3 bet here.
Now all that being said, most of the good players I talked to would just call. Their thinking is similar to mine. The raiser will have AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK, or AQ. Against AA your AK is hopelessly buried. Against KK, you are dead to an Ace. Against QQ,JJ,TT you will be out of position facing an over pair most of the time when the flop misses you making you a dog. Against another AK you are a slight underdog because of your poor position and the fact that your opponent is a good player just like yourself. The only hand that you are a clear favorite against is AQ. Furthermore, it is costing you at least one extra bet to 3 bet and in some cases it will cost you two extra bets when you get 4 bet. I feel, along with many other players I have talked to, that these facts override the benefit of driving out the other two players. As an aside, the big blind might fold anyway for one bet so re-raising may not be necessary to get one of the other two players out.
--Of course, I still don't like the play under the circumstances described since I believe that all you are doing is locking up a good second place finish for yourself. Now if they would just pay for second place.... --
Jim you miss point badly. If you heads up, a 6-5 dog and pot offer 2-1 you glad to take it. Do you mind being in second then? You always lose with AK against other pair? If reraise get it heads up don't you make more money?
The issue is not whether or not you will play. No one is advocating folding here. The issue is whether or not the increased cost of 3 betting coupled with the possibility of it getting 4 bet by a player marked with a good hand with the best position is worth the value of having the other two players fold. In general, I don't believe it is. First of all, the big blind may well fold anyway so in his case your 3 bet is not necessary to get him out. Secondly, the decent player who limped in under the gun may well have cards you need thereby crippling your chances for improvement. Hands headed by an Ace or a King are the kinds of hands players limp with (e.g.-AJ,KQ,AT suited, KJ suited). If the UTG limper has a medium pair like 99,88,77, or 66 unless he flops a set he will probably be folding anyway once the flop comes. The only other hands a decent player limps in with under the gun would be QJ suited, JT suited, and maybe T9 suited. Unless he flops a draw, he will probably be dumping these once the flop comes anyway with a pre-flop raiser right over him.
You guys are grossly overestimating the value of eliminating a limper or two in situations where you most likely have a second best playing hand under the circumstances given your poor position. It is rarely worth the cost.
"You guys are grossly overestimating the value of eliminating a limper or two in situations where you most likely have a second best playing hand under the circumstances given your poor position. It is rarely worth the cost."
Frankly, I think you put way too much emphasis on having to cough up an extra bet preflop.
There are so many assumptions you are making here which may or may not be valid. If they are valid and I am wrong, it ain't the end of the world - I lose an extra bet or possibly two if Mason has AA or KK (in which case I may save money on later streets with the added info I have on his hand). But if they are invalid and you are wrong, you may just let another pot slip by when you hold a premium hand.
Your assumptions and my comments:
1. Mason most likely has a better hand (I have already commented on this...don't forget that you will outflop Mason about 30% of the time even if he has TT,JJ or QQ).
2. First limper likely has an Ace or King because those are good limping cards.
I don't agree with you at all that hands with Aces or Kings are limping hands. In any event, if that was the case, you should just about never raise with AK once two or three guys limp in because surely one or two of your 6 outs are dead.
Interesting to note that the limper here had 97s. I think that you often incorrectly assume that everyone has the same UTG limping standards that you do. I don't know about Vegas games in general but many players in the games that I play in would play these hands UTG.
3. The big blind may fold anyway.
While this is true, there is absolutely no doubt that the big blind can play a helluva lot more hands if you don't 3 bet. Mnay will play hands as weak as 64s or 87 offsuit. It's one of the reasons that when you have a hand like A8 or something in the sb, you should frequently 3 bet a cut-off or button preflop open-raise. You want to get the big blind out and get heads-up.
Can we at least agree that if the limper and BB announced to the table that they will fold if you reraise but call if you don't, then you should reraise. If not, then I gather you are saying that factor No. 1 by itself is enough reason not to reraise - am I correct?
I am afraid not. I remained unconvinced that driving out one or two limping hands is worth even one small bet much less two unless the pot is gigantic (20 bets or more). Consider a hypothetical case. You have Player A, Player B, and Player C. Player A's chances of winning the pot are 60%. Player B's chances of winning the pot are 30%. Player C's chances of winning the pot are 10%. If Player B is willing to put in one more small bet, then Player C will fold. What happens when Player C folds in most cases? Player A's chances increase to 67% and Player B's chances increase to 33%. Player B has increased his chances of winning by 3%. How big does a pot have to be to make this worth 1 bet? Something on the order of 30 bets (1/0.033). Pots are rarely this large. Furthermore, as the pot gets bigger the likelihood of anyone folding for one more bet goes down dramatically.
P.S: I am unaware of any book ever written on full tabled limit hold'em which advocates limping in under the gun with Nine-Seven suited. Not Ciaffone, not Krieger, not Jones, not 2+2, not anyone. Therefore, any player who does so should be stripped of the title "a decent player".
Your looking at the problem in the correct way and your point is valid. However, as skp alludes to you are describing a worst case scenario and are not describing the nominal case IMO. I did some modeling of EV in this situation and I believe that the strategy is well supported mathematically. However, my modeling was crude and I think I need to do a more thorough job before I post my work. I will attempt to do this in the next couple of days but I'm busy with a lot of activities at the present time. I consider this a "fun" activity though so I may find the time to clean up my work. I think we should leave this interesting debate at the point where you left it. We have to make a case that the cost of an extra small bet results in an appropriate gain in EV. Or at leat describe when this occurs.
I would welcome such an analysis because I may be wrong about this. Both David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth have argued that it is frequently correct to raise even when you know you don't have the best hand in order to drive out other players and increase your chances of winning the pot. I remain "a doubting Thomas" until someone shows me with a few specific examples. I think it should be a separate lead post on the "General" forum. I also think it should be discussed at the upcoming seminar that 2+2 is planning in April at the Mirage.
Good post and I was wondering if the Turbo sims might shed some insight as well.
Dear Doubting Thomas:)
Limper, Mason and you with AK in the sb.
Assuming that Mason does not have AA, I don't think that you can find a combination of hands for the 3 players such that their respective chances of winning are limper (10%), Mason (60%) and you (30%). Let me know if you think there any such combos.
Furthermore, when you get rid of the limpers (don't forget bb which you have not accounted for in your 60-30-10 estimates), I think you will increase your chances of winning the pot more than Mason's chances will be increased if he has hands like QQ-TT. This is because when he has those hands, the danger cards for him are the ones that you hold. So, when you toast the limpers with your reraise, you are the primary benefactor rather than Mason.
And you continue to refuse to consider how the hand will play out if you 3 bet as opposed to if you smoothcall. Flops that will terrify you if you smoothcall will now terrify Mason if you reraise even if you assume that he *MUST* have a better preflop hand which is of course not necessarily true.
When I first got involved in this debate, I said that there were plenty of valid arguments on both sides i.e., 3 betting and smoothcalling. I am baffled that despite the many points put forth in favour of 3 betting, you continue to think that smoothcalling is so much the better play all because you want to save 1 bet.
I guess I just can't get my points across very well.
I too look forward to Haley's analysis.
As for your 97s suited comments, of course you are correct in saying that it shouldn't be played UTG. A very good player would not play it there. But if a player plays it, it doesn't mean that he just can't be decent. My point simply was that you are wrong to think that every decent player would muck hands such as 97s UTG. And of course, almost all poor players play those hands up front.
"Assuming that Mason does not have AA, I don't think that you can find a combination of hands for the 3 players such that their respective chances of winning are limper (10%), Mason (60%), and you (30%)."
But why would I exclude AA? Against AA or KK, the AK is HUGE dog. Against KK I need to flop an Ace which will only happen about 20% of the time. Against QQ,JJ,TT an Ace or a King will only flop 30% of the time and this includes flops that give Mason a set. While I may not be able to come up with precise hand holdings for everyone that equate to exactly the percentage I used in my strawman, I believe that they are representative and the idea is quite valid. There is some range you could use and vary it a few percentage points but you would still conclude that the pot has to be very large in order to justify the increased cost. This increased cost is more than one small bet because there will be a certain percentage of the time when it will get 4 bet.
"So when you toast the limpers with your reraise, you are the primary benefactor rather than Mason."
I don't see how you figure this at all. How is eliminating limpers help AK versus QQ out of position? The limpers are more likely to hold an Ace or a King than they are to hold a Queen given your hand and Mason's. Furthermore, there are a lot more hands that people limp with which include an Ace or a King than include a Queen.
"And you continue to refuse ot consider how the hand will play out if you 3 bet as opposed to if you smoothcall. Flops that terrify you if you smoothcall will now terrify Mason if you re-raise even if you re-raise even if you assume the he must have a better pre-flop hand which is of course not necessarily true".
Unless the flop comes Ace high or King high (a 30% probability), a 3 bet will not terrify Mason when he holds an overpair with position. Heads-up with a large pot at stake, an overpair is a through ticket. Mason's hand is AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK, or AQ. Given your hand of AK, Mason will have a better hand over 70% of the time given his superior position. In fact AQ suited is not that big of a dog to AK when AQ suited has position I wouldn't think.
Your points are very clear. But like many poker decisions there are reasons for deciding which course of action to take. The issue is which reasons are the most compelling given the particulars of the situation.
"Mason's hand is AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK, or AQ."
Quick observation... Previously I suggested stretching that range just a bit. But even going very strictly by HPFAP his hands should include AJs and KQs - right?
Yes, AJ suited and KQ suited should be included. Given that you have AK of different suits, this would be 6 more hands that you could beat making your hand a little better. Personally, I would be surprised if Mason raises much upfront with KQ suited. I never would. KQ suited is a bizarre hand. It looks lovely but it doesn't get to win very often in shortanded, raised pots like this.
It still seems counter intuitive that AQ offsuit is a fold when you have position over the raiser but AK offsuit becomes a re-raising hand when you are out of position. AK offsuit is better than AQ offsuit. But is it that much better?
Situation No.1 has Mason UTG coming in with a raise. You have AQ off. Feeney's AQ test has you folding.
Situation No.2 has a UTG limper, a raise by Mason and you in the sb with AK. We both agree that folding is out of the qusetion here. The big debate if we have been boring the crowd with is whether you ought to reraise. You already know my reasons for reraising although as I have stated several times, smoothcalling has its advantages.
In any event...
Situation No. 1: Mason has TT(6), JJ(6), QQ (3), KK (6), AA (3), AK (12), AQ (9), AJs (3) and KQs (3).
When he raises, you only beat KQs and AJs - 6 combos. Further, you are behind when he has AQ despite your favourable position because if neither of you get help, you will likely fold before he does.
So, you are ahead 6 times and behind 45 times. Actually, come to think of it, you are not even "really" ahead when he has AJs and KQs because if you both miss, once again, he will likely take the pot. You will both likely miss here given that you share 1 common card in each scenario.
Your best chances of a suck-out are if he has TT,JJ (12 combos). But once again, since you are the caller preflop rather than the 3 bettor, you will often fail to go to the river even if pot odds warrant it. This reduces your chances of a suckout.
In situation No. 2, you have a much better hand.
Mason's hands are TT (6), JJ (6), QQ (6), KK (3), AA (3), AK (9), AQ (12), AJs (3) and KQs (3). Once again, 51 possible raising hands.
You are ahead 18 times. You are tied 9 times. You are behind 24 times.
Now, if you three bet like I suggest, you are in fact ahead 27 times as now when he has AK, you should take the pot (usually).
Of the 24 times that you are behind, you have what about a 48% chance (guess) of sucking out on TT,JJ,QQ if you go to the river (given that you have 3 bet preflop, you are usually commited to seeing the turn and often the river). In situation No. 1, your chances of sucking out on QQ are not as good as here obviously.
In sum, you are ahead more often in the case of AK. You have greater cahnces of sucking out. By three betting, you increase your chances of sucking out and by 3 betting, you will likely win on those occasions when you both miss.
While you have position in situation No. 1 and don't in situation no. 2, what good is it going to do you if you are not going to use it i.e. I presume that if the flop comes all rags, you are not going to raise Mason to see where he is at.
Besides, in situation No. 2, by 3 betting with the AK, you are telling Mason something. You have to put him on a thought at this point. He is likely to fear AA or KK in your hands. So, by betting the flop and turn, you will take the pot when he has AK etc. because he knows that AK is about the worst hand you could have.
Yes..AK is way better than AQ just like AQ is way better than KQ.
Okay, skp you almost have me convinced here. But let me summarize it differently:
Situation 1: Losses: 36 Ties:9 Wins: 6 Total: 51 (AQ)
Situation 2: Losses: 24 Ties:9 Wins: 18 Total: 51 (AK)
AQ is a loser 71% of the time. AK is only a loser 47% of the time. This is a BIG improvement. In situation #2 it still troubles me that I am 3 betting on a hand that rates to be a loser almost half the time.
Your logic about ties seems to be counter intuitive. The conventional wisdom is that the last guy to act has the advantage. You are arguing that the first guy to act has the advantage because he was the last one to take aggressive action. This might be true but it seems paradoxical and is unclear to me. It is more clear to me that ties in situation #1 favor the pre-flop raiser than that ties in situation #2 favor an out of position 3 bettor. In situation #2 I don't believe Mason would capitulate with AK on the flop facing a 3 bettor which means that AK is going to have to keep firing on later streets which can get expensive since he doesn't know where he stands. Would most players lead with AK on the turn when undercards show up facing an early position pre-flop raiser? I don't know. I tend to think not.
Back at the office earlier than expected:)
Nothing at all wrong with your lingering doubts. A lot of what both of us have been saying in this thread are subject to attack and certainly, the points you raise here are valid considerations to doubt what I am saying.
That said, once you 3 bet preflop, you generally should take a stab at the turn with nothing when you face no raise on the flop because Mason still has to worry that the worst hand you could have is AK.
The way I see it is that the 3 bet preflop goes a long way in neutralizing (or at least diminishing) the positional disadvantage you have.
In situation No. 1, you lose ties despite having the positional advantage precisely because you were not the preflop aggressor. Of course, you can resteal and stuff like that but I am talking about what usually happens. Preflop aggression is IMO a very big factor and in heads-up situations can sometimes be as (if not more) important than position provided of course you don't overdo it. I mean, if you start 3 betting out of the bb with AJ against an early position raiser solid, you are doomed as he will no longer fear your 3 bets very much and will be more likely to use his position to advantage on later streets. This is of course simply restating the maxim that tight-aggressive poker is the key to success.
As always, a pleasure discussing poker with you. Thanks for your superb insight here and generally speaking all threads that you throw your 2 bits into.
Well, no.
When you have AK, unless Mason has AA, there is no way that his chances of winning the pot are anywhere near twice yours. After all, Mason is way more likely to have other raising hands as opposed to aa or K given that you have AK.
Give Mason any of TT-AA, AK, AQ, AJs and perhaps the red KQs.
If you work out the math using Bayesian analysis, there is no way that the figures come anywhere close to 60% Mason and 30 % for you and 10% for the other guy if you put him on some kind of semi-hand (i.e. don't put 72 off suit in his hands but you can put in hands as weak as 22 or 65s).
I would say that the figures are closer to 45% Mason, 35% you and 20% the other guy.
Now, if you remove the other guy from the equation with a 3 bet, you might see that the equation changes to 55% Mason and 45% you..,if Mason has TT-QQ, your chances are nearly equal to his i.e. 50%/50%. That's the classic tournament confrontation a pocket pair vs. AK - usually a 50/50 proposition.
This shows that toasting the limpers can help you more than Mason. It has to. You have to hit to beat Mason if he has a pocket pair. If you don't hit, it makes no difference to you if the limper is in or out because you are still trailing. But once you hit, you benefit from limper being out.
Now, all of this is assuming a "bad" case scenario for you i.e. Mason has you beat. It's not the worst case scenario because Mason could have AA. But there's also a better case scenario i.e. Mason has AK, AQ, AJs, the red KQs. In a real game situation where none of you are all in, you lose every time when the flop comes all rags and he has these hands if you smoothcall. You win if you 3 bet preflop.
If the flop comes all rags and he has a pocket pair, you lose. But you would lose regardless of whether you 3 bet preflop. In other words, saving a bet preflop on those instances ain't going to help you on the flop. But investing that bet preflop helps you a great deal if you have Mason beat or tied preflop or if you catch Queen high flops when he has JJ,TT or if you catch a Jack high flop when he has TT.
Bottom line: You wrote:
"While I may not be able to come up with precise hand holdings for everyone that equate to exactly the percentage I used in my strawman, I believe that they are representative and the idea is quite valid."
With respect, your percentages are not very representative at all IMO as explained above.
You also wrote:
"Against QQ,JJ,TT an Ace or a King will only flop 30% of the time and this includes flops that give Mason a set."
I used 30% to account for the times when you flop an Ace or king but the flop also gives Mason a set. The odds of flopping an Ace or King are higher than that. In other words, I am saying that you will outflop Mason 30% of the time if he has a pocket pair, You don't have to take into account running into a set because the 30% figure already takes that into consideration.
The odds of flopping an Ace or a King given that you have AK are: 1 minus the probability of no Ace or King on a flop of three cards. The probability of no Ace or King on 3 cards is: (44/50)(43/49)(42/48) or 0.676. The probability of flopping an Ace or a King is therefore about 32%. Now if you want to adjust it for the specific case when Mason has QQ then then your chances improve to about 34%. However, this is optimistic since there will be times when you flop an Ace or a King but Mason flops a Queen giving him a set. To figure this out, suppose the first card is an Ace. Given that you have AK and Mason has QQ, there are 47 unseen cards two of which are Queens. The probability that neither of the remaining two flop cards are a Queen is: (45/47)(44/46) which is 91.6%. In other words, about 8% of the time Mason will flop a set of Queens when you flop an Ace or a King. So overall your chances of flopping top pair without Mason flopping a set of Queens is about 26% making you a 3:1 dog. Furthermore, you will go on to lose big bucks the 8% of the time you flop top pair/top kicker and Mason flops a set of Queens. Of course when you flop top pair and no Queen flops, Mason will have no trouble dumping his two outer in most cases so you don't get payed off when you get lucky and get the best of it on the flop.
The so called classic tournament confrontation where a pair of Deuces is only a slight favorite over AK sounds like a Lawrence Hill computer simulation study that assumes that AK gets to go all the way to the river at no cost. This might happen against Deuces. But when AK is up against QQ out of position in a real poker situation, AK will frequently never get to the river especially if the flop misses AK completely.
Now factor in the times when one or more of the limpers happen to have limped in with an Ace or a King in their hands. Your chances of improving to run down QQ really plummet.
I guess it will take a computer simulation study or something to address this. You may want to answer my question to John Feeney about how it can wrong to call with AQ offsuit with position against an early position raiser but it is right to re-raise with AK offsuit out of position against that same raiser. Is AK offsuit that much better than AQ offsuit? The latter is a fold with position but the former is a re-raising hand out of position? There is something wrong with this picture.
Thank you for taking the pains to figure out the actual odds of you outflopping Mason if he has QQ. The 30% figure was an estimate (as I initially stated when I proposed it) - but I'll buy the 26% calculation that you have set out but the rest of my comments above still apply with the 26% figure.
"So overall your chances of flopping top pair without Mason flopping a set of Queens is about 26% making you a 3:1 dog."
Yes...now what about the 9 times that he will have AK, the 12 times that he will have AQ, the 3 times he will have AJs and the 2 or 3 times he will have KQs.
When you factor in all of those, you will have no chance of showing that Mason stands to win twice as often as you do even if there was no further betting i.e. you both go all in. So, I stand by my comment that the 60%-30%-10% figure is way off.
"The so called classic tournament confrontation where a pair of Deuces is only a slight favorite over AK sounds like a Lawrence Hill computer simulation study that assumes that AK gets to go all the way to the river at no cost. This might happen against Deuces. But when AK is up against QQ out of position in a real poker situation, AK will frequently never get to the river especially if the flop misses AK completely."
Ironic. I have oftn made the same point to you with respect to 3 betting an early position solid player when you have JJ or TT. Your argument against 3 betting then has always been that JJ is a big dog to an overpair and a small favourite over AK and AQ. And I pointed out on several occasions that this incorrectly assumes that AK will go the river. Now, you are throwing it in my face:)...Touche....but aaah...I have considered that. You see, when you 3 bet preflop, you are going to see the turn card for sure and may even go to the river. If you don't 3 bet preflop, it is way less likely that you will get an opportunity to do this.
You are right about the computer simulations. Maybe Abdul can be summoned but as I gather, he is busy making quantum leaps (see RGP).
But let's not lose sight of why I am even arguing this issue with you: I am simply saying that you are wrong if you think smoothcalling is clearly the better choice. There are advantages of smoothcalling to be sure (I never claimed otherwise) and you nicley point out one such advantage i.e. you hit an Ace on the flop and now don't want to lose Mason with his 2 outer.
Which brings me to another issue where you and I have disagreed before. The situation is this: I have AK in the big blind and the button raises and sb folds. I will often just call with my AK precisely because I think I have greater EV by calling if I happen to flop an Ace or King. Depending on the texture of the flop, I may often checkcall all the way. Good flops to do this on would be those that come with an open pair.
I will answer your question to John later. Gotta go for a haircut.
|
|
AhKd |
JcTc |
3h3d |
QsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
29.35 |
19.49 |
16.53 |
34.42 |
|
% chance of win or split |
29.55 |
19.69 |
16.73 |
34.63 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
29.40 |
19.54 |
16.58 |
34.47 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
2.40 |
4.11 |
5.03 |
1.90 |
|
|
AhKd |
QsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
43.032 |
56.55 |
|
% chance of win or split |
43.45 |
56.97 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
43.24 |
56.76 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
1.31 |
0.76 |
|
|
AhKd |
3h3d |
QsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
35.38 |
17.67 |
46.52 |
|
% chance of win or split |
35.81 |
18.10 |
46.95 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
35.52 |
17.81 |
46.67 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
1.82 |
4.61 |
1.14 |
|
|
AhKd |
7c6c |
2h2d |
QsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
27.42 |
24.05 |
15.55 |
33.76 |
|
% chance of win or split |
27.64 |
24.26 |
14.77 |
33.98 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
27.48 |
24.10 |
14.60 |
33.82 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
2.64 |
3.15 |
5.85 |
1.95 |
|
|
AhKd |
7c6c |
2h2d |
AsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
25.43 |
35.16 |
21.22 |
15.85 |
|
% chance of win or split |
27.77 |
35.48 |
21.54 |
18.19 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
26.52 |
35.24 |
21.30 |
16.94 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
2.77 |
1.84 |
3.69 |
4.90 |
|
|
AhKd |
AsQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
72.35 |
22.97 |
|
% chance of win or split |
77.03 |
27.65 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
74.69 |
25.31 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
0.34 |
2.95 |
|
|
AhKd |
JcTc |
3s3h |
AdQd |
|
% chance of outright win |
24.10 |
30.25 |
24.23 |
19.50 |
|
% chance of win or split |
26.01 |
30.54 |
24.52 |
21.42 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
24.98 |
30.32 |
24.31 |
20.39 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
3.00 |
2.298 |
3.11 |
3.90 |
|
|
AhKd |
7s6s |
AcQc |
|
% chance of outright win |
36.78 |
36.43 |
24.36 |
|
% chance of win or split |
39.21 |
36.69 |
26.79 |
|
expected return, % of pot |
37.95 |
36.52 |
25.53 |
|
fair pot odds:1 |
1.63 |
1.74 |
2.92 |
Just for the heck of it I did some hot and cold sims pitting AK against various hands. I used QQ and AQ as the raiser's hand. There clearly is a tremendous benefit to three betting AK and eliminating hands like 76s, 33, and JTs when the raiser has AQ. When the raiser has QQ eliminating players probably benefits the QQ more than the AK. However, if the other players stay in it isn't that bad for the AK when the raiser has AQ. At this point I'm thinking that three betting AK is very wrong when:
1) Raiser has AA or KK.
2) Raiser has something like AQs and there are other callers with decent hands that will stay in for the extra bets.
It is a good play when you can eliminate the callers and the raiser does not have AA or KK.
I'd be interested in comments about this. This is far from a complete analysis and I realize that hot and cold sims leave a lot to be desired however I do think they provide some insight.
Interesting and thanks. Your conclusions sound perfectly all right to me although to be sure, I will reflect on your sim results a little more and provide some afterthoughts later in the week.
I am tied up at some depositions over the next few days and will be out of the loop till at least Wednesday.
Tom I appreciate the analyses and would like to see more, perhaps on a new post but I have some problems:
1. Does this assume that hands like pocket Deuces and Seven-Six suited get to go all the way to the river? If yes, then their winning chances are overstated. Pocket Deuces will not be calling flop bets without flopping a set so they never get to see the river.
2. I don't believe that there are very many players who will limp in under the gun in a $30-$60 game with a small pocket pair or a small to medium suited connector (e.g.-Seven-Six suited). I think you should run the analyses based on the UTG limper having AJ offsuit or KQ offsuit or AT suited or KJ suited or 99 or 88 or 77.
3. I recommend for simplicity sake you ignore the big blind for the moment and assume he would fold for one raise or two. Just concentrate on the UTG limper having one of the hands I listed.
4. Do the simulation first assuming that the limper goes all the way to the river but then assume that he folds on the flop or turn when he catches a top pair of Aces,Kings, or Queens and gets bet out of the hand so he never gets beyond the turn.
I don't know if this is all possible and I may be asking for too much. I also believe this should be continued as a new post so others can more easily participate.
Thanks!
>>Tom I appreciate the analyses and would like to see more, perhaps on a new post but I have some problems: <<
This is not meant to be a complete analysis rather a start.
>>1. Does this assume that hands like pocket Deuces and Seven-Six suited get to go all the way to the river? If yes, then their winning chances are overstated. Pocket Deuces will not be calling flop bets without flopping a set so they never get to see the river. <<
Yes it does and I agree with what you are saying.
>>2. I don't believe that there are very many players who will limp in under the gun in a $30-$60 game with a small pocket pair or a small to medium suited connector (e.g.-Seven-Six suited). I think you should run the analyses based on the UTG limper having AJ offsuit or KQ offsuit or AT suited or KJ suited or 99 or 88 or 77. <<
I somewhat disagree with this in light of some of Mason's comments (especially small pairs) but I agree that all the hands you mention are worth looking at.
>>3. I recommend for simplicity sake you ignore the big blind for the moment and assume he would fold for one raise or two. Just concentrate on the UTG limper having one of the hands I listed. <<
Ok
>>4. Do the simulation first assuming that the limper goes all the way to the river but then assume that he folds on the flop or turn when he catches a top pair of Aces,Kings, or Queens and gets bet out of the hand so he never gets beyond the turn. <<
One of the things about three betting is that a hand such as 76s knows he will get bet out of the hand and have a propensity to fold pre-flop for two bets. I really think a better idea would be some TTH sims to complement what is done with the hot and cold sims. I'll have to add some software (what you suggest is great) but this will take time and I will have to verify that my code works.
Even though what you said in your first point is true I believe that eliminating the pairs and suited connectors has more value than what you may think. Anyway I would like to do hot and cold sims given your criteria and do some Turbo sims (I need to get the most recent version of TTH) with the same criteria. Look at the results and see if they provide any insight.
(n/t)
You played the river great. Enjoyable post.
How else could I play the river?
n/t
But I still think you are pure evil!
Still though, if it was me I would be smirking for hours! I'm a little bit evil now and then too....
Dave in Cali
this difficulty is easily avoided by mucking if you don't hit your set.
I'm not so this is true, since a certain percentage of the time you WILL hold the best hand after the flop, whether you hit your set or not AND whether the pot was raised or not. Paying hard earned $$ to see a flop, only to fold the best hand afterward, can't be a very good poker strategy.
Kevin
my view on playing pocket pairs up front is that I'm relying on the implied odds of hitting a set. So if the game is loose or there are several players that will always go to far with their hands I will play. Playing pocket pairs after the flop is very tricky unless you have good control of your opponents. Not many of us do. So if you start going too far with your pocket pairs when you don't flop a set you are giving back all the money you win when you do hit your set. You're correct that throwing away the best hand is not profitable but you have to know you have the best hand. Since neither of us are complete calling stations I'm sure that we've both been bluffed out or thrown away a winner. A similiar situation is playing Ace-shit suited and an Ace flops. for this hand to be profitable you have to be able to muck top pair.
Mike-
I'm not sure if I got the gist of your post. It sounded to me as if you are suggesting playing ALL pocket pairs from early position unless the game is specifically very aggressive. Is this correct?
There is also another problem I don't like about this strategy (although I'm not saying it's wrong). Since I'm very much mathematically challenged, I have no way of verifying this...
Losing when you flop a set is usually a very expensive proposition. By playing ALL pairs you are naturally going to flop more sets. It seems to me that this must mean you're winning percentage on flopped sets will go down as well. Simple math states that you will run into bigger sets, straights and flushes (when you don't fill) more often than had you flopped this set under more appropriate circumstances. This might seem miniscule, but I would think it should subtract at least some, from profits on other sets which you flop under more ideal conditions. Then again, this might be a very dumb perspective but I do wonder what effect if any, it could have.
Kevin
He should probably lose w/ sets w/ a pretty similar percentage whether or not he limps early or sneaks in late w/ the pocket pair. I don't think that the fact that he'll lose more w/ sets b/c he's making more sets should factor in b/c he'll invariably win more pots w/ sets as well. Unless there is something about the hands that are in the congo-line of callers after he limps early(ie, maybe he's encouraging more Pocketpairs to see a flop) that would cause small-middle sets to lose more, but I don't think it'd be enough to weigh in to consideration.
Yes, but when you sneak in late with a pocket pair, you have the luxury of knowing the pot status, ie. is it raised?, how many callers, the types of players in, etc. This information is important, since it means you will rarely flop a set of 4's only to look at a set of Q's. You won't be able to prevent these costly situations from an early position. I agree he will no doubt win more sets, but my point was that he should lose more as well. Of course, you always like it when you flop a set, but they're not automatic winners, especially smaller ones. Being out of position means you may encounter difficulties in making it incorrect for certain draws to continue against you. So, you lose a larger percentage of the time when the draw correctly gets there, and you don't fill up. This might be a nitpick, I don't know.
Kevin
Rick-
Would you still have a problem with this raise if the limper were weak/tightish AND both blinds were tight enough to both fold say, 30% of the time?
In this case, I actually like the raise. I'd also like to know if I'm wrong to like it. 66 is a small favorite vs. two overcards heads up. In addition, you have position and a bunch of scare card outs to go along with the two other sixes. You often will be getting 3:2 (assumes you bet the flop) on this play, with a hand that could very well be best after the flop anyway.
I think 66 is MUCH better than 33 or 44 in this spot, since there are many more flops in which you will have an overpair or some type of straight draw which could give you powerful semi-bluffing opportunities on later streets. I'd appreciate your comments Rick.
Kevin
You are correct in viewing 66 as much better than 44 or 33. 66 can be a good second pair (higher than middle pair but lower than top pair) especially when the flop is Ten-high or lower as well as being an overpair to the board on occasion. Having a good second pair in a shorthanded, unraised pot is almost as good as having top pair sometimes.
I agree with your thinking. As Rick said, it's close between calling, folding and raising anyway. Once you have the conditions you stated, then the raise starts making good sense.
These simple hands still confuse the heck out of me. My AA went down in flames on this hand. Should I have bailed? Or should I have stayed and tried to make a recovery?
2 limpers, and I raised with two black Aces. The BB calls (All typical players).
The flop came 6d,3s,2d. Checked to me and I bet, BB (check) raises, others fold, I call.
The turn was the Tc. BB bets, I raised, he thinks and re-raises, I folded?!!
While it's possible he had 63s,62s,32s, I didn't think it was likely. He may have had a pair with a draw, but it was very doubtful in my mind that he'd 3 bet such a hand. I was fairly sure he had flopped a set.
I had anywhere from zero (if he had flopped a str8) to eight outs (assuming he had no diamond re-draw) and it was sure to cost me another two bets. I never show my hands when mucking, so the gentleman next to me, who appeared to be a very good player said, "AK is the most over rated hand". When I responded "what makes you think it was AK?" (which I regret having said), he replied, "AA was a call my friend". Was it really that cut and dried? Thanks for any help.
Kevin
the only mistake was th.s: you should have had it made up in your mind what you would do if reraised on the turn. if you knew you would call his 3 bet or reraise back then your raise was the right move. if you knew you would fold to his reraise then i believe a call was the right move.
just ask yourself, "am i going to let this guy push me around?" if you answer yes than you at least have a call to the river with AA and this board. for gosh sakes he couldve played JJ that way.
what mid-limit game are you playing in where you havent thought this sort of thing out a little more? can i have the address?
asd said "what game are you playing in that you haven't thought that out a little more, can I have the address"
You can't make a decision like that before hand, unless you play system cards. "I have AA call, call, call, call, call, is it good? Nice beat." While he could be ready for such a situation, the variables that go into that sort of decision are player based, which need to constantly be adapted. Can I have the address of where you play, because I know what to do with sytem players.
I think my problem was that I did make a decision before hand. I had pre-decided that he was either getting fancy with a draw, or that I was drawing very thin. I felt there was no chance he could've played JJ that way. If there were, I certainly would've called such a player down. (as I've done many times before)
I appreciate your taking the time to comment. btw- This game was at Harrah's Casino in East Chicago, IN but if it's my play in particular your after, I normaly play at Hollywood Casino in Aurora.
Kevin
So you got the game all figured out, and you want the address, well son bring your best game and Kevin, me and the boys will show you a good time at the felt jungle.
Less you forget Rounder played by us for a while, he don't play no more.
SPM,...looking for a little action...
okay so i got cocky, but i really think you misplayed this. as did the guy sitting next to you. im not a system player nor would i advocate such a silly idea.
your opponent showed aggression on the flop so you raised him on the turn.. you had to have at least taken a second to wonder if you would fold to a reraise and why. i think a flat call on the turn (And river) wouldve been in order here. you let him push you off your hand and there's several hands he couldve held that were not as strong as your AA that he couldve done it with.
I'm not disagreeing with you. The mistake was raising the turn, instead of calling the hand down. I DO think my fold was correct, since this particular player doesn't make it 3 bets without a minimum holding of a set. But that's not the point. Your correct to say my raise on the turn was poor. I suspected that even before I posted the hand.
I never had a problem with your original response. Cocky or not, you gave an honest opinion. That's all I look for, whether I played a hand well or not. In this case, I suffered a brain lapse. It happens.
Kevin
You raise on the button with AA. 4 way action.
Flop: 632 with 2 dimaonds. BB checkraises you. The other players fold. You smoothcall.
Turn: Tc
For all intents and purpoese, that turn card is a blank. It didn't improve his hand unless he held pocket Tens (which would be consistent with his preflop call and flop checkraise).
In any event, if you disregard TT, why is raising the turn so quickly poo-pooed (sp?) here?
Your decision on how to play this hand must be guided by what you know about this player. I can see several hands that he could have where it is absolutely correct for you to raise the turn eg. 65. There are also several hands that he could have that you beat when it still might be incorrect for you to raise the turn eg. Any pocket overpair to the flop with which he might checkraise the flop but fold to your raise on the turn.
The beauty of having AA on a flop such as this against a single opponent is that you have several ways of playing the hand. These include 3 betting the flop, raising the turn, calling all the way or even waiting until the river to raise. All can be correct and you ought to use them all depending on your read of your opponent.
In this instance, with a board of T632, I would think that some of my opponents have a mere 2 outer with an overpair to the flop and are good enough to release it if I raise. In that case, I would not raise. If they had an overpair to the turn, very few are good enough to release it but other than JJ, it is reasonable to assume that he would have 3 bet preflop if he had an overpair to the turn.
Some will call with a 2 outer like 88. Against them, I will raise.
Many opponents could call with a wide range of hands from the big blind and could well have flopped a 9 outer with a hand like 65. You can bet your booties I am going to raise the turn and charge them extra to draw. Many of thenm will also call my river bet if they miss with their pair of 6's or whatever just in case I tried to outmuscle them with AK.
I should also add that if one of the other limpers had called the bb's checkraise on the flop (and if you chose just to smoothcall the flop), you should definitely raise the turn when the ten hits if bb bets and limper just calls. There could be a lot of colective outs against you. For example, if bb has 65 and the limper has 2 diamonds, there are 16 bad cards for you on the river. But that means there are 26 good cards. You are getting 2:1 on your raise as they will both likely call. Failing to raise there is just giving up too much.
As it was, on your hand, you probably made a good laydown when he 3 bet. Very few players have the balls to 3 bet here without a set (although KK could be an exception if he for some reason just chose to smoothcall preflop rather than 3 betting it).
In any event, my point is that raising the turn is not automatically an error. Often, it can be the correct play.
Whoa! Ok, back to the drawing board. Everything you stated, makes so much sense, that I'm now back to being confused about the hand.
Of course, I raised under the premise of the Tc being a blank for all intents and purposes. I also wanted to charge a worse hand with a possible draw, and/or an over pair, which I felt this particular player calls me down with. But within that premise was also the fact that I didn't feel he'd 3-bet a worse hand or even two pair, since I thought this player to be timid enough to worry about my having TT.
So, does this mean it's possible I played it right? The way I see it, it kinda comes down to confidence in your ability to read the player. Players capable of 3-betting a worse hand, you're gonna have to call down, especially when the draw(s) does not get there. If not, why make the raise, right? With other players, a 3 bet is all but certain to mean you are severely behind.
Your reasons for when to call/when to raise on the turn seem absolutely correct to me. What about 3-betting the flop? Now, if check/raised on the turn, is it easier to call it down? Thanks skp.
Kevin
it's a matter of inconsistency on your part here. if youre going to raise on the turn, i still dont really like your fold.
with that board he can, if he wants to be optmistic, presume that you are on a semibluff draw. so your raise would be correct but so would his 3 bet with JJ (or even a preflop-smoothcalled QQ or KK) and some other hands you have enough outs against to proceed. i agree that when you are 3 bet on the turn it 'looks' like you are beat, but you still have an AA that he could easily be thinking is AK or worse. perhaps you think you have a good read on him, but perhaps he saw you do something, or he 'think' he saw you doing something previously that has led him to discount your preflop raises. or maybe he has a read on you as someone who will laydown a decent hand?
it isnt so much your turn raise that i hated, but your FOLD. everyone else liked your fold but i think you owe it to yourself to see the river and call your opponent down here. youre probably beat, but i believe you have the odds to call him down here. skp defends your play well, but brier's post is the key here to seeing why raising is a mistake and why calling to the river is your best course of action here.
good hand btw, thanks for posting it!
I am not sure that there is any inconsistency in raising the turn and then folding to a 3 bet. At one point in time, Kevin thought he had him beat. An instant later, it was "oops" time.
That said, if your point is that he could (should) have called the 3 bet, well I certainly wouldn't quibble with that very much. I just about never fault a guy for not making a laydown in a heads-up situation particularly with AA.
I also think that calling the turn and then calling the river is a viable option and should be done now and then. But the reason for doing that should not be solely because you don't want to be 3 bet. As well, there are costs to playing this way too often i.e. you don't charge your opponents to draw, you don't maximize your wins, you may portray a weak-tight image etc.
Sure, you can 3 bet the flop. You probably do that now and then with AK here particularly if the flop has 2 parts to Broadway. So, you have to do that now and then with big pockets as well.
Then, if he checkraises you on the turn, you will probably have to call in a heads-up situation with AA. A checkraise though noteworthy is of course not as scary as the 3 bet that the bb put on you in your actual hand.
.
I've seen you play, and believe me, I am and will continue to take your money, and you will never know who is doing it.
I'd be careful going after SPM. He's got lots of influence. From the aldermen of VOP, to the backstreet rif-raf of A2CT, not to mention all his friends from Border Town. If he were to call in a couple of favors...
ET,
Take off that silly tattered rain coat and wash the fake hair from your forehead.
You look ridiculous.
Posted By: Anonymous
I've seen you play, and believe me, I am and will continue to take your money, and you will never know who is doing it.
Sorry to disappoint you, I counted all my chips and none are missing. In fact I got some extra, step up to the table any time Anonymous. Any one can say they win the SPM's chips.
You better stay Anonymous, it will be easier for you to call yourself a winner.
SPM,...available, and never anonymous...
Kevin I think that when you get check-raised on the flop you should simply call and plan on calling to the river with your big over pair. If you win, you will collect something on every street and if you lose, you will at least lose the minimum without ever getting bluffed out. Suppose this were a $10-$20 game. Pre-flop there is $85 in the pot. On the flop another $40 is added bringing the total pot to $125. Now using your approach you raise on the turn and fold so it costs you $40 and you never get to see his hand to make sure you are beat. So you lose $40 and run the risk of either getting bluffed out or failing to improve when you would have thereby costing you an entire pot. Now under my scenario, I just call the turn and call the river so I invest the same $40. However, I never get bluffed out and I give myself the best chance to win the pot since I get to see a river card.
don't get into the habit of raising if you are in a situation where a re-raise is going to be a [big] problem; this is a dilemma you REALLY want to avoid on the turn - for exactly the reason(s) Jim gave.
It can also become a nagging problem on the river in small to medium sized pots. It can be a problem on any round, in a pot of any size - but for reasons that should be obvious these are two of the "places" you truly don't want to allow it to happen.
You played this hand badly; you did not play it badly enough to warrant "asd's" comment.
I've been off the forum for a while, but to the best of my recollection this is the first time I've seen him get cranky - until there's a second time I'm going to chalk it up to him having had a bad day.
J-D
P.S. I DON'T have the luxry of knowing the tendencies of your opponent in this hand, but even if raising the turn was a mistake I think you made a good laydown when he 3-bet you. Most non-maniacal players want to be called when they 3-bet; the second raise is almost never a semi-bluff - it's usually a real hand. And in this case ALMOST all of the possible real hands he could have leave you drawing thin to dead.
Even if he did happen to have you beat with two-pair - and as you pointed out, with this board 2-pair is very unlikely - you only have 8 outs.
And you can't even be sure what your outs are; he would not be the first player ever to "protect" his blind with 32s, 62s, or even T6s.
Thanks for your comments J-D. I think you're 100% correct that raising the turn was a bigger mistake than folding to a re-raise.
As for asd's comments, they really don't bother me. I thought and played this hand very poorly and deserve reprimand. When I get to the point where I'm incapable of the occasional bad play, I guess I'll have no more use for this board or other forms of learning. Until then, I appreciate comments/criticisms even when harsh. Thanks again J-D
Kevin
don't get into the habit of raising if you are in a situation where a re-raise is going to be a [big] problem
This is very well put, if simple. I suppose in some ways it is covered in HPFAP, but not as well as it could be.
I haven't read all the posts in this thread so this comment may be a little off, but I believe that this thype of stuff is well discussed in THE THEORY OF POKER.
Thanks Jim-
I had decided on the flop, that he might be getting fancy with a draw hence, my raise on the turn. I would also make this raise against someone who I assess would pay me off with a worse hand or who would 3-bet a worse hand. After I raised, I had 2nd thoughts about assessment of this player's ability to make such a play even with two pair, so I folded.
I agree with you 100%, that in this case, it's better to simply call him down (maybe after 3-betting the flop?). I think there are times for this type of raise on the turn, but this was no doubt a poor one. Thanks Jim.
Kevin
Kevin:
Good post.
Without having a read on this player, this situation screams "SET!" to me.
I am curious of your thought process on the turn however. The BB has check-raised you on the flop. With this board, I now put him on one of the following hands. 4-5 (made straight, wants to put pressure on any diamond draw), a set (I think most would play a set fast here, i.e. check-raise, again to make any diamond draw feel much pressure), any overpair would be bet this way, or a diamond draw. When you just called his flop check-raise, what did you put him on? Had you made up your mind to raise on the turn upon smooth-calling his flop raise?
One thought here, and a play that I might make here, would be with Ad10d (Although I quite possibly fold this preflop). I would check-raise with the nut draw, I could also 3-bet this turn with this hand. Was this a player you saw capable of making plays such as this with a hand not already ahead of you. If not, then you made a great laydown. The one interesting dilemma here is that a player capable of such a play would not be there with a straight. He would however be there with a set, or an overpair. You stated that it was your thinking that he held a set. (FYI, I would have bet either you or Willy held a set when in fact you chopped with AQ).
My take here is that you gave the BB the opportunity to make a GREAT play against you. It is likely you were beat if he was as you stated simply a typical player, but if he was better than typical, there are an equal number of hands he might play this way that you have beat.
Matt
Thanks for your response Matt-
I played this one horribly and that's that! I think the key is in recognizing exactly what my mistake was, and why I made it.
I have little doubt that raising the turn was very incorrect. I thought this player capable of playing a draw in this manner on the flop, but incapable of any of the stronger plays you mentioned on the turn. If so, I call the hand down without reservation as I'm sure you know and have seen me do in the past. But I should never have put myself in this predicament here.
You are correct that my intention was to raise the turn immediately after he check/raised and made it heads up on the flop. But why? This was very poor thinking on my part, given the texture of the flop and what I knew about this player and his possible holdings. This was the mistake as far as I'm concerned. You are right that against a more creative player, I might be giving him a chance to make a great play. (Then again, it might be correct to give such a player this opportunity, so I can foil it). The fold, I can live with, since I'm quite sure I was drawing slim to dead in this particular case. Thanks Matt.
Kevin
Kevin, I hate to add to your confusion here but ...
Let me 1st state that I think your raise on the turn was questionable, but NOT nearly the diaster you seem to indicate.
You state in your response to Matt
" I thought this player capable of playing a draw in this manner on the flop, but incapable of any of the stronger plays you mention on the turn"
So why not go ahead and make your play on the turn? To use a term I've seen you use here, if he rereaises, you can now fold with IMPUNITY.
When I first read Jim Brier's response, I agreed that he would spend the same ($40) but he would force the other player to show down his hand. Now I'm not so sure, if, as you stated he was capable of, the player was driving a draw, you make much more, and YOU GOT YOUR ANSWER (he reraised and you folded) for the same amount of $$.
So let's say the player doesn't reraise you on the turn and your pocket rockets hold up..are you now a hero for your excellent raise on the turn that maximized your hand?
As some of the others have suggested, I believe that the play of this hand is VERY situational based and can only be answered with the proverbial "it depends"
I'll bet if you would have walked away from the table and written down all your thoughts and feelings at the moment, you would remember the "reasonableness" of your play. It seems to me that you have analyized this play under the light of day and cold hard facts and you now doubt yourself. However, as we all know, playing poker isn't only about cold hard facts, facts are hard to come by and generally aren't know till the hand is over. I think you reacted to a read on the other person's attempt to make a play, then you folded when you were certain you were beat. Sounds like good poker play to me!
I have never played against you, but I can assume from the depth of your posts and the comments I hear from those who have played against you.....maybe you should quit second guessing yourself so much? :-)
Just my two cents worth
BH
.
Poker players,
I was in the 10-20 game a couple nights ago, and the chips were flying. I was losing and taking my fair share of pots, and the lineup was tough. I was in the 1 seat. Here's one hand I remember in particular. I had 87 in middle position, no pre-flop raises, five callers.
FLOP: A 9 6 rainbow - gave me an open-ended straight draw. I love running semi-bluffs with these types of draws...on good days, players will check to me on the turn, and I can get a free card if I'm in late or last position. The 8 seat BB checked, the 10 seat bet, I raised. Question...should I have raised here and risked running the other players out of the hand? My reasoning was, by raising, I was representing at least a pair of Aces. I hoped to build up the pot and/or knock some weak draws out to get a better chance of winning the pot. If I hit my straight, I'll get a lot of action from the players with pairs and two pairs. The 5 seat folded, 6 seat called, BB folded, and the 10 seat reraised. Here's my main question...if I'm running a semi-bluff, and I get reraised, should I cap it or should I just call? I called, and the other players called. When the 10 seat reraised, I put him on a pair or two pair.
TURN: 10. Perfect. 10 seat bet out, I raised. Players inbetween folded. 10 seat reraised. I capped it. He called.
RIVER: 8. 10 seat bet, I called...mostly because I no longer had a nut straight (no flush possible,) even though there was almost no chance he'd have QJ with the way he was betting the hand. He turned over 99 for a flopped set. I turned over the 87 for the straight. Question...should I have raised here or just called like I did and went to the showdown?
Any comments are appreciated!
Scott
I don't like your raise on the flop. First of all you're driving out all the callers you want in. Second, there's an ace on the flop. In my experience it's difficult to get players to release an ace in a loose game. Third, your only out is the str8.
Now if you have QJ and the flop is 9-10-x I would make that raise to drive out the better Q's and J's. Or if there are players trapped between the initial bettor and myself (and I feel the bettor won't re-raise) I'll sometimes make that raise.
On the turn, you've got the nuts. Raise, re-raise and raise again.
On the river you still have the best. You're right when you say there is no way he has QJ. Raise 'til you're all in.
Scott,
After the flop, I'd have to agree with Winger. With the type of drawing hand that you have, it's best to have as many callers as possible so you get paid the max if you hit. I understand the free card concept with your raise, but I'd probably just call here. On the turn, you gotta keep raising until it's capped because you got the nuts. When I was reading all the action that took place on the turn, I actually felt that Seat 10 had the straight also. Most good players will put you on the straight after your raise, so it doesn't make too much sense to reraise you unless Seat 10 also has the nuts. However, due to your raise on the flop, it's possible that you might have 66 or mabye even A10.
After the river shows a one card for the straight and Seat 10 still bets, I'd assume that you had the same hand and just call. However, a raise just in case Seat 10 doesn't have a straight wouldn't be a bad play.
Glad you won the pot!
I don't like raising on a draw when you have several players left to act who will call one bet but not two.
Your opponent way overplayed his hand. Given the action I probably would have raised him on the river.
Players,
This hand took place before the 87 hand I was talking about in my last post. I had AdQc in middle position. Two people called, the 10 seat raised, I called, and three others called before the flop. The 10 seat is a good player, and he usually won't raise in early/middle position with anything less than AA, KK, or AK.
FLOP: Q 7 4 rainbow
Players checked to the 10 seat, and he bet. I raised...is this a good idea, knowing almost for sure he's got an overpair? I was "hoping" he had KK or AK so that an Ace or a Queen could help me out. The crazy players between us called the bets cold, and the 10 seat reraised me. I called, and everyone else called....my guess is they called because of the huge pot we built up.
TURN: Q
The 10 seat bet out again, I raised this time, and this one knocked everyone between us out. My reasoning was, now that I have trips with a bullet, if he DOES have Aces, he has one out...the case Ace. If he has Kings, he needs another King to show up. The 10 seat called.
RIVER: Ace of Spades
S!#@$. He bet, and I just had to shake my head and call. Normally, Queens full of Aces is a great hand...but I called just to get to the showdown. The pot was already big enough, and if he had anything else but AA, I'd win the pot. Needless to say, he had exactly AA, and he took it down with Aces full.
Was I out of line by seeing the flop and the turn? Again, comments are appreciated.
Scott
"The 10 seat is a good player, and he usually won't raise in early/middle position with anything less than AA, KK, or AK".
Your AQo is obviously dominated. If this opponent is truly this straightforward and predictable, this should be an easy preflop fold.
Matt
Why would you call a raise by a player who "normally only raises with AA, KK or A-K" with AQ? Your hand is a huge dog before the flop.
On the flop, would he bet AK? If he would you played correctly. When he re-raises and with the pot as big as it is I too would take one off hoping I have 5 outs. Bad luck on the river, but you got what you deserved for getting involved pre-flop.
If you knew the 10 seat was a solid player, who, by raising in early position, had a strong hand, why would you call? I am reading John Feeny's (Inside the Poker Mind) book right now and he discusses this exact topic (calling with AQ in middle position vs. an early position raise). Essentially he says that he loves having players in his game who make this call. If this player was the solid player that you say he was, he should only raise with group I, II, and sometimes III hands from early position. This means that more often than not (I think Feeny says around 75% of the time) when you are holding AQ in middle position against an early raiser, you are beaten.
I used to make this mistake too, so don't let it get you down...just avoid doing it in the future.
Take care, Jason
I agree with everyone above. Knowing what you did about this player you should have folded.
Put it this way. When you called, what sort of flop were you hoping for? Any A you may be dominated, any K (with or with out an A) you are dominated. Q? There are only 3 of them left and if it hits you are only a 4:3 favorite to have the best hand (12 ways he could have AK vs 9 ways he could have AA, KK). So you are drawing to three outs on the flop and even when you hit one you will be leading only 57% of the time and when you are not you will end up paying dearly for it.
Really you are hoping to flop QQX and even then you may end up losing (as you infortunately found out).
Regards,
Paul Talbot
Players,
Thanks for your posts. If my hand was suited, I should have gotten involved, maybe. Just another example of a marginal hand being worth a little profit or a huge loss.
Scott
one other thing, you should rarely flat call a raise with A-Qo. definitely pump or dump. obviously in this case it was dump situation.
Where is the ten seat? to your right? I always think it is better just to say where the bettors are in relation to where you are...
But I think you pbly fold preflop, but if you are going to play you should reraise and get it heads up. Your knowledge of the players will decide the best course of action.
On the flop, I aggree you should raise. Unfortunately part of your reason to raise didn't work out you didn't get it heads up... YOu don't say how many people took the flop or called on the flop. Sounds like your play on the flop is routine as a) you have to raise when bet into with what is often the best hand b) when raised, you have to call as you are pbly getting something like 24-1 on your final call. (and you have at least 2 outs unless he unfortunately has QQ).
If you KNOW that the raiser will only raise with AA, KK, or AK, you MUST fold AQ offsuit even if you are already in for one bet.
I would be far more willing to throw in another bet with 87s than with AQ offsuit.
The chances of getting a flop you can be happy with are TINY. The only time you can like it is IF you flop a queen AND he only has AK.
Or if you flop 2 queens - but even this is not infallible, as you found out.
Even if you are in for one bet you should throw em in the muck if he is such a tight raiser.
Let me give you an example.
One night I was playing and an old retiree 'rock' was sitting on my right. I also play tight and both of us were in very few pots period, much less together in a pot.
He always looked at his hole cards in such a way that I could see them, so if I knew I wouldn't play a hand I would peek. I saw him muck AK offsuit preflop when there was no preflop raise twice. In one hand he limped in with QQ. It got checked around on every round until the river when there were 2 pair on the board. Someone bet - an obvious ace high or bluff - and he mucked saying 'nope, these ain't any good no more'.
Anyway, one hand I picked up KK. I was all set to raise when suddenly *HE* came out with a raise! Those kings hit the muck as fast as if they were 83 offsuit. When he raised everyone at the table was shocked - all the limpers mucked too! They all knew what he had as well as I did.
Anyway, the point is - don't play a hand that has no chance of winning. In some hands AQ offsuit can be huge - in others it can be completely drawing dead.
Let me give you an example.
I was on the button with QQ one hand. Raise from early position, reraise from a very loose player, so I just called. Ended up getting capped.
Now, the reraiser is very loose and bluffs too often but he won't reraise or cap without some kind of hand. Or so he thinks.
Flop comes 966 with 2 hearts. Bet from early position, reraiser just calls. Now, I have to find out here and now if I'm against KK or AA so I raise. The bettor kind of shakes his head and calls - I know he has AK. He has a lot of tells.
Other capper calls.
Turn is blank, check check I bet they call.
River is a third 6 giving me 6's full of queens.
Check check I bet fold, capper calls.
I win. The loose capper had AQ suited (Not hearts!) The other guy had AK.
Now, What % chance of winning that pot did AQ have? Almost nil.
He was drawing dead to an ace - there was AK out there. He was drawing dead to a queen - one would give me a set.
I guess the best possible flop for me would be AQx. AK would have top pair, I'd have a set, and AQ would have top 2. I woud have gotten unlimited action.
Anyway. the only way AQ could win would be to make a straight or a flush - assuming one of us didn't fill up along the way.
-SmoothB-
"The 10 seat is a good player, and he usually won't raise in early/middle position with anything less than AA, KK, or AK."
His way too tight raising requirements do not make him a good player. Maybe he's a good player for other reasons but this ain't one of them.
Frankly, I have never seen a *good* player who only raises with AA/KK/AK in early/middle position.
nt
--Was I out of line by seeing the flop and the turn? Again, comments are appreciated--
If raiser tight as you say you way out of line calling that raise with AQ. After that you probably in for river. Your bad call will cost you lots in long run.
Here's a funky one. Please ignore the pre-flop call. I'm very new to 20-40, so the more detail you can give me the better.
Eight-handed; I'm in cutoff. UTG is a calling station and played 32o the previous hand. She calls. It's raised by a good player who plays tight after the flop but loose pre-flop. Loose passive player on my right calls. I call with Kh7h, then undergo a full body stutter realizing what I'd done as coach says "I never play that there." Hey, before this hand me neither! Button calls - a solid tight player who can be aggressive with the button. BB calls. $220 in pot.
Flop 9c7s2c. All check to me. I bet, the button obliges with a raise, both calling stations call, and the other two drop. Pot $380.
Turn is Ts. Check to me. I bet. Button raises. Both calling stations call. That's $660 vs. $40. I FOLD on gestalt. Coach is most displeased and I agreed with him, but in retrospect given what I know about the players I think it was correct. The question is what kind of odds was the pot giving me?
Additional info: both calling stations definitely had a draw or one pair. Both would bet top pair on the flop and likely on the turn. Button would never raise without at least top pair and usually would require more, especially acting after me.
I figure I had the equivalent of less than 3 outs due to flush and straight possibilities potentially killing Kc, 7c, Ks and even all three kings if someone had QJ. Plus there'd be additional money lost for hitting my hand and running into a better one.
Aside from the initial call, what do you all think? My rationale for the bet on the turn was that the button would likely have raised the flop with overcards and definitely would not bet them on the turn, and the two calling stations had been dropping on the turn if they had nothing.
Thanks in advance.....
As you expect, pre-flop I don't think much of your cold-call of a bet and raise with King-shit suited.
Your flop bet with middle pair into a crowd of 5 players when a two flush flops is not recommended especially with a solid player yet to act who called two bets cold pre-flop. You probably don't have the best hand and you could easily get raised. You have 5 outs which is an 8:1 shot but the Kc or the 7c may give someone a Club flush or a draw to a Club flush. My point is that you will not win 100% of the time even when you hit one of your outs. You should check.
Your turn bet makes even less sense. Do you think with the solid player raising and all those other players calling that no one can beat a lousy pair of Sevens? Furthermore, the Ts puts 3 cards in a straight zone (T-9-7) so a King could easily give someone a straight if someone does not already have a straight. As a minimum it puts a second overcard to your pair on the table. You should check and fold when the action gets back to you unless everyone checks.
You lost way too much money on this hand.
Matt,
It was fun to try to figure out which players you were talking about based on 2+2ish descriptions.
Preflop: Don't forget that when you're facing a bet, you have three choices. Next time the gamble urge hits in a spot like this, try runing with it, and three bet. It's WAY better than calling, and it only costs 1/3 more. Wrench the button away from the guy on your left. Throw fear back into the face of the guy who thought he liked his A-Q.
I like your bet on the flop. Probe, posture, thin.
I'm with Jim after that. I'd check and fold on the turn after everyone stays in. However, if you MUST put more chips in, I like the way you did it. Betting and folding to a raise is better than check-calling, possibly twice. Generally I need two convincings before I'm convinced. This hand, you got them, so say bye bye.
The extra calling-station players make check-folding on the turn a good play. Let's say you DO have the best hand on the turn, and the button had raised the flop to get a free-card, and then you give him one, and he checks the turn behind you. This is not quite the "mathematical disaster" that free cards often are, given the strength of your hand, and the sheer number of outs the field has against you.
The good news is that you could bet the turn and fold for one more bet for all the right reasons. The monster's leash grows shorter.
Tommy
--It's WAY better than calling, and it only costs 1/3 more. Wrench the button away from the guy on your left.--
Good idea, don't play shitty cards shitty :-)
I was reading an article, I think it was Roy Cooke, talking about how the bad choices in poker tend to have a snowball effect. I that that hand is a good example.
The cold call before the flop didn't just lose you $40 because you got hooked, and since the pot was large you ended up spending a lot more. All because of one lousy mistake.
This is so true. You start off playing bad cards in raised pots and you freqeuntly get thrown into marginal situations where the pot is large but your outs are few. When the session is over you wonder how you lost so much money.
Hey, can you play in my game please?
The Fish
Yeah, there are probably a lot of things you could have done differently here, starting with mucking BTF.
My comment is about the turn play. You bet, were raised and folded. I'm not sure it is ever correct, in limit play, to bed and fold to one raise. If you are not going to call one raise then you should not have bet.
"I am not sure it is ever correct in limit play to bet and fold for one raise."
On the turn it is frequently correct to fold when popped on the expensive street. In the games I play in, when a decent player raises you on the turn he can almost always beat top pair. It usually means two pair or something better. Here is an example:
A $10-$20 game. You limp in from early position with KhQh. A decent player limps in behind you. You take the flop 3 handed. There is $35 in the pot.
The flop is: Qs8d7c
The big blind checks. You bet and only the limper calls. There is $55 in the pot and two players.
The turn is: Jh
You bet and the limper raises. There is $115 in the pot. Despite getting almost 6:1 on the call, I would fold every time against a typical $10-$20 player. I am either drawing dead or playing 3 outs.
I would need a very sure read on the player to fold in that situation. It seems you are putting him on precisely QJ. Assuming he wouldn't play Q7 or Q8, and also assuming he didn't call on the flop with a gutshot draw in an unraised pot. He could have you beat with 78, in which case you have 8 outs instead of 3, (2 Qs, 3 Ks and 3 Js). Yeah he could have a set of 8s or 7s but I would normally call his raise and fold on the river if I don't improve.
He could have QJ or T9. T9 is 16 possible hands. QJ is 6 possible hands given your holding and what is now on the board. He could also have a set of Sevens or Eights and waited until the expensive street to pull the trigger. This would be six more possible hands. This totals 22 possible hands where you are drawing dead and 6 hands where you are playing 3 outs. Eight-Seven is 9 possible hands given the board where you have enough outs to justify continuing. Of the 37 total hands, there are 22 where you are drawing dead, 6 where you are playing 3 outs, and 9 where you have 8 outs. Run it through the computer and you will see that your call would be a long term money loser not to mention the times when you hit one of your outs only to discover that you were drawing dead and have to pay off at the river.
Thanks for the responses everyone (except Fish ;) ). It was indeed a silly hand on my part. River was the Ks. The UTG player won with 86 for the straight. Button mucked.
40/80 game. The button and the big blind are both very loose players....but not too aggressive.
I get AA 2 to the right of the button. One guy limps in front of me, I raise. The button calls, SB folds, BB calls, limper calls as well. We see the flop 5 handed for 4 BB.
The flop is Ks7c2d - checked to me, I bet. The button calls, the big blind calls, the limper folds. Pot is now 5.5BB
The turn is a 2s. The big blind bets. I call, the button now raises, and the big blind just calls. Before I make a decision on calling the button's raise, there is now 10.5BB in the pot, and I am likely have to put in another BB to showdown and hope one of these knuckleheads doesn't have 77 or a deuce. I have to hope that one of the was a spade draw, and the other only had a K, or both only had a K. I am not happy about having to put in 2 BB to showdown my hand.
I fold. The river comes a 5d. Big blind checks, button bets. Big Blind folds. The fact that the button bet the river does say there's a good chance he had a 2 or 77, since with just a K, he may be afraid the big blind had a 2, and probably would have checked it down.
Before I folded, I flashed my cards just a little (not a lot) as I folded...the player to my right asked later if I had AA because he thought he saw it. I told him "heck no, there's no way I fold AA". And he said, "oh, ok...I just thought I saw you flash AA, but I guess I was wrong".
doc said: "The turn is a 2s. The big blind bets. I call, the button now raises, and the big blind just calls. Before I make a decision on calling the button's raise, there is now 10.5BB in the pot, and I am likely have to put in another BB to showdown and hope one of these knuckleheads doesn't have 77 or a deuce. I have to hope that one of the was a spade draw, and the other only had a K, or both only had a K. I am not happy about having to put in 2 BB to showdown my hand. I fold."
sorry to quote so much, but the answer is in what's written here. it's a scary situation cause a loose (And as you see it "not too aggressive") button has raised you on the turn. so everything hinges on your read of him as not too aggressive the way i see it. if he's not too aggressive then he would probably only raise the turn with a hand that has you beat. but if you miread him at all he could be on a spade semibluff or he could be (foolsihly?) betting any number of pairs and draws that you have beat. who's to say he doesnt feel like gambling with a K? he assumes you only can have AA or a stronger kicker to beat him so he likes his chances. is he smart enough to realise that that board would look scary to you?
are you willing to fold AA with that many BB in the pot based on your read of this player? how sure are you he has a 7 or 2 vs your odds to call him down? i think you have a clear call to the river here. it will be interesting to see what other's say.
Any chance one of these guys has K7?
In general I would pay it off with this hand, but of course as always it "depends on the players" blah blah blah. For instance, would the BB bet out with a deuce here? Why would he not checkraise, you would certainly still bet AA or AK or KQ, etc. In my experience, players who bet out in these situations on the turn have a hand that they think may be best, but are afraid you will take a free card. So I'd often put him on a king, probably with a decent kicker.
Then, since your call shows weakness, the button might raise with a king as well. But it's hard to know. Would the button cold call with KQ or AK? Any chance he'd raise with something like A7s (and call preflop with it)?
At any rate, I think vs. the players I play with I would have raised the BB on the turn, and called down unless things got really crazy. But I have good game selection skills ;). Against better players a fold isn't bad.
>>Any chance one of these guys has K7?<<
D'oh!
How about KsQs?
D'oh! D'oh!!
"Against better players a fold isn't bad. "
Actually, against better players, I'd call...cause I'd doubt he'd call two bets on the button with a 2. I'd put him on 77 or KQ and call him down. It was the fact that this guy was such a loose player that made it possible that he could have a deuce.
Doc,
I just read the other responses after posting my own. Even if it is possible for the loose button to have a deuce, I also think it is possible he has a king or K7. So I still think my analysis below applies even if I discounted a button deuce at the time.
Regards,
Rick
Yeah, I see what your saying. I meant against players who don't overplay their hand postflop as much as the ones I play with, but I phrased it pretty poorly...
I'm just going to make a comment that is not specific to this hand. In general, I have found that in these situations, a good but not great hand like your two aces will win more often than you think is possible. For example, you point out that one of these one of these "knuckleheads" could have 77 or a deuce. If that's the case, why couldn't they be over playing a king and/or a spade draw. Given the number of bets in the pot, I would call every time. You will certainly lose more often than you will win, but I believe that your call is long term profitable.
Doc,
When the big blind did not reraise on the turn, I would discount the likelihood he has the deuce. I doubt the button has a deuce since he cold called a pre flop raise and there are two deuces on board. Of course he could have a set but there is a lot of doubt IMO. A K7 is another possible opponents holding. This hand would be played aggressively and you beat it.
With 10.5 big bets in the pot and a turn call that closes the betting, note that you are about half way to spiking a set of your own (22 to 1 against). Combine your redraw that would beat the hands you fear along with the chance that you are still leading and I would at least call the turn and probably the river too unless the big blind leads back into me after a spade hits the river.
It should go without saying that you should never flash your cards.
Regards,
Rick
I don't think folding is the right play here. The only way I fold in this situation were if I were against players who never bluff or semibluff or put on delayed moves. Otherwise one could have AK and the other could have 78s. It is entirely feasible. I understand they are loose but even most loose players don't call raises with deuces in their hands, unless it is A2. You holding AA makes that possibility less likely.
Look at the way the river played out. The BB check-folded. Almost surely a draw or a pair-draw, because if he had a K he surely should have a called with such a non-threatening board and a bloated pot. So that means he bet into you with a four-flush or a 78s type hand on the turn. Perhaps these players are a little more aggressive than you think.
I agree with what Mason said in his post. Even if you end up losing a majority of the time the pot size and the possibility that both opponents are overplaying their hands should make a call in your spot profitable.
Ok. I am a low limit player who has built a bankroll big enough to take shots at higher limits. In a 9-18 game I was getting completly run over, but I wasn't playing badly I thought. Well this one guy in paticular beat me twice and I was wondering if this was good play on his part and I didn't read it indicating I should stay down with the other fish. Ok here we go.
1st hand.. Me BB. 1 caller. My enemy in the cutoff calls button calls. SB folds. I check my K9s.
flp: Kx5.. I go for a check raise. It works. me and my enemy are heads up.
Turn: 9 no flush or st8 apparent. I bet. He raises. He seemed a little cocky so I almost reraised him, but I didn't. I call.
river blank. I check and call he turns over pocket 5's.
I'm not complaining that I got a bad beat. I am wondering if I made a bad read and others more advanced would have figured out what I didn't. He laughed as he told me he let me know on the turn.
2nd hand. BB again with J5s. Same situation. I check,
flop: 257 rainbow. I bet. he calls. button calls.
turn: 7 i check. gets checked around.
river: blank. I check. enemy calls. button calls. I call because I don't think he has shit. he turns over J5 and button has pocket 4's.
Is J5 and pocket 5's something I would normally see in the cutoff in higher limits? I know to play a little less tight in late position, but I wouldn't think to play these hands with only 1 or two callers. The reason I am asking this is because this player was very cocky and staring at me, etc trying to get me off my game so it made me curious. thanks in advance.
If he played J5 there he is a moron. You played both hands fine, though I would bet again on the turn in the second hand.
Sounds to me like you may not be confident enough in your game to move up in limits yet. Wait till you're the cocky one ;) (and then learn humility all over again).
I've been playing low limit so long that I am used to having to show the best hand (ie top pair) to win. I am very underconfident about moving up because I feel like I'm learning a whole new game. It took me a long time to build a roll I'm comfortable with and I would hate to go through it quick just because I didn't adapt to the more aggressive game.
When I said I was getting run over, I meant it. I was letting people push me off my hands when I would never let that happen in a lower limit game. So I've got a lot of work to do on my confidence level. That's why I've been taking only limited shots at the new level and not moved up full time. Unfortunately alot of the 9-18 players have seen me at the 6-12 table and are taking advantage of my lack of confidence. But I look forward to the challenge and will be at war with them very soon. This guy in particular stood out in my mind because he was trying so hard to get me off my game, it got me wondering was I missing something in his play that other people would have caught.
thanks for the help
the first hand was just a case of a good hand (top two) running into a better hand (set). it happen, nothing you can do about it.
second hand you played weakly. bet the turn and fold to a raise.
it always takes me about 2 sessions to get comfortable at higher limit. stick with it. don't be too worried about people taking shots at you. sometimes when I feel this way I look at my cards and realize that I really have a weak hand and I should be folding. There is no reason to make a stand with crap. BTW, do you play at lucky chances? if so I'm pretty sure who your "enemy" is.
I do play at Lucky Chances, but this was San Pablo. How'd you know I was from Cali? Would you mind giving me a little friendly advice sometime if I see you at LC?
Thanks
I usually play 20-40 at LC on Saturdays. I will be there tomorrow. drop me an email if you want to meet. You can have all the advice you want. I would never purposely give you bad advice but you must realize that there are many who are more knowledgeable and experienced than myself. In other words, take any thing I say with a grain of salt.
Hey Stork,
I agree with DeadBart's reponse. Confidence is a big factor when you move up in limits. I remember when I made the "big" jump from 3-6 to 6-12 two years ago. I was nervous and timid, which prevented me from playing my "A" game. But over the past year, great insights from this forum and a nice silicon valley job to support my bankroll, I've been beating the 6-12 game fairly consistently.
Coincidentally, I just started playing the 9-18 at Lucky Chances a month ago. Because money wasn't a big problem and I was confident in my skills, I've been doing ok (although my 6-12 results are still much better). My advice is that you gotta bring your tight/aggressive "A" game to the table each time. It's okay to only play 1 or 2 hands for a 30 minute stretch, but when you get a premium hand and a good flop, let'em have it (especially to the cocky bastard)!
Also, it might be nice to meet you some time at Lucky Chances and we can talk about our thoughts on the 9-18 game or HE in general. Send me an email at jace_22@hotmail.com if you have a chance and let me know when you're usually at the club.
Good luck and play hard!!!
Hi Boris and hi Stork and maybe hi Jace. I've played you a couple times in 20-40 Boris, and I know I've played you Stork (although I don't know which player you are yet) 'cause I was a fixture at 6-12 at LC from September through December. I played 9-18 three times and skipped it. Twice it was way too tight. The drop's $3 regardless....
Have you tried the 10-20 game at Artichoke Joe's? That's a fine game, and the pot-stickers are 4/$1 there.
I'll likely be at LC tomorrow (Sat) AM at 20-40 around 9 or so for an hour or two. Come say hi if any of you are around.
Matt
how do you know it was me? i completely agree with you about the LC 9-18 game. it can be good but often it is a tight, boring game. 10-20 at AJ's usually is good but the word is out and it is getting tougher. I'll look for you tomorrow at the 20-40. say hi if you have me pegged.
The first hand you played fine. Nothing you can do about that.
The second hand you played two passively. If somebody has a 7, they normally would raise your flop bet. The second 7 coming is the best card you could get (Besides a jack or another 5). It makes it even less likely somebody had a 7. You have to bet the turn. To show weakness here puts you on the defensive. If somebody has a 7, they will let you know. If you get callers, check the river. I can't imagine anybody calling with a worse hand than yours. Although the pocket 4s called. I cant imagine what he was thinking. How many overcards does it take before you let go of a hand? If somebody bets the river, you have an easy call unless there is a lot of action.
15-30 game i'm on button with AKo. all fold, i raise. sb and bb both call. flop comes K 10 3 no flush. all check. turn is a rag. sb bets out, bb folds, i raise, sb calls. river rag, sb checks. i bet, he calls, turns up K 10. my question is, should i have bet the flop on hands like that or is it ok to raise the turn like i did. iknow this hand was lost anyway but is it a good idea to check the flop sometimes in that situation?
steve,
The problem with checking the flop when the flop looks like it hit you is that it makes your two opponents suspicious and you probably end up with less action when you are a winner and leading by a lot, which you should be most of the time with this hand and this flop.
If the flop contained small cards and you had aces then it is plausible to check the flop and try to trap your two opponents. But with this flop, if I were in the blind (with something like KJ) I would give very little action to a player who checked the flop but might get trapped for several bets if you made the more natural play of betting.
Regards,
Rick
x
You simply MUST bet the flop here. In this particular case, you are behind anyway, but that doesn't make any difference. You simply cannot let hands like KQ, QJ, QT, or JT draw for free on this flop. After you checked it out on the flop, the raise on the turn is fine. The river bet is a little more debatable, but the way this hand played out increased the likelihood of your opponent having a weaker hand than yours, so I like your value bet. The sb played this hand badly, IMHO. He was probably going for a check-raise on the flop, and then lost his nerve to the raise on the turn. Since he played so passively, you didn't lose as much as you could have, so be thankful.
Good Luck,
Steve
I think you need a different board to check on the flop here. Both blinds called your raise preflop which means they had something worth calling with. What sort of hands would that be? There's a good chance that one has a K or a T and you don't want to give them a free card to beat you. If the flop was K 7 2 it would be a better play.
While betting is usually correct, one benefit of checking and then raising on the turn is that opponents may start to worry about traps. In a later hand say you miss the flop and check. Now on the turn they may think, "aha he's going to raise the turn, why else wouldn't he have bet the flop!" and check to you thinking they escaped your trap. You missed the turn as well and check along and see the river for free. This could be very valuable when you raised with a marginal hand and did not want to be called preflop.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
I would bet the flop. If I am the BB and you check here, I will suspect you have a monster, even KK. Also, that board isn't all that broken. God forbid you let a guy have a free card with J9 and a Q falls. If the board was K-2-8 rainbow and you are heads up, it's not as bad.
10-20 game, loose as usual.
I have AsJs in late position. A bad player (BP) raises in middle position. One cold caller, I call. All others fold.
Flop is: 4s2c9d
BP bets, middle guy folds, I raise. BP calls.
Turn is: 2s.
Check to me, I bet, he calls.
River is: Qd.
Check to me, I bet, he calls. BP turns over AK and drags the pot.
I think once I committed on the flop I had no choices the rest of the way. This player is capable of open raising with a wide variety of hands, and I was fairly certain (once he just called my flop raise) that he did not have a pair. The problem is that he is also the type that has a hard time releasing a hand, so this might have been a bad time to play it this way.
Comments welcomed.
I don't disbelieve you when you say he's a bad player, but his play on this hand doesn't seem too bad to me. The only thing I would have done differently is to reraise you on the flop. Maybe that makes me a bad player? With a flop/turn like that, it's unlikely it helped you. The Qd on the river is slightly scary, but by then it's a clear call.
In your place I would have taken the free card on the turn. Other than that, I don't think you did anything wrong.
Scott,
I like your aggressive play through the turn. But once called on the turn you should usually check most ace high hands on the river when you miss. You can beat his weaker aces but he will call with any pair and fold almost all of his misses that don't include a pair or the ace. The other problem is getting check raised bluffed.
I do wonder whether revealing the result made me tailor my response. An argument could be made for a river value bet since he will call with weaker aces and probably would hold them more often than AK. In any event, betting the river in this spot (without the benefit of hindsight) is no more than a fraction of a bet mistake since you will get your fair share of calls with a weaker ace.
Regards,
Rick
I may be mistaken but I believe that 3 betting or folding pre-flop is consistent with the advice in HFAP 21st Century Edition. Three betting may have won you the pot with this hand.
Scott-
I tend to agree with Rick. I like the way you played it, but I'd have checked the river. I like the bet on the turn, which I would have interpreted as top pair (nines) w/ decent kicker, causing me to fold anything unpaired (A-K and worse). If he calls the turn, he's probably gonna call the river and beat you. If he wouldn't call the river, perhaps you can shown him the winner w/out having to try to bluff him. that's why I like a check at the end.
Yeah, but somehow I felt AK was quite likely, and this guy (unlike you) would not fold the turn because he wants to draw to his overcards. Having missed (and the worst possible card having fallen!), I thought he might fold to a bet, even though he called the turn.
While their definitely are good arguments for just checking on the end I think I'm going to go with the minority opinoin here and say I liked your bet on the river (as long as your image wasn't too aggressive). The reason I like it is because the queen came on the river and your opponent checked indicating that he didn't have a queen, and I think their is a reasonable chance the queen will convince even a calling station that you "have him beat," even though if he really thought about it the queen probably did not help your hand. I would definitely say the bluff on the river is incorrect if the board had paired again on the river or even if a rag came out. Also if you had been bluffing much I would say the play is neg EV.
Shawn Keller
One more thing I forgot to mention is that one has to keep in mind that this pot has 7.5BB bets in it so you only have to successfully bluff 1-8.5 to break even (and this doesn't even take into account the times that you are called by a weaker hand), oh and I also agree with your analysis that your opponent likely has AK, and I often see weak players try to spike their overcard on the turn and then release on the river to a bet.
Shawn Keller
Heads up I would have 3 bet but with the intervening guy I think calling is ok. If the middle guy folds pre-flop or calls on the flop, it's a whole different ballgame.
Another benefit of checking the river is you usually don't have to show your hand.
You should know better than to bluff 'bad players'. He isn't going to fold a hand better than yours (IE AK or better) and he isn't going to call with much worse.
You mentioned that you knew he was a bad player. Had you also taken note of whether he is a calling station? Never bluff a calling station.
Playing with calling stations is easy. Just catch and play it strong. Make money from their mistakes. Don't let THEM make money from YOUR mistakes.
-SmoothB-
N/T
A while back I have put up a post with the same title. It has gotten a pretty good response and I thank all posters. Here is what I think. Chopping is bad! Bad for winning players and bad for the game. Some of you were right, saying that chopping makes the game friendly. What you forget is that a friendly game usually translates into softplaying and very little or no action. Remember, the object of poker is still WINNING MONEY. So please, don't chop and gamble instead.
P.S. It could be right to chop in rake games (20-40 @ the Mirage, where they take $3)
I don't like chopping, personally. I think it takes away from the game. I think good players are going to make enough in would-be chop situations to make playing on worthwhile (and thus detrimental to chop).
I've lost my share, too, when I should have chopped, but I just rather play it out. When folks ask if I chop and I politely answer in the negative, most players understand and are cool about it.
Interestingly, in Kansas City it is illegal to chop -- the hand must be played out. (But, the two involved can agree to just 'run em').
Many good players don't chop. Cissy Bottoms and Mike Minetti are excellent middle limit players who don't chop. Roy Cooke chops but he probably would rather not.
I now play only on the net where chopping is not allowed...and you are right...the $3 rake bites. Were it not for the $3 rake, I agree with you that playing is better (i.e. more fun) than chopping.
I was in a 30-60 game at Bellagio. I asked ppl on either side of me if they chopped as I sat down, my normal procedure, and they both responded yes. The guy to my left was away from the table during my SB. It came down to me and the BB, who just so happens to be a dealer at Bellagio. I got ready to muck..looking at him and saying, "Chop, right?" He looked at his cards and said, "No." I was holding two black Kings. I said, "Fine...then Sir, I raise." He snorted and threw his hand in. The table applauded.
Finally, someone agrees with me. Chopping is not only bad for the individual player, if he is good enough to beat most players heads up, IT IS BAD FOR THE GAME! It decreases the action. I think it should be against the rules, rake or not.
Also, I find most players enjoy sitting next to me knowing I don't chop, rather than being offended by it. They would rather play out their hands, but they are afraid of going against the majority or seeming unfriendly. I have very little adverse reaction to not chopping.
STOP THE CHOP!
I know many people that don't chop and I am not offended by their position at all...in fact, it makes sense to me. The problem I have is when they do not make that position clear prior to a chop situation arising..knowing that everyone at the table is chopping. It seems reptilian to me to wait until a chopper is heads up with you to make a stand against chopping.
I disagree. It's not up to me to tell you I don't participate in your silly custom. If it's so important to you, then ask me when I sit down. Besides, what difference does it make when you find out?
I don't chop either, mainly because I don't want to spend all day asking others if they chop.
But I did offer to chop a few months ago. Funny story.
It was a half-hour-collection 40-80 game. We were using time-pots then. (They were elliminated by the house because of the bickering they caused.)
A new dealer sat down and it was time for a time pot. I had the big blind. While the cards were being dealt, I turned to the unfamiliar player to my right and said, "I usually don't chop, but if they all fold we can chop this time if you want to."
He said, "I don't chop."
Everyone folded to him. He raised, and I mucked, and the time was still unpaid. The next hand I was in the small blind. Everyone folded to me and I obviously had not looked at my hand yet. I turned to the player on my left and gave the same speech.
He said, "I don't chop."
I mucked, and the whole table busted a gut. Everyone at the club knows I don't chop. Out of nowhere I asked to chop, twice, in a span of three minutes, and got turned down both times. That'll teach me!
(If my offers to chop because of the time pot seem unethical, all I can say is I had never done it before, and I never did it again, and I would not have done it if I was not certain that the table had no complaint. Still, I feel it was a questionable move, though I'm not certain as to why. I'm curious what the Vegas rules are on this.)
Tommy
Hello All,
Just a question for those of you who do not chop. What if the rake structure were changed somewhat? In Chicago at both Riverboats where there are legal poker rooms, the rake is 10% up to $5. Obviously in 10-20 games an higher, the pot is almost always over $50, even heads up, thus causing a $5 rake. This is steep. I have not done the math as of late on specifics of playing Vs chopping with a $5 rake but I am taking a shot in the dark that with this steep of rake that chopping is the most prudent method if a player logs any type of significant hours. Any thoughts or comments on this.
Personally, I chop as I feel it not only keeps the atmosphere friendly and but it does not put a target on me at the table. There are very few profesional players where I play, and a friendly atmosphere is a good one for our game. Also, there is usually plenty of action so it is not an issue most of the time.
I completely understand the theory behind not chopping and probably would prefer to play out in the games I am in. However, even with this in mind, I think there is something to be said for the intangibles of chopping. I truly think with a $5 rake it is definitely a good move.
I just returned from playing 10-20, 15-30, 20-40, 30-60, and 40-80 in Vegas where it was split - some chopped, some did not. I was fine either way with it. In the games in Chicago, about 95% + chop.
All thoughts and comments appreciated.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D.)
Mike, you don't have a target on you? Maybe I was just imagining those concentric circles on your chemise.
I agree that in our $5/10% rake games that chopping is imperative. The social factor is one thing, but in a "blinds heads-up" situation, simple math dictates that one hand is either going to be clearly superior to the other most of the time, or both players will have so little that they won't act too often. So as a general policy and to encourage the game from getting dull, it's better just to chop all the time.
I reiterate Michael's sentiment that chopping creates a bit more user-friendly atmosphere at the table. If you're sitting at a poker table with seven or nine other professionals, then one can be quite rigid in their play. However, I fail to understand why the "pros", and by pros I mean people that play for a living, insist on raping every single dime from the table when that table consists of at least one tourist or recreational player. I will tell you this..as a recreational player I find it offensive when I am sitting there with all pros who make it so damn obvious that they are there to take every chip, bar none, and will exercise every possible tactic to do it.
It creates a negative energy at the table and will cause me to get up and look for a less-talent-laden table. And since I feel I am not unique in any of my interpretations, I am guessing other recreational players pick up on this and will get up to look for a more user-friendly table as well.
So often professionals focus on what is the most profitable and correct play in the short term. I believe pros should sow some seeds to reap future play from the recreational players and if everyone is chopping at the table and you wait until you are heads up with one of us to inform us that you don't chop, trust me, I am not only going to probably leave that table shortly, but I will be playing my very best game against you.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. :))
I was once in a game when a nice lady asked a pro did he chop or not? His answer was "Chop My Dick."
I wouldnt chop anything that couldnt be seen with the naked eye.
desire,
As long as it is restricted to chopping, I agree with you. Unfortunately, once you start chopping then softplaying often follows as does pushing chips and so on.
That being said, I hate chopping but got sick of standing out as the "bad guy" so I fell into line. It is not a big problem at 15/30 or 20/40 since frequent chopping is an indicator or a bad game. But if I ever move up I wonder if I should go back to a no chop policy.
Regards,
Rick
I agree with this philosophy. "Pros" trying to extract every last dollar from the table often ruin a good game. How many times have you had a good game going, and then have a few "pros" sit down. You know, the guys with the CIA/FBI sunglasses and the very serious expressions that let the world know they are "pros". A friendly tourist type asks the guy if he chops. Cold stare from the The Great Stone Face Pro. Monosyllabic response, "No." Gee, great way to make the fishy types want to gamb00l it up. Chopping, along with appearing friendly, makes for a good game environment in my opinion, and this far outweighs whatever EV you would make from failure to chop (providing the game is sufficiently loose and chopping isn't taking place much anyway).
I agree that a lot of pros have absolutely no social skills at all. If they did, they would realize that the way to handle this is politely or with humor. When asked, I say, "no, I play" or "no, I'm here to gamble!" I also wear sunglasses a lot, but I am by far one of the friendliest players at the table.
Just because you are serious about poker doesn't mean you have to be a jerk about it. And not chopping doesn't make you a jerk.
I understand some people would rather play than chop. I don't think just because someone doesn't chop that they are a jerk. If more people handled it like you do I don't think it would have much of an effect on the game. But the way some "pros" handle it, I think we can both agree has a much worse effect on the game than chopping itself does.
PS What's with the sunglasses? Do you just wear them everywhere, or specifically when you play poker? If you use them specifically when playing poker, are you that worried about tells?
The shades prevent other players from picking up tells from me, and they keep them from knowing what I'm looking at, whether it be their facial expressions, stack size, or whatever.
My experience is that most players who wear sunglasses aren't that good, but they universally think they're much better than they are. Anyone who needs to exude the "pro" image is generally not a great player.
Of course, one of the best things about not chopping is watching how bad most of you play in a heads-up situation. I get a real kick out of the hands that some people will call a raise with just because they are in the blind and the other player is in the blind also.
As far as Desire playing her best game if I don't inform her that I don't chop, it's far more likely, if she is offended by that, that she will play and chase with any two. Another good reason to keep my mouth shut.
Wrong, luv. Just makes me want to go after you with the only the absolute nuts.
So you wouldn't go after anyone else with the nuts? I guess this is supposed to mean something, but I missed it.
You must have misunderstood the original post.
And I am too tired to relate it..again.
Ok Ok...let me try and explain.
The original scenario was this: From what I had seen, everyone was chopping at the table. The guy in the one seat left the table for a brief period, exposing my small blind to the 2 seat's big blind. I had not even looked at my cards yet. When the betting got to me uncalled, I had them ready to muck, asking, "Chop?" He declined. What was particularly disturbing about this was that he had chopped with the one seat in an earlier round. I know many many players that don't chop and I respect their right not to. In fact, I think chopping should be against the rules. But I assumed he was chopping because he chopped earlier. I think it was justice that when I drew my cards back, I found myself looking at two black kings. Hence the raise and the muck by him. This same guy, a dealer, capped early rounds with 9 10 os...and made an 8 gut on the river to scoop the pot. He did the same with 7 8 os. So normally where I would give him action, I was folding anything but premium hands. I think the short term possible net of his behavior precluded him of getting action from me and garnered ill will towards him at the table by the other players that laughed when I raised after his refusal to chop. The player on his left even stated that he would no longer be chopping with him. So to set the facts straight, I was not attacking your decision to not chop. I was referring to this particular incident. Have a good day.
I fully understand why a professional player would refuse to chop. Over time, I would think he is simply giving up too much by chopping. Especially in bigger games, where the opportunity probably presents itself much more often.
I would love to play instead of chop. However, the games I play (10-20,15-30,20-40 w/a $5 rake), it just doesn't make much sense not to chop. It's better to keep the game friendly and more importantly moving along, in order to get more hands out. Any time you can keep that $5 on the table instead of in the drop box, it HAS to be better for the game!
Kevin
I don't think it's practical that this $5 can be made up easily, even against mediocre opposition. Furthermore, if many other players are not chopping who are more equally matched, then it's better to keep the $5 on the table, since inevitably the biggest winner in these cases will be the house.
Kevin
I wish the casino's would just not allow chopping.That would solve the problem.Just reduce the rake to a dollar or .50.Wouldnt that take care of it?
I know posting a preflop question will lower Oz’s high regard for me but the forums answers will settle a side bet with my friend. I’m in an otherwise average (for Los Angeles) nine-handed 15/30 holdem game made very good by a clueless player two seats to my left who will call with anything pre flop and stay until the river almost no matter what. Even better, he has such reliable tells that he might as well play his cards face up. The presence of this player means that you can’t steal blinds or ever run a bluff or semi-bluff (see Note 1), and most of the other players know this. The game is generally un-aggressive.
I get dealt AJ offsuit UTG and come in for a raise (see Note 2). The clueless player calls, as does an average player to the right of the cutoff. Unfortunately, the button three-bets, the small blind folds, and the big blind caps it at four bets. The button and big blind are competent albeit a little on the overaggressive side. Both have played against me a lot and know my UTG raising standards well. I decide to fold even though I am half way in.
My reasons for folding are 1) AJ offsuit is the worse ace I raise with UTG, 2) I could easily be up against a better ace AND an overpair to my jack, and 3) I am probably going to get squeezed between an aggressive blind and aggressive button with a hand that rarely can handle pressure post flop.
Although not routine (in fact, I don’t believe I ever did this before), I think this fold was correct. A competent friend thought I was out of my mind. We have a friendly side bet riding on this and defer to the forum’s opinion. What does everyone else think?
Regards,
Rick
Note 1: Actually, if you are head up post flop with the clueless player you can run semi-bluffs with an ace high, big overcards, or a small pair and an overcard since you will often have the best hand when he calls.
Note 2: Without blind stealing equity, some may criticize raising with AJ offsuit UTG in the first place. I felt that I would love to play this had with the clueless player and perhaps a few others for two bets, since the game was normally passive.
If clueless is going to cold call two, then I would raise with AJo everytime UTG.
I would fold it non-suited, call suited. If you dont hit at least two pair, then your going to be in for a bumpy ride. Your very likely dominated (better ace), and if your not then your only out is an ace (if both have pocket pairs). Also, there is a very good possibility your drawing dead to an overpair to your Jack and a better ace.
I think this is an easy fold. Its going to get expensive very quickly if your dominated and you hit your hand.
My thoughts, Joe
I agree with your fold. Between the button 3 betting and the blind 4 betting you are almost certainly badly dominated. You need to flop two pair or better to win and the pot odds are not there to pay two more bets and try to do this.
It is okay to get off the installment plan when it is a double bet back to you. The double bet means two things both of which are bad. First, the value of your hand goes down dramatically given the presence of two other players who are excited about their hands. Second, two more bets versus one more bet significantly cuts into your pot odds both current and implied.
I would fold AQ offsuit as well assuming the the button and big blind are solid players and do not make speculative re-raises and caps.
Jim,
Good post but the raisers would have to be super tough in order for me to fold AQ.
Regards,
Rick
Rick-
Just trying to learn here. Why do you see AQ so different from AJ in this spot? Then again, maybe you're not saying it's SO different, because it might've been a tough decision for you to fold it here.
I just don't see a whole lot of difference whether your kicker is a jack or queen here. Either your ace is in trouble, or it's not. All the queen does, is give you 3 more outs to JJ, no? And you still gotta hope AK,AA,KK,QQ isn't in someone's hand which appears at least a little less likely, given the 4 bet pot status.
Here's another dumb question: Are whether these players "super tough" really much of a factor pre-flop? I understand how it might be a consideration after the flop, but I've seen many weak players who know enough that it's usually correct to re-raise and/or cap with the big three pocket pairs. In fact, this might be one of the few times you can expect to see such players put a 3rd or 4th bet in themselves pre-flop! Thanks Rick.
Kevin
I concur if for no other reason than, AJo is simply NOT a 4 bet hand. It's one thing for YOU to make it two bets pre-flop for the reasons you gave, but it's quite a different situation when it comes back to you capped. Sounds to me like you had good reasons both for initially raising and for folding. Well played! (even if you didn't see a flop) IMO-
Kevin
First, I think that you should only call with the AJ. Since you are describing a hand that needs to hit the flop to win (since the game is somewhat loose) raising loses much of its value. However, given that you did raise you should now fold for two more bets. Their reraises are telling you something and that something is that your AJ is in big trouble.
This reminds me of a conversation that I once heard between two high limit players. One of them was making fun of another player who had called for half a bet out of the small blind in a multiway pot, but then folded after the big blid raised and everyone else had called. The high limit player stated "He was getting the exact same odds, so how can his fold be correct if his original call was correct." But in my opinion there are a few hands where his fold was probably correct because the big blind's raise does give you some additional information.
Mason,
I agree that calling is an option in this type of game, although most of the other players (other than clueless) would respect my raises and I could often get in a three way pot with clueless and a mediocre player (usually in the blinds) or even in a two way pot with clueless as my lone opponent. Imagine playing heads up with a player who won't bet anything but the best of his own hands and calls almost everything, showing a genuine sigh if he was weak and a satisfied look if he was strong.
It is interesting that since his actions were so predictable, it was perhaps better for me to acting before him then after him. Acting after him I would tend to need more multi-way value for my raise since there would be more limpers.
You also wrote concerning calling an additional raise out of the big blind after calling in the small blind for half a bet: ” But in my opinion there are a few hands where his fold was probably correct because the big blind's raise does give you some additional information.”
I agree and this is one fold I routinely make. Some examples would be hands like K9 offsuit or Ax offsuit. My big fear would be domination with a hand that won't hit the flop hard. OTOH, I might make some narrow calls in the small blind with a hand such as 64 offsuit (let's say I had four limpers and I was getting 11 to 1). If I knew I was going to be raised (and sometimes you do if you monitor those who handle their chips poorly), then I wouldn't call. But if I was raised, I might like my second call even more than the original call for half a bet. With this hand there is no fear of domination and the aggressors position might enhance the value of my hand. Now if I flop a draw I can often get in a check raise for value on the flop or if I make it on the turn and the big blind leads again I can trap all the callers for two bets.
I also wonder if holding a hand like 64 offsuit in the small blind and getting a flop of 8 6 2, betting into the big blind knowing he holds a likely overpair and will raise isn't the right play. If you get it head up you can often suck out with a lot of dead money in the pot. If they check the turn it often means they had AK suited. But the whole issue of blind on blind really should be in another thread. I should stop drinking coffee :-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
You should win the side bet, but your competent friend should have a talk with you about up-front raising standards.
Abe
Abe,
This friend says I don't raise enough. That being said, in many games I am tossing AJ offsuit UTG.
Regards,
Rick
You folded this hand for two more bets? And you call yourself an LA Player? You know, the place where the motto is, "Let's get the money in now and worry about making a hand later." You should hang your head in shame.
This is just one $4/8 stud player's opinion, and it's somewhat unlikely that I'd find this play at the table, but I think you did the right thing by folding. You're probably dominated, and you're out of position.
I agree with your fold, but this is merely a distraction. The important point is that you unnecessarily lost a bet by raising UTG with AJ.
You played the hand incorrectly.
Bob J.
this is at a place i think im going to start playing at regularly cause the game is SO loose. anyways, i made this play last night and im wondering if it was a mistake and how bad of one if it was. id also like to know if the rake is to high on this game.
it's a 3/6 kill game, with a $3 collection on the button (for 7-9 players which it usually is). so the kill (the player who won the last hand) is the big blind, and left of the button is $3 as the small blind. hopefully this isnt too stupid to explain it, this was the first kill game id ever played in. so it's a $6 bet preflop and flop and $12 on the turn and river. is that too much of a collection? is the kill any sort of a disadvantage?
im in the sb with 4d6h. 6 players limp ahead of me and pay $3 more to see the flop. it comes J75 all hearts. i wait a second and then check. next player bets and 4 other players call. i raise. groans are heard around the table of gullible fish. 3 of the 5 players fold, 2 call. what do think of this play?
the turn comes Ah. i check next player bets 12, next player folds, i fold.
there's a follow up to this which i may post.
When the board flops all of one suit, it is a mistake to be trying to make a straight against a lot of players when you could already be drawing dead. Whether or not you make your straight, if another card of that suit appears your hand is instantly dead. Furthermore, some of your outs are killed like the 3h or the 8h since these cards give someone a flush. Raising is insane and you have a clear fold on the flop.
i suspected this was an awful play. i had a strong sense tbat no one had a flush yet and i assumed that the implied odds of hitting my straight (if another heart did not come) were big. but in retrospect i think this was a bad play.
the thing with both this hand and the one you replied to on the small stakes page is that the game was so so loose i was taken aback. there were five players that would call to the river with any pair or any draw. one hand saw two nitwits (neither of them in the blinds) split the pot with J4o when a jack and a four came on the flop. the player to my left had three hands where he made runner runner two pair with XXo trash. point is, i wasnt sure how to play against this type of game, it's the first time id actually encountered it, although id read about it before. i want to play there regularly but am unsure of whether i should continue to play tight pre-flop per hpfap 21 or start letting in a few more connectors, suited one gaps, Ax hands, and Kxs. is there a text i should look at re: this sort of game?
I am not recommending Gary Carson's book to you called the "Complete Book Of Hold'em Poker". I think a lot of his advice would be suicidal in the games I play in. But supposedly his book applies to loose, low-limit games of the kind you describe. I do not have a lot of familiarity with these kinds of games. However, you may want to go to a bookstore like the Gamblers Book Store here in Vegas or some other bookstore specializing in gambling literature and take a look at Gary Carson's book. It should be on the book shelves in March. After examining it, you may want to purchase it for $24. It will give you a radically different perspective on pre-flop starting hand strategy. Again, I am not recommending it, just making you aware.
I don't see much benefit to continuing with this hand for a single bet, let alone check/raising a field of six. There's not much you can hope to accomplish with this play, other than burn some chips.
As for the rake, if the game is as soft as you say, it's most likely beatable. Still, I'd try to graduate up in limits ASAP.
Also, this seems like a strange kill structure. In every kill game I've played in, the kill does not affect the blinds. The kill is simply posted in addition to the blinds. In other words, you have the normal blinds where they are supposed to be, in addition to the kill.
Kevin
the kill is $6 paid by the person who won the last hand. there is a collection on the button of $3 (so that's like a small blind cause it counts towards getting you halfway in the hand--does that make sense?) and there's the player just to the left of the button paying $3 (a small blind right?) it's $6 to go preflop. the small blind acts second to last and the kill (regardless of where he is at the table) is last to act preflop.
how does this differ from a normal kill structure and more importantly, does it at all change the way i should play from any certain position and does it change the profitability of the game. this place rarely has a 10-20 game running so i foresee myself playing this 6-12, nut only with the blessings of you folks here, you poker gawds you.
by the way, at this point ill introduce myself finally, my name is mike l. i had normally posted as asdf or aseds or dsaf or any combo like that. but ill post as mike l now.
lastly, does anyone have any suggestions on cheap but smart looking and effective (i.e. not too dark, my vision's kinda shoddy as it is) hold em playing sunglasses. it's not that i want to look like a badass pro like someone mentioned earlier, it's that i want to avoid giving off any tells with my eyes. im a little paranoid about giving off tells cause im used to playing online.
Well, it's nice to meet you mike. Since I play in raked games (as opposed to time collection), the blinds are not affected. Also, the kill is NOT last to act, but acts in order of his position. So, if UTG wins the kill, he posts the kill to the left of the small and big blinds, and is now first to act. He has the option to check or raise. It sounds like what you're describing is a $3 collection on the button and one blind of $3, correct? So, if a pot is NOT killed, you have a $3 blind and a $3 collection on the button.
As far as changes in strategy, I'm sure there are more qualified forum members who can provide you with a more thorough answer to this than myself. I would think you can play a little more liberally from the button (that is, you should probably find more opportunities to raise), and play due to your position and the fact that you are already in for one bet (assuming an unkilled pot). Your superior position and odds, might also allow you to play a few more hands in an unraised kill pot as well. When not the kill, the blind, or button yourself, I would make decisions based on much the same factors as in any other game, with the one exception that if it's killed, there is one more player to be heard from pre-flop.
I do not know of any one brand of sun glasses which is more common or better than any other. I have recently taken to wearing sun glasses at times, but this is due to the strain on my eyes caused by reading the board after many hours under the glare of the lights. Unless you really have a "deer caught in the headlights" look, I personally don't put too much weight into someone's eyes other than WHERE he is looking. What a player does with his hands, how he's handling his chips, what he says, how he says it, his body expression, are all MUCH more telling than his eyes IMO-. Also, sun glasses doesn't do much to hide the rest of your facial expression. I guess this is just a matter of opinion. I know very good players who feel as you do. I just don't think it's that important. Good luck to you!
Kevin
If I understand the rake/structure correctly, I would run, not walk from this game.
It's difficult enough to win with a $3 collection in 6-12. At 40 hands per hour, average 8 players, you'll be paying $15, compared with, for example, $10/hour at the Hollywood Park 10-20 (the one with which I am most familiar).
Even if you do start winning, you're faced with a forced bet on the next round and miserable position.
All in all, it seems like a game designed to stop the fish losing too quickly, thereby maximizing profits for the house. If the 10-20 is rarely running, start agitating. Talk to other players. Is there anywhere else you could take your business?
at hollywood park does that half hour collection get you halfway into the hand? the collection on the button at the place im talking about gets you halfway in (and youre on the button so it's not so bad). im concerned though by your comments. i think it does keep the fish alive longer and they are REALLY fishy there. what place has the best rake in southern CA??
the position on the next hand if you win is not miserable. you can win and then be on the button the next hand and half your kill counts towards the collection and youre last to act every round and already in the hand. so i was thinking it might be smart to play a few more hands in the cutoff in order to try and get in the situation.
Either I am misunderstand the kill structure or it is diffent than what I have ever experienced.
Regardless, this is a clear muck after the flop.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D.)
I have to agree with the other players (from personal experience, if nothing else.) Going after a straight is NOT a good idea when the flop is all one suit. Someone could have you dead already, and anyone with the suit's high cards is going to stick around to try to make it on the turn or the river. Your outs are effectively reduced from eight to six, and you'd need astronomical pot odds to stay in the hand. Not a good situation.
Scott
I don't quite understand what the betting structure is but I gather there was $42 in the pot preflop and gather another $15 or so went in on the flop. The pot is now $57 and you have to call for $3 on the flop with your probable 6 outer (although you could be drawing dead).
You are getting 19:1 odds. I would call every time.
Your position here is not at all very bad given that the flop aggressor is to your immediate left. If you make a str8 with a heart, you can check/fold. If you make a str8 with a non-heart and the same guy bets and no one calls, you can often checkraise. You may want to just call and then see if the river is a brick but not my style. If you do make a str8 with a non-heart, betting out would not be recommended because no one is going to help you cut down the field unless they have you beat. A checkraise here is better. People with low heart draws may drop even if already in for one bet if you checkraise. The other advantage of checking is that you could fold the turn even if you make a str8 with a non-herat if it's 2 bets to you by the time the action gets back to you.
You have to be wary of chasing str8's when the flop is all of one suit. But the size of the pot and your "good" position vis a vis the probable bettor on the turn makes this an easy call on the flop. Note that if the flop bet had come from late position, you ought to be much more inclined to muck on the flop itself because it then becomes very difficult to play the turn and river even if you hit your 6 outer.
someone who thinks my play wasn't the pits! here's a couple things that needed clarification. on the flop there are 11.5 small bets in the pot when the action comes back to me in the small blind. as skp said i have 6 outs and if a heart comes i must fold. also there is a chance i am already drawing dead BUT: when i raise, no one reraises me (there's a good chance that no one at this table is smart enough to smooth call a made flush) and 3 players drop out right there leaving that $18 dead (small bet in this game is $6 not $3).
that said, is my flop check-raise still so awful? it gives me information. if i were reraised on the flop i could drop right there and be sure i was drawing dead. i was sure i was against someone with a decent heart (9-A) before the turn and i held one small heart (the 6) which uses up two of their outs. someone else may have threw away a small heart on the flop. there's a strong chance i can pull off a bluff on the river by betting out when a 4th heart hasnt come. i think i might have more outs here then someone drawing to a flush and i can bluff on the river with the strength of the flop check raise. am i delusional? none of this mentions the fact that if i hit my straight and a heart doesnt come i can charge any draws $12 on the turn and can make any person that would call me down on the river pay another $12.
im a little worried that no one gets the rake and structure i described.. i described it twice now, albeit poorly the first time.
I agree that the pot odds are very attractive and maybe calling isn't as bad as I thought. Of course, raising ruins your odds and the information you get is not worth much. But I still think folding is better because of all the money you lose when you hit your hand and someones either has a flush or makes a flush.
What tips the scale in favour of a call on the flop is your position in relation to the probable bettor on the turn (i.e., he is to your immediate left). So, if you make your straight with a non-heart, you can check to see how others will react to this guy's bet. If someone raises, you can fold and only lose the $3 that you put in on the flop. If no one raises, your hand looks a whole lot better and will no doubt validate your decision to call the flop based on pot odds.
10-20 full table game. I am 3 seats before button holding AsJs. Two limp to me, I raise, 1 cold calls, both blinds and limpers call. =$120
flop is 7s9s3d....checked to me I bet, 2 drop out.=$160
turn is 7c, SB bets out(solid player),BB raises(loose/passive), one to act behind me. MY ACTION?
I count 10.5 BB's in the pot and somebody is SUPPOSED to have at least a seven here. You don't likely have 9 total outs and it could get re-raised and capped back to you. I would fold, unless these players were maniacs and proven to be out of line quite often.
Kevin
Good problem. There is $220 in the pot and it costs you $40 right now to call. These are pot odds of 5.5:1. You have 9 outs to the nut flush. If someone has trip Sevens then the 3s is not an out so that leaves 8 outs. The odds are 38:8 against which is 4.75:1 so you appear to have an overlay. However, a Spade might arrive at the river that happens to pair the sidecard of the player holding trip Sevens. This could reduce you to 7 outs which is 39:7 against or about 5.5:1 against. Another problem is that someone may already be full so you could be drawing dead. Finally, it is possible you get taken for a 4 or 5 bet ride which totally destroys any odds you might have had plus increases the possibility you drawing dead.
I think it is a common and expensive mistake for players to pursue their draw when the board pairs and it is bet and raised to them on the expensive street. I would fold every time.
Jim,
I'm glad to see we arrived at the same answer, albeit by different methods. But even your brain would have been reduced to chaotic mush after playing in the game I did today :-).
Regards,
Rick
Jim -
What if the board was not paired in this situation?
Also, what if he was drawing at a smaller flush?
Two nights ago I saw a lady throw away a 10 high flush draw on the turn to an unpaired bored because she didnt want to cold call a raise. Is the possibility of a reraise usually strong enough to throw such a holding away?
If the board does not pair, I would be calling because I am drawing to the nuts in most cases.
I would call even if my flush draw was not to the nuts because it is very unlikely someone else is also drawing to a flush. I don't agree with what the lady did at all. Players who are betting and raising on the expensive street are usually doing it on made hands not come hands so there is an excellent chance she is drawing live.
When you face the turn raise best case is you are not up against a full and there is no more raising and your flush outs are clean. So it will cost you two big bets to see the river and you will win about 14 big bets, which is 7 to 1 on a little worse than 4 to 1 shot. But your outs are not clean since you may be up against a full OR making your flush will make somebody a full AND it may cost more than two bets on the turn so my quick guesstimate is that a fold is right.
Then again, I just spent ten hours playing Los Angeles 20/40 and my brain may be fried so listen to Jim Brier ;-).
Regards,
Rick
Tony,
As you know I was in the game. Actually, this was a very good laydown from a technical standpoint. Most losing players can never lay this hand down.
Given the players and situations involved, I think it was about as close to 50-50 as you could get. I believe the key to the laydown is the player to act behind you.
I know I was giving you a hard time about it when you showed me your hand then mucked. I truly was just teasing you. I hope you know that. I do that all the time at the table.
A year ago, I do not think you lay this hand down. You have become a much stronger player over the past year. Well done, although I cannot say I am happy about it!!
Anyway, good job.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D.)
I folded. My thinking was similar(exactly) to Jim and Kevins.Player to act behind me folded, SB called. River was a non spade blank. Sb check called the river bet by BB. He showed K or Q 7 for trips.Sb did not show his hand.
Sorry guys, I've been busy at work and am just now getting a chance to post again. I'm posting here because the original thread is so far down.
I called both hands on the river.
1) sb had JdTd and was semi-bluffing the turn with the straightflush draw. He hit the straight with the K.
2) sb did hold AJo and after calling 2 cold with it hit for trips.
Glad to know my calls wern't terrible although I didn't like either. Thanks for your responses.
Hello All,
I played this hand some time ago and decided I would post it now and see what the forum thought about it. The prompting for this post is that I played it against an opponent that I have not seen since, until he walked into Hollywood Aurora this past Thursday evening.
The hand in question is as follows...
I had AKs in clubs and I raise utg. I am in my customary 8 seat. All fold except the 2 seat who cold calls the raise. This is an opponent whom I have never played with before but for the past 5 hours he has simply been running over the game. He has a few drinks in him and is feeling no pain. He usually raises coming in or reraises coming in and never slows down, raising on every street until all fold or he hits the hand. He is simply brutalizing the game.
Anyway, it is heads up and the flop comes of insignificance with 2 clubs. I bet out and watch my opponenet who picks his hole cards up to his face and looks at them, then looks at the flop, looks back at his cards, and back at the flop again. He then sets his cards down, puts a chip over his cards and raises. I reraise, he reraises, I reraise, he calls.
Turn comes a blank and I bet. My opponenet raises, I reraise, he reraises, I reraise, he calls.
River comes an offsuit 3. I bet, my opponent raises, I reraise, he calls.
I turn over my AK clubs. He looks at his hand and turns over the 83 clubs and takes down the pot with a pair of threes.
My thoughts on this play are in a separate post immediately following this one.
All responses appreciated.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D.)
Hello All,
I think for me the key to my admitted overplay here is the fact that I had picked up a great read on this guy. In the past, anytime he had a flush draw, he went through the same routine of holding his cards up, looking at them, then the board, then back at his cards, and back at the board again. He had been doing this with every flush he had turned over for a winner. When he had a pair or set, he never looked at his cards again. I am not a huge fan of tells but I do think being able to have a read on your opponents plays a major role in being a winning player. I always try to pay attention at the table.
The bad news is I lost the hand, the good news is my read was correct. This hand may sound a bit farfetched but there were some regular posters here who were at the table. One even asked me if I was gonna post it. I said I would someday.
The comments at the table ranged from sheer stupidity to strong play. I found it interesting to see peoples reaction after the hand. I even had people coming up to me days later asking me about it and that they thought I was nuts. One even suggested I should have folded on the turn.
After he took the pot, I was shortstacked and skipped my blinds to go rebuy. I came back and posted the button. The 2 seat opponent continued to play for about another 2 hours. After he left, someone at the table told me that when I went to rebuy he had told the table that he just knew I was bluffing. Gosh I hate being a read out!! :)-
Anyway, I still was able to manage a fair win for the day. I was sure we would have seen him again but have not until he walked in last Thursday and sat down in a 5-10 game. He walked past my table, we recognized each other and said hello - both very friendly. I asked him what he was playing and he said 5-10. I invited him to sit in the 20-40 game, he smiled and politely declined.
Anway, those are my thoughts on the hand. Those of you who play with me regularly know I hardly ever get upset about a beat. I guess looking back, I could have played the hand differently and saved some bets but I really hate being right and not putting the most money in when I have the best of it. I thought I did so in all phases of this hand with the obvious exception of the river. In minor justification of this, this particular player had bluffed raised the river 2 times before.
Oh well, I guess thats why they call me Sucker Mike.
Just some thoughts...
Michael D. (Soccer/Sucker Mike D.)
Mike, welcome to that magical word called "luck." You had a good read, you played the hand as it should be played given the read, and he just...well you know the expression. He had six outs and you had 40.
What scares me is I tried to figure out who you're talking about, and at least a half a dozen people who've run through the room match that description. You're gonna get that when you're poker room of choice is attached to a casino, and players don't have to pass a litmus test to get in the game.
Mike -
I don't think your play was bad...it was just unlucky. The only value you're going to get from that hand is the encouragement to other players that any two cards can win. I think you could have slowed down a bit until you hit your flush (since it's a nut flush.)
Regardless, you should thank your lucky stars that he's playing in your game. I was playing at Bellagio right after Christmas one night, and some guy sitting two to my right must have had an entire keg of Bud throughout the session. The waitresses didn't have to ask him any more, they just brought a bottle whenever they came around. He had two playing speeds: call and raise. This guy was so gone that he didn't even know what he had when he turned his cards over, and he must have played eighty hands in a row. He dropped over $500 in our 4-8 game (which is an accomplishment unto itself.) I managed to relieve him of some money, usually with top pair and a good kicker, higher flush, etc. After that, he proceeded to hit miracle hand after hand...runner runner straights, full houses with 83, things like that, and he almost got even....if he could count his chips, anyways. Too bad he didn't accept your invitation to sit in the 20-40.
Scott
I agree with you. Although he might have a pair or even two pair on the turn, the probability -- assuming he'll always jam with just the draw -- is the same as hitting a 2 card flop wtih AK, less than 1/3. You had the best of it on the turn and acted accordingly.
But at some point, you have to adjust your initial read based on his subsequent actions. I mean, did you also read him as someone who will go to war with a flush draw over and over again on the flop and the turn?
It turned out here that you did have a great read on the guy and simply got unlucky. But I know that I will never trust any read of mine that much.
I may have gone as far as 3 betting the flop. Once he 4 bets, it's time to play check/call to the river.
Even if your flop and turn actions were fully warranted, I don't understand the river play. Why even bet in the first place - this guy ain't gonna lay down a pair....or did you also think that he would go to war with nothing on the river.
Then, you compounded matters by 3 betting with nothing.
Even if your read was a 100% accurate, you should only check/call the river IMO.
Before I look at your next post I will attempt to show you what happened.
You said:
He has a few drinks in him and is feeling no pain.
No pain no fear, if he had been in his right mind he would have released pre-flop, you are the Chairman.
You said:
River comes an offsuit 3. I bet, my opponent raises, I reraise, he calls.
Did you expect him to lay down the nuts?
SPM,...bluff the good players the impaired will call if you bet...
I'm assuming your read of his manner on the flop indicates he is on a weaker flush draw then yours and you have top flush draw overcards. You won't always be right so at some point you may want to slow down on your raising on the flop.
By the turn you should only raise once. “A blank” could have hit him and now you are the dog going to the river (six overpair outs and seven flush outs).
Since this guy will never lay down a hand if all you show is an ace high flush draw and miss by the river then just check and call there. You will have much better spots to gamble later, like when you actually have something.
Also forget about your favorite seat if it puts him close to your left. Try to get on his right when a seat opens up there.
Regards,
Rick
I believe that you have overlooked some very basic poker facts. In a full tabled limit hold'em game it will take the best hand to win. You don't know what your opponent had, sometimes your "read" is right and sometimes it is "wrong". But you will not be betting him out of the hand so you must end up with the best hand. Look at your own hand. You have a magnificient draw but you don't even have a pair. If your opponent had a pair, two pair, a set, or something better he will be betting and raising with those hands as well. Don't go to war with someone, even a drunk, when you know you don't have anything. It is simply ridiculous to lose a ton of money when you cannot even beat a pair of Treys. Go ahead and raise the flop bet on your super draw but then back off after that. When a blank comes on the turn simply call. When you miss at the river just call. You lost an extra 200 bucks or so when you didn't have to with hand that could not beat a pair.
If you have two aces inthe pocket, and you're on the button,5 players call and you have two blinds. since you're an underdog, should you raise? And what are the possibilities?
This is a totally different situation than what is being addressed here. Your pocket Aces are the best possible hand pre-flop and you know that with 100% certainity. You raise for value and the fact that you are an underdog against a collective should not prevent you from raising since the times you win all that extra money will more than cover the times your pocket rockets fail to hold up. But having a no pair hand in a heads-up situation where you know you may well be beat makes unlimited raising insane.
nt
Since I was at the table and obviously dumbfounded by the play of this hand, you know I think your read on this guy was absolutely magnificant! I guess the real question is, can it ever be worth spending a lot of $$$ representing a hand to an unthinking player who is not aware enough to fear the hand you're representing?
I find it very ironic and interesting how both the expert and complete idiot might arrive at the same conclusion albeit for different reasons. I'm referring of course, to his call on the end. It was either brilliant, or lacked any thought whatsoever.
Kevin
What were you thinking? The LAST thing you ever want to do is play back at a maniac when you have nothing. Don't try to beat a maniac by making the same mistakes he does.
Sounds to me like he didn't play the hand TOO badly. Calling preflop is a mistake of course, but playing this hand fast on the flop and turn can't be too far off. Of course he didn't know that you were drawing to a bigger flush.
Learn how to play against maniacs. Sounds like your play was worse than his on this hand.
-SmoothB-
Hey Smoothie, I think I speak for most of us here when I say, %&@@$#!T!!!! There were 4 reraises with no pair, less than the nut flush. He caught his pair on the river. In theory, except for the river, the AK played perfectly where the 8-3 did everything wrong.
In certain situations, an unimproved AK isn't "nothing," and heads up against a maniac is one of those times. In this situation, he's got a huge draw and probably the best hand if his read is correct, so he should play it as such. The fact that the best hand is nut no pair instead of top pair/top kicker or something isn't terribly relevant. The poster played the hand fine until the river, where he probably should have check-called. (Betting and calling a raise might be correct depending on the exact board/opponent, but I think betting/re-raising is too much because he's not folding a pair and it seems too thin to re-raise for value.)
-Sean
Thoughts? Clearly you had none.
I thought I'd ask for some input from the Vegas folks. I'm from NJ & primarily play 5-10 at the Taj. I've done well, and have just started to foray into 10-20, hopefully with my eyes open. I've visited LV twice, but mainly stayed low-limt (4-8 Bellagio, 6-12 Mirage, etc.).
I know the Bellagio has 8-16 and I think the Mirage has 10-20. Any input on these games regarding toughness, loose-aggressive, tight-passive characteristics? Any other recs. for aspiring middle limit THM tourist? Maybe I could into. myself to a couple of the regulars in the LV mid limts.
Mason, If you read this, I'd really like to stop by the Bellagio to say hello without being intrusive. Yours & David's book have really re-shaped my game, and I think the new material in 21st on loose ganes has helped me a great deal. Also, Feeney's new book is top notch.
Regards, Tony Rossi
The 8/16 can be a good game as can the 6/12. The games are better at night, especially graveyard, and on the weekends. Don't be afraid to change tables.
Good luck.
I am in full agreement with what NW Card Hack said above. Also, Binion's 10-20 is worth a look.
Good Luck
Howard
PS
Why not play a little no-limit at the Strat,while you are in town? It can be a lot of fun.
This "routine" hand had a couple of interesting elements, not the least of which is that pocket nines made it to the river against 5 opponents and still rated to be the likely winner without improvement.
Its a fairly tight, but somewhat passive 10-20 game. I am two off the button with pocket nines and raise first in. A late position poster calls in the cutoff seat, setting off a calling frenzy as the button and both blinds also come in.
The flop is a benign T52 rainbow.
It is checked to me and I bet. Everybody calls.
Turn is a seemingly harmless 3 of hearts, putting two hearts on board (matching the ten). Again it is checked to me and I bet.
Only the button folds.
I wonder what river card will be a safe one as any overcard or baby card should hit somebody. Maybe another nine or an eight.
However, the black ten that comes also seems pretty good.
Again it is checked to me. How many people bet the river here?
Michael -
In a passive game, I don't know how many people would be slowplaying an overpair or top pair. I think either betting or checking would be good. Betting would give other players the option of calling with worse hands, and since they've been calling you all the way, I don't see why this would be any different. They could conceivably fold an overpair, afraid that you made trip tens....but I doubt anyone had an overpair in this hand or they'd be betting. Checking is a little safer, but you have to assume you have the best hand now. I would doubt that anyone would be in with 46 to make the six-high straight, and someone should have been betting top pair at least. But by no means do you have an unbeatable hand. I would bet just to get some more chips in the pot...if I got raised, I'd call it and go to the showdown (maybe they have 88, who knows.)
Scott
I would check because I don't believe a worse hand will call. You have represented a decent hand, possibly top pair or maybe even an overpair and no one has shown any strength. It is unlikely anyone has a Ten since your flop bet was not raised. If anyone was on a draw, they didn't get there. I would check and call if anyone bets. You might even induce a bluff bet by one of your opponents.
I can't believe Mr. Jim Brier would check in this spot. It's a gurantee that you have the best hand. Not only that, you are likely to get called by seven or any other pair. Look at the way these patzies played the hand. Five people called on the turn, and you think they aren't calling the river bet? You are going to lose two big bets here most of the time by not betting, and you definitely have the best hand. Most people work long and hard for 1.5BB an hour. You might as well pick up two on the river here.
Obviously a ten would have raised on the turn. Overpair rarely slowplay, checking here is a sin.
Jim Brier, either you have detached yourself from the pissing of a 10-20 game or you are off your rocker.
There is a lot more to value betting on the river than just believing you might have the best hand. With 3 opponents on the end and one yet to act, I don't agree that betting the river is right. If you are playing against opponents who will call with any pair when the top card pairs and the river gets bet with 4 players in the hand, well that's fine. The opponents I play against wouldn't call.
A ten on the river is just about the best card for you (next to a 9) given the lack of a flop raise or bet from anyone else.. You should bet the river and expect to collect a call. It is unlikely that you will collect more than one call.
Since you are in last position on the river, checking to induce a bluff is obviously not an option here. I would note paranthetically that checking to induce a bluff from the button is unlikely even if the button was still around. Very few people (correctly) will play passively preflop, flop, and turn and then suddenly throw in a bluff against 4 opponents.
Will someone with a worse hand call?...You wont belive how often they will call at the end with just about anything.
I'm with JV and skp on this one. It was a pretty easy bet, even though someone in this passive crowd could have had a weakish ten, feared an overpair, and now is looking to check-raise. If that happened, I would have gritted my teeth, maybe felt a little dumb for betting, and called.
But the more likeley result is that I bet and get called by (up t) a couple of weaker pairs due to the "pot odds" they were getting.
As it is, I fell for the oldest trick in the book and didn't bet because when I hesitated, the guy in the cutoff seat reached for his chips as if he wer going to bluff/bet. I thought I could pick off a bluff and maybe even another call from one of the blinds. However, he didn't bet, but clearly would have called since he felt compelled to faking me into checking.
The SB showed J5s and the cut-off seat mucked after I showed my hand. I would have certainly gotten a call from one of those hands.
Breaking news, Jim Brier misses more river bets, here ye here ye, Brier wiffs river bet again!!!!!
That's not really fair. Jim acknowledged above that he was answering in the context of the opponents he usually faces. As a generl rule, I think he is correct that it is unlikely that you get called by a worse hand against decent opponents. Couple that with the possiblity that you will get raised, check-raised, or just called by a better hand and I think the river bet has marginal EV.
Even against these passive mutts (which you had to see to believe.
If you pay close attention to Jim's post's - and for that matter, his style of play - you will [or should] have noticed by now that his game is best desribed as solid; he very often passes up marginally profitable situations when said situations are also "high varience". This applies to all rounds, but is especially true on the river when he is last (or near last) to act in a multi-way pot. This is a personal decision, and one that he has no doubt given a great deal of thought to. He plays as high as 30-60, and as far as I know almost never below 15-30, although I am sure that he would be the first to grab a seat if the "8-16" was bleeding chips.
At these stakes varience is probably a major consideration; maybe he's wealthy - I don't know if he is, have never asked, and don't really care - but a fifty thousand dollar "losing streak" would probably hurt even if it would not wipe him out. If you go after every dollar in 30-60, such a loss is not at all an impossibility (although I will admit it is pretty high). Twenty or thirty thousand is ABSOLUTELY plausible.
I play alot of 10-20, a good bit of 5-10, some (but not much) 15-30, and if the game is too good to pass by I will pull up a chair at the good ol' 3-6 game.
At these stakes I can "afford" to try and milk the last dollar out of every hand - varience is not a key issue for me since I look at my results at the end of the year and seldom during it.
On those rare occasions when I have "taken a shot" (20-40 or 30-60, NEVER higher), I would have played it the way Jim advised.
At 5-10 or 10-20 I would have bet the river, and I'm fairly certain doing so would have been the correct play. (In this particular case I know [given the results] that it would have been. -LOL-)
By the way, the only reason I am writing this is because Jim will probably not take the time to respond - both out of a sense of "gentlemanly behavior", and due to the fact that it likely doesn't bother him to have other's disagree with his "way".
I hope I'm wrong; I would love to hear what he has to say about this. Unfortunately, I probably won't.
J-D
P.S. I don't think you meant his as an insult; I suspect it was meant as a joke and as such it was actually quite amusing.
This "post" is really for those who don't spend as much time on this forum as some of us do.
I would have to agree with Jim, too. The poster said the game was very passive, and he had raised before the flop with his nines. Anyone of the FOUR players who were in the hand could have thought their T was a loser to a higher pocket pair as the poster's betting action could mean an overpair.
Checking on the river may give you an opportunity to win one BB maybe even two, but I would that sure is better than losing 2.
But I will tell you this, the ole chips in hand ready to call play runs rampant through low limit games and seome medium games, and usually value betting is correct.
Hey, you guys ever have fish sit at your table and put their "calling" chips in their hand and then wave their hand frantically trying to get you not to bet? Those guys crack me up, especially when they are telling you not to bluff because they are going to call, you bet anyway, they call and you still win.
That may not happen much in Vegas, but down in Louisiana, those rocks will do whatever they can to keep from having to throw money into a pot they think they have lost yet they still see themselves letting the chips float to the middle and then to my stack.
I've had them leaning over the pot with the chips in their hand!
"As a general rule, I think he is correct that it is unlikely that you get called by a worse hand against decent opponents."
I don't buy this, Michael.
First of all, very few decent players will play the hand they way they have up to the river if they have your 99 beat. Secondly, if the above statement is true, then you should liberally bluff on the river. Bluff every time that you miss with AK/AQ/AJs in this situation. After all, no one is going to call with an underpair according to this logic.
You can see that if the above statement is true, you could have a field day bluffing. But in reality, it is almost always better to just show down Ace high because the truth is that you will be called by an underpair the vast majority of the time.
Failing to make these value bets is a very common error made by good players. Over time, these errors add up. Such value bets also provide cover for those times when you actually are bluffing. If your opponents know that you can't bet this river without a Ten, then your bluffs are going to be picked off way more often.
I should add that there is also a danger to checking to induce a bluff from the player to youre left. If you checked and the button bet, I may well raise with sweet f*ck all from the bb or whatever because I would know that the button, of all people, should not have a ten. He coldcalled 2 bets preflop and then did not raise the flop. Chances are he does not have a Ten and is bluffing himself.
skp-
Fair enough. However, I think the multiway nature of this pot makes it less likely that you will get called by an AK or AQ here. The button and SB would have to be looking for a parlay to pick off a bluff with Ace-high as they would have to beat not only he bettor, bu the players acting behind.
To me, the strongest argument for a value bet is the texture of the board and the lack of quality straight/flush draws. It is pretty clear that you were facing stubborn overcards, medium pairs, or hands like A5s that caught a little piece of the flop. And even these players would not incorrectly fold a pair after calling down thus far.
To clarify:
When you bet, I wouldn't expect that you will be called by Ace high as it is a multiway pot. I would expect that you will be called by an inferior one pair hand.
My point simply was that if you think that decent players will never call with an inferior one pair hand, then you should always bluff when you have AK/AQ in this situation as they are going to fold on those occasions as well. Since we know that ain't gonna happen, the only logical conclusion we can draw is that even decent players will call you at the end often enough to make this an easy value bet.
In any event, you and I are in agreement on this one.
But, I would go so far as to say that if you held say QQ, you should value bet even if the river is say a Jack even though you now have 5 different ranks on the board. Against a lone opponet, I may value bet with QQ even if an Ace or King comes off at the end.
In other words, while I agree that you should only bet when you think that you will win *if called* (i.e. it's not enough to just bet when you think you have the best hand), my point is that this will happen much more frequently than what most good players assume.
Players don't like to be bluffed. If they have something at the end, they will usually look you up. If they are going to fold a pair against a preflop raiser, they are way more likely to fold on the turn.
skp-
I agree that any pair (with or without a draw) that called the turn, would almost have to call the river (depending on his position), in order to protect against A/big. So, if you would bet AA in this spot, you may as well bet 99 as it doesn't seem logical from the play of this hand, that someone is holding a ten. But this brings up something else...
I assume you would always call if raised by a player capable of using this paired ten with a busted draw? When making these type of value bets, you open yourself up to bluff raises. But is this always a bad thing? Thanks.
Kevin
In a multiway pot, it is not very often that someone will bluffraise. Fortunately, in a multiway pot, it is also rare for someone with a (poorly played) Ten to try for a checkraise. If he made trip tens, he will likely bet out 'cause he wants to collect at least one call and 'cause he doesn't want to look like a chump if no one else bets.
Yes, Jim I realize their is more to betting than just having the best hand. However, maybe you should tailor your advice based on the people in the game. Look at the way those chumps played the turn, and you think that they would fold a full house getting those pot odds. Every game is not a tight 30/60 game, you might want to take that into consideration. Maybe realizing this you might be able to squeeze bets out of the loose players at your 30/60 game. Believe me they don't all think like you.
I would bet this in any game by the way.
I thought the tens tripped on the river. I still bet the river, but not in a 30/60 game. The river bet is not definately debatable.
I do believe the 2nd T came on the river, but I would be more likely to bet this in 30/60 then in a lower limit.
i have been on a 5 week losing streak i have lost about $5000 playing 20/40 to 60/120 and i have booked one winner and broke even alopt but i just cannot get the money and everyone of my sessions i have started out ahead anywhere from $200 to as much as $1200 in the first hour of play.my question is what should i do to get my confidence back and start winning again.
Tony,
Try this.
#1 The next session you have, if your up any amount in the first 2 hours of play, GET UP AND GO HOME.
#2 Take some time off, you have to make a mental break from the loss and get back in the saddle of "it's all one big long session"
#3 Realize that although you lost that amount of money over a realitively short period of time, it will take you much longer to win it back.
Hang in there and remember to have fun (seriously, players having fun ALWAYS play better than those who do not)
BH
.
First, good luck -- I hope things turn around for you.
Second, $5,000 is unfortunately not a bad losing streak over a 5 week period in those games. Assuming you are an active recreational player, put in about 20 hours a week, and are a winning player, you should expect to win anywhere from 50 to 100 BBs -- $2-4K if you only played 20/40. But since most players have a standard dev. of about 12-13 BBs per hour, you will rarely be exactly on target of your win rate. Over that period of time, 95% of the time, you will be within 260 BBs of your win rate, which means you could easily be $8K down if you only played 20/40. But since you also play higher, your loss could actually be much greater even though you are a winning player.
You should consider playing some 15/30 and 9/18 to get your confidence back. And if the money loss is upsetting, do not under any circumstance play higher than 20/40, even if it is a great game -- you can't afford to play w/scared money or go on tilt when stuck.
I'll bet that if you step down for a little while -- maybe even just a session or two, things will turn around and your losing streak will be a thing of history.
anthony, I once lost $5000 in one week of $20-$40 about two years ago. I recommend you step down to a lower game and try to recoup some of your losses and regain your confidence. It may be that you are just getting sucked out a lot. Do you find that you frequently have the best hand on the flop or turn when most of the money goes into the pot only to have a turn card or a river card show up that loses the pot for you? If that is the case, there is nothing to be done.
It works for me. I had back to back 50BB losses in 10-20. Not the end of the world, but it stung a bit. So back to 5-10. A 22 BB loss. Heh. I felt like I saved all the $ I would have lost at the higher limits! :-)
Then 3-6. And lo and behold, I could really relax, have fun again, talk to my neighbors, fold my cards, and concentrate on what was happening. I stayed flat for one visit (finally!) and the next got hit with a 85 BB win.
Bottom line: if you or your bankroll is starting to feel pinched, you owe it to yourself to step down and take some pressure off.
My two cents,
Zooey
This is a hand from a 10-20 game at the Taj on Saturday. I felt that my opponent (who was in the small blind) played the hand incorrectly. He disagreed, and I am curious what others think. Since some people hate spoilers, I will reveal my hand and my comments in a "Results" post.
Small blind has 55. Two middle position players call, I call on the button, small blind calls, and big blind checks.
Flop is 9, 10, 10 with two spades. Small blind bets, all fold to me on the button, and I call.
Turn is a 5 (not a spade), giving the small blind 5s full of 10s. Small blind bets, and I call again.
River is a blank (say 2d). Small blind bets, I raise, and small blind calls(!?!?)
I had pocket 9s, so I flopped a full house and ultimately won the pot.
If I had been in the small blind, I would not have bet the flop. With possible straight and flush draws out there, I don't think you could hope to win the pot on the flop.
I called the bet with my full house, because I did not believe the small blind had a 10 (he would have probably checked a 10), and I did not believe a non-10 would call the raise.
On the turn, I have no problem with the small blind's bet. I called, because I did not believe the small blind would call a raise. It happens that he had about the only non-10 hand that made my play incorrect.
On the river, how can the small blind not reraise with a full house? My play was consistant with having three 10s (rather than a full house). Sure, I could have had 9-10, but a reraise with 5s full of 10s has got to be profitable in the long run.
After the hand was over, I told the small blind that I would have lost more money than he had, and he responded, "I know." I think he was suggesting that I am too aggressive. Any thoughts on the subject?
i think a raise on the turn on your part wouldve been ok cause he may have had a ten with a weak kicker (sort of explaining his bet out on the flop), a flush or even straight draw that wouldve tempted him to call your raise (unless he's just ultra weak tight in which case it doesnt matter anyway), or he may think youre bluffing cause, as you said, he thinks youre overaggressive. either way, i see a lot of ways he could call you here and a few ways he couldve reraised. (although from his river play that was not likely. but you were surprised by his awful river non-reraise so no fair using hindsight here.) you shouldve raised the turn.
when were you planning to stop slowplaying your great (but non-nut; beware that third ten's few outs) hand? might as well charge his possible draws on the turn.
on the river his call is the ultimate passive/retarded play of all time. and shame on you for even suggesting it to him. DO NOT GIVE LESSONS.
Leaving aside the question of SB's earlier play...
There is nothing wrong with SB's call of our hero's raise on the river. He doesn't have the nuts, or even the second/third nuts, and the raise indicates he's probably up against TT, 99 or T9, since a bluff in this spot is highly dangerous.
A reraise is asking to be raised back. Then what does he do?
"There is nothing wrong with SB's call of our hero's raise on the river. He doesn't have the nuts, or even the second/third nuts, and the raise indicates he's probably up against TT, 99 or T9, since a bluff in this spot is highly dangerous. A reraise is asking to be raised back. Then what does he do?"
THEN sb just calls. either there are reads of opponents going on by both players that were not explained or the SBs call on the river (instead of a reraise) sucked big time.
the board is 9TT52. the sb gets 5 full of tens on the turn.
the hands that beat sb total 10. 99 (3) TT (1) T9 (6) sb can cancel out T2 or T5. very unlikely.
the hands that sb's opponent could have raised with on the river (because sb has done NOTHING to signify he has a full house, he bet the flop, turn and river;sb could have many many hands worse than a FH here) are many. any AT, KT, QT, JT, Tx any bluff raise busted draws a hand with a 9, he can assume sb was betting overcards or a flush draw and missed any ace hand semibluff a lot of these are unlikely but the T hands are not unlikely and many players (right or wrong) wait till the river to raise these if someone has been betting into them. SB's opponent could put the sb on a variety of hands that wouldve incited him to raise the river and win the pot there. this is not an unusual play by an aggressive opponent and you dont need a hand to make this play. sb i guess figured he would only be reraised or folded to if he reraised, but i think he's wrong. i think a T wouldve called here as would a couple other hands.
bottom line: there's no reason for sb to ASSUME a bigger full house here cause he himself has not represented one. I do not understand his failure to reraise. either he is a brilliant player (the rest of the hand proves he's not) or i have a gaping hole in my game (likely i have many but this is not one).
SB doesn't have to ASSUME a bigger full house - the high probability of a further reraise *if* he's beaten, means he must be something like a 2:1 favourite to reraise in this spot.
Whether SB should think he's 2:1 or better depends on his read of his opponent and the significance of the raise on the river.
So I think the answer is neither SB being brilliant nor you having a huge hole in your game. A reraise here seems ok, but so do does calling.
I can't find much fault in the SB's play. He bets out on the flop represening a T and gets headsup with you on the button. You just call. Now he could surmise you just have a str8t or flush draw. (But knows you might have a T, because he knows dang well HE doesn't)
He fills up on the turn and bets out. You just call.(hmmm)
He bets out on the river and you re-raise.Red Flag!Warning-Warning! If YOU just had a T only, then YOU would have been playing back agressively with the str8t and flush draws out against you. Thus he must conclude you were not worried about these draws and filled up on the flop, but of course he has to pay you off with the crying call in case you are trying some sort of move but I don't think he missed a re-raise personally.
If you would have re-raised on the flop, do you really think he would have dropped? If the answer is yes then you got two more big bets out of him by slow playing your shack. But if he reads you as an agressive opponent who would bet a draw (especilly on a cheap street) then he would call your re-raise on the flop maybe you could have gotten some more money out of him when he filled up on the turn, but probably only one small bet because had you raised his turn bet it seems he would have check-called the river and your earn would be the same as far as the big bets goes.But you never know if you don't try. He might have re-raised if he though you were on a draw still. He KNOWS you're not on a draw when you re-raise the river.
hillbilly,
For the most part I agree with your turn and river analysis. Calling the turn and raising the river when a blank hits is very scary.
However, I strongly disagree that this was a good flop bet by the small blind. Remember, he was betting into the big blind, two limpers AND our hero on the button. If he were heads up in the first place a bet is a good move but when he made the bet the pot was protected.
Regards,
Rick
You and Jim are correct, this flop bet is clearly not made with the probable best hand. And to bet out in this situation often would also be wrong.
But is it "insane"? :o)
What better place to try and represent a T than out of the SB? As you say, the pot is protected, and most of your opponents will give you credit for the T, as once again , what fool would bluff into this pot. Well, in the right spot against the right opponents I would, that's who. In this case, there is a pair on board, which, IMO, might slow down any re-raises from str8t or flush draws. And also, since this is such a "foolish" place to bluff, a singleton 9 or overcards to the flop may decide to drop. What hands do you put the three limpers that folded to this bet on? The SB very nearly pulled this off and it was his bad luck that the button flopped the big shack. If I am raised immediately after this flop bet by predictable opponents of course I give it up and I've "wasted" one small bet with my "probe" into the pot.(and leave them guessing what the hell was hillbilly up to THIS time)
I'm sort of suprised the SB in this situation, if he had the moxie to bet this flop, and the intuition not to lose any more money on the river, did'nt try for a check-raise on the turn. But that's what it's all about, make your opponents guess what you are up to and be UN- predictable.
Now in a casino environment against loose opponents, yes, you are really swimming uphill with this move and it will rarely be correct. But if you are in a tight game with a tight image, why not (occaisionally, VERY occasionally go for the gusto, or should I say presto! :o)
responding to hillbilly: "And also, since this is such a "foolish" place to bluff, a singleton 9 or overcards to the flop may decide to drop."
i can only imagine the weakest players folding a decent 9 with an overcard to this single flop small bet. am i wrong?
hillbilly again: "I'm sort of suprised the SB in this situation, if he had the moxie to bet this flop, and the intuition not to lose any more money on the river, did'nt try for a check-raise on the turn. But that's what it's all about, make your opponents guess what you are up to and be UN- predictable"
if being unpredictable means misplaying every street then ill opt for predictable.. i agree he should have went for a checkraise on the turn, especially against someone he considers too aggressive.
you state:
"I called the bet with my full house, because I did not believe the small blind had a 10 (he would have probably checked a 10), and I did not believe a non-10 would call the raise."
Why do you think if the small blind had a T he would have checked? Is it because you think he would have check-raised a T? I know I would bet a T almost everytime in that situation, personally. What hand did you put him on? I would almost have to put him on a T as I concider it somewhat foolhardy to bet a str8t or flush draw into four opponents with a pair on the board.(Although of course it depends on your opponents)
I think your play on the turn is more consistent with a full house than with 3 tens. Three tens has got to fear a drawing hand whereas a full house welcomes a draw. Thus 3 tens is more likely to raise on the turn whereas a full house is more likely to just call, encouraging action on the river.
On the river, from his perspective, if you have just 3 tens, you might conceivably fold to his reraise. If you have a full house, your opponent is going to get reraised again. I don't see his call of your raise on the river as too bad a play.
I do agree with the consensus that his play on the flop was the truly bad play.
Just calling on the turn and raising the river when a complete blank hits just stinks of a monster. Given the sequence of events, if I'm the guy w/55 and I get popped on the turn I would probably re-raise, but when I don't get popped until the river I'm definitely going to worry about a monster like TT/99/T9.
-Sean
The small blinds pre flop call was fine. His flop bet was insane considering he had a total miss and four opponents in an unraised pot. The texture of the flop is such that someone is very likely to have paired the board, or hold a straight or a flush draw. He would be lucky to win the pot right there 5% of the time.
On the turn he gets lucky and hits a 22.5 to 1 shot. Betting is fine since it is unlikely the five improved your hand. He should be happy you called.
On the river I think his call of your raise is OK although I might reraise in the heat of battle. The fact that you waited until the river rather than the turn to pull the trigger means you could be very strong indeed (i.e., you hold the big full).
The horrible part of his play was the flop bet. The river is debatable.
Regards,
Rick
PS Thanks for posting the results separately.
Leading into a crowd of four players with a small pocket pair and a board of TT9 with a two flush is very bad poker. He cannot win the pot outright by betting and he will frequently get raised by a better hand as well as someone on a straight or a flush draw. The point is that even if someone is raising on a come hand and his hand happens to be best, unless a Five shows up on the turn he will have to fold anyway when the turn gets bet. He should check and hope it gets checked around.
I'll agree with Jim on this one...the pocket five's player MUST assume that someone's got a nine or a ten, if not a straight or a flush draw. The hand becomes a check and fold on the flop. His only help would be another five, and as shown, it was very expensive "help." Even though he shouldn't have been involved in the hand in the first place, when he did get his fives full on the turn, he should have played it faster.
Scott
What do you mean, "He disagreed"?
Sigh.
-CONFUSED
I am in SB with KK. Middle position raises, late poster calls 10, I threebet. MP dude caps. All call. 3 take flop for 40 each. Flop is 643. I check, with the intention of checkraising. MP player is aggressive and plays alot of hands fast... I am pretty sure I have the best hand. He checks (confusing) and the poster bets. I raise, MP folds, poster 3 bets... I call. ??? Turn is a 4, I bet out, he raises. I call... ??? River is a 3. I check-call. Comments on all streets appreciated. Too weak? Lead on turn bad? Checkraise attempt on flop bad? Did I get the max? Did I lose the minimum? Results later...
TT,
I read this three times trying to figure what I would do differently and I came up with a blank. I like the attempted checkraise on the flop. I like the call of the three bet on the flop followed by leading on the turn. I would call his turn raise and check and call the river as you did.
One reason you should not make a laydown here is that he knows you probably have an overpair and can't possibly have a straight or full house with this board. At the same time he knows you think he could be connected with a baby board since he saw the flop on installments. So he is protected from any reraises on the turn or river and could be overplaying a hand such as 65 suited or even a small pair such as 77 or 55. In this spot you lose more often then not but the pot is big enough to justify calling him down.
Regards,
Rick
One thing is clear. You cannot get away from this hand. I don't like the check-raise move on the flop. If the capper is a loose, goose then I hope he raises my flop bet so I can re-raise and make everyone pay triple to hang around. I think this is better than check-raising and you make sure that the flop get bet and avoid the small risk of having it checked around. The poster now coming out of the woodwork frightens me. He could have practically anything. When the poster 3 bets you on the flop and the turn card pairs the board I don't think I would lead out on the expensive street here.
Jim,
The checkraise move is debatable. Keep in mind that leading at the flop hoping the capper raises forcing “everyone” to face two bets cold (and your subsequent reraise) is probably the play against a larger field but here “everyone” means only two opponents. I think TT's checkraise move was reasonable given the aggressive nature of the middle position player.
I still like the lead bet on the turn. In this spot when this baby connected board pairs a card other than the top card I believe it improves the kings more often then it hurts the kings (some times it won't matter). If the late poster flopped a straight now the kings have four outs rather than none. If the late poster has a six with a kicker other than an ace the late poster now has only two outs rather than five. If the poster had two pair not including the card that paired on the turn he has lost the lead and has four outs. And if the four filled him up or gave him trips, the kings were trailing anyway but still have two outs.
Much worse would be a card that completes a straight. Now the kings could have lost the lead and be drawing dead. But we both agree that TT has to call down the late poster given he was unknown and the pot has become large.
Regards,
Rick
I agree that the board pairing small has helped the Kings and gives him more outs when he is behind. But the reason I don't like him betting the turn is because there is still too great a chance that he is behind. Having some light at the end of the tunnel is better than having none but if it is from a locomotive I will be dead anyway.
I don't understand. By checking this flop, you increase the chance that the late position poster will go on to win the hand. In a pot which has 13 pre-flop bets in it, why would you want to do anything but reduce these chances? (checking prevents any initial pressure of more than one bet to the late position poster). Is a pair of kings that invincible here? Or, does this have to do with the fact that MP might hold AA?
Kevin
Interesting hand. I find it interesting, because while I understand your check/raise was an attempt to gain value from what may have been a best hand (certainly, it wasn't meant as a strategic move to shut someone out), it seemed to confuse things a little...
It seems to me, that when you find yourself marked with a big hand in capped short-handed pots, it might be best to play things a little more straight forward. You're SUPPOSED to have a hand that warrants putting in some $$ on this flop, so I see little to be gained from disappointing your opponents. Maybe others could comment a little more on this aspect of the hand.
Kevin
while playin atlantic city, an opponent said he wpould not give me any action because i played to tight{his three a'ces to my a'ces fullwhat is your observation?
Please type this again, only slower. I'm not sure I understand the question.
If you can't seem to get action from trips, it might be worth the investment to buy a few rounds of drinks for the table :)
Kevin
Thanks to all who responded. I questioned the CRaise attempt on the flop and perhaps leading the turn... Although I felt good about it initially and still think it is the play. The late position poster had 66 and had me drawing to two outs. I was a bit frustrated thinking that I might have been able to get away from this hand... I don't think that is true upon reflection and the comments of those on the forum. The only thing troubling for me there is that I have demonstrated, both before and on the flop (and by leading at the turn....) that I have an overpair. The action on the flop suggests that this dude knows I have an overpair and that he has me beat... When he pops me on the turn, I am BEAT... I hear the locomotive. Anyhow, thanks to all who responded for providing insight and further avenues for reflection... -TT
you are sure you lost. 80-160 at the Bellagio. 5 players 3 bet before the flop . Big blind plays JhTh flop come Ks9d8c BB bets all call. Turn Kh ..all check River 9c. All check BB mucks his hand and see pair 7 pair 6 pair 4 pair 3 ... throw away the winning hand ....amazing
Had almost the exact thing with pocket 9's once, three cold callers in on underpairs, i raised UTG, checked to river after board came in A-k-q-k-8--i mucked, i couldn't conceive i could possibly win.
4 players call the flop with a pair smaller than the 3 cards of the flop...they like to throw black chips maybe ...I don't have better explanation ...
t
du bist ei eierkopf
I'll be in Vegas the last of this month. What nights do ya,ll play at the Strat? Dino.
What nights do I personally play there, or what nights do they spread no-limit ?
To the best of my knowledge,they spread no-limit on Sun,Wed, and Fri nights. Although there was a no-limit game spread there this past Saturday.
Although I play cards just about every day,I would not consider myself to be a "regular" at any one card room.I have no set night that I attend any certain card room. In my notebook, I do keep notes on certain events (pool players in town at the Riviera for example) that might sway my play to a certain room for a certain length of time.
The no-limit games at the Strat go off at around 6:00 or 7:00 PM on those nights, depending on various factors.
Dino, if you want to get together and hit the Strat (or any other card room) on a wednesday night when you are in town, just give me a call. My # is in the book.
PS
When I told T-Bone that he should consider playing no-limit at the Strat, I didn't mean so that I could take his money. I meant that it can be a lot of fun for both tourist and local alike.
Good Luck
Howard
Dino
I just got done reading your post about owning a poolhall.So don't take the Riviera pool players comment the wrong way.It's nothing against pool players.A lot of the one's that come to the Riviera have a lot of gamble in them,that's all.
Good Luck
Howard
Well Howard, thanks for your response. You're right about pool players though. I haven't seen many that play any other games very well. Takes too much time to develop a good pool game to concentrate on much else. Hope to see you in Vegas, I'll be arriving Feb. 25th. Dino.
Dino
Give me a call when you get in town. I'm sure we'll be able to get together at least once while you are in town.
Good Luck
Howard
-You alone can decide the fluctuation your willing to take as you play. On certain draws that are close you can put in raises rather then calls. You can take on a safer game or one where there is a lot of fluctuation or you can find a game where their is not a lot of raising going on but has approximatly the same earn. This all how you fell that day. You decide this before you walk into the room.
-An Idle Mind Is... The Best Way To Relax.
-Where There's Smoke, There is... Pollution.
-Happy The Bride Who... Gets All The Presents!
-A Penny Saved Is... Not Much.
-Two's Company, Three's... The Musketeers.
-Don't Put Off Tomorrow What... You Put On To Go To Bed.
-Laugh & The Whole World Laughs With You, Cry & You Have To Blow Your Nose.
-None Are So Blind As... Helen Keller.
-Over heard a the table this week do you know that 6 percent of the people have orgasm when sneezing takes place. When an opponent sneezed you should have seen all the glassy eyed people in the cardroom.
-For those people with sunglasses who are trying to block tells.(Remember tells can only be used as guidelines in close decisions) Blood under stress runs from the extremetees of the body to the heart and brain. This is part of the fight or flight response. For people who wear sunglasses. Watch their hands and lips before the pot starts. If they change from a pinkish color to a whitish color while playing they are probably bluffing. To increase the color change take your time when you think he is bluffing.
-If you hear anything interesting please email me at Hosh115@aol.com
-Play well and have fun. Hosh
- "FIRST you forget names, then you forget faces. Next you forget to pull your zipper up and finally you forget to pull it doen"(George Burns).
- IF YOU were to spell out numbers, how far would you have to go until you would find the letter "A"? (One thousand).
c
Great Post. I want to thank you for the CardPlayer tip. Its a go at least for the first three articles which will appear this month, next month, and in April (the even numbered issues).
Hey Jim have fun with it. My Idea for an internet article with tips through out is taken from Bernard Trink from the Bangkok Post. I have discussed it with Mason and will try to post it every Monday. But I need your help if you hear a funny story or something at the card table you find interesting please email me at the above email address. Poker should be fun so should tips.
Hosh this could have been a GREAT post. Could have been. What stopped it from being great was of course the Helen Keller bit. Oh well your good and someday you may be great but we will have to wait and see.
Your buddy,
Vince.
I just shoveled two feet of snow off of the driveway. Don't give me a hard time.
Now you know why vegas is better. Keep up the good work get back her soon. All the best just don't stick your tongue on the shovel.
10-20 and I'm in BB w/ QhJh. Seven are in so far and it's capped to me. I call. Is this correct? (As expected 8 of us see the flop.)
Seven in so far and you're holding QJ suited? Ask the dealer if another raise is allowed! :-)
Play flush draws and straight draws for value on the flop. Try a semi-bluff with a draw on the turn, if heads-up or three-way by then. The pot odds here are giving you multiple chances to win, even by chasing 5 to 3 outs for two pair or trips if you flop top pair. If the players are half-decent, consider all aces and kings out of the deck, though your queens and jacks might not be too live either. Definite call though.
Lars
Playing this way is not smart and will cost you a fortune in the long run.
People are not thinking carefully about this problem.
First of all this is a terrible hand to play in bad position. In the long run this hand cannot be played profitably in early position - ESPECIALLY when all the money is going in preflop. This hand only makes money after the flop, and the flop should be seen cheaply.
So what do you want to accomplish with QJ suited? Your straight making possibilities are probably in serious trouble since it appears as though there are some big hands out there - AK, AA, KK, QQ etc are all likely.
As for flush possibilities - you might as well play any 2 suited cards. And the same goes for your trips or 2 pair making possibilities.
I would be FAR more inclined to call with 98 suited in this situation. But the fact is, I would muck either.
You must think carefully about what all the raising is telling you about the other hands that are out there. If you don't you will find yourself losing at poker.
-SmoothB-
SmoothB, I think this is a great response. It speaks to something we normally don't think too much about in hold 'em. That is, are the cards we need live? In 7CS this is a basic part of the game but in hold 'em we are taught as beginners to compute odds as if all unseen cards have the same likelihood of coming out of the deck. This can be a very dangerous assumption.
While we can't know that the cards that are likely to make QJs hit the flop hard are in other players hands, it is a pretty good assumption to make.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
SmoothB,
Great post! But how about a game where most pots are multi-way and capped (i.e., an action game full of maniacs)? Let's say the cap is three raises as it is in California. Let's assume that bankroll is not a problem or that you are playing at the low end of your normal limits. Now big cards are not so likely to be out. Would you play it under these assumptions?
Regards,
Rick
My thinking exactly. Would you call on the button?
I would fold. Your implied odds get ruined when you have to pay 3 or 4 bets to take a flop with this hand regardless of how many other players are in or what the field happens to be flying around with. I would call one raise being half-way in but not 3 or 4. In Vegas a cap is a bet and four raises. In other places it is a bet and three raises.
What about KQs and AQs in the same situation...
I played at casino-rama this weekend and the games were so loose agressive that it happened a few times...
I called with AQs but folded KQs. The time i called with AQs the board came AQ3 rainbow... Got the boat with a quennie on the river One guy had aces.... i lost 220$ in a 10-20 hand.....
I love hold em :o)))))
Charlie
AQ suited is better and getting closer. KQ suited is not strong enough in my opinion since your flush draw is not to the nuts. I prefer AA then KK then QQ then AK suited then AQ suited.
Fold if this is an anomolous situation in the game; call against the usual gang of idiots.
Played a quick and very profitable session of 9-18 this morning at Lucky Chances in Colma, CA. The players were unusually loose, often raising and chasing with extremely marginal hands. Anyways, one hand that I'd like some comments on:
I'm on the button and before I look at my cards, I like to observe the actions of the other players before it's my turn to act. This is something that I'm beginning to do more and more of to try to get better reads of players. First player (#1) in middle position is an average player who will call with any two suited cards. He plays post-flop fairly well. #1 opens for a raise. Next player (#2) is a very loose aggressive and I've seen him raise with 35s. He makes it 3 bets. Cutoff seat (#3) is a so-so player, but seems like he's been playing well and has been taking his share of pots this morning. He calls the 3 bets. Action is to me and I see KcKs. I cap it at 4 bets.
Question 1: I assume that I did the right thing by capping preflop with my hand and position. Anyone just cold call here?
We see the flop 4-handed.
Flop: 2c 5c 8s
#1 checks, #2 bets, #3 raises, I only call, #1, and #2 call.
Question 2: Should I have made it 3 bets here? I was going to make it 2 bets, but #3's raise threw me off. I wasn't sure if #3 had a flush draw, straight draw, or maybe a set or two-pair (I would not be surprised if he called preflop with 58s). I guess that I also wanted to see how #1 and #2 would respond to the 2 bets.
Turn: 2c 5c 8s (10d)
#1 checks, #2 checks, #3 bets, I call, #1 calls, #2 calls.
Question 3: Try a raise here or just call down? If I was going to raise, I think I missed the opportunity to do that on the flop. I figure that if I raise and get reraised on the turn, I'm probably way behind. I'm determined to call this pot to the river, so I just call.
River: 2c 5c 8s 10d (10c)
#1 checks, #2 checks, #3 checks (after he thought long and hard for about a minute), I bet, everyone folds.
Question 4: Did I make a good bet here? I actually wasn't afraid of the clubs because these guys (especially #1 and #2) would have bet if they hit on the river. I don't believe anyone had a 10 and if #3 had flopped 2-pair (which in retrospect, I'm sure he didn't), he was now conterfeited.
Thanks for your comments in advance.
With regard to question 1, yes I approve of capping the betting with AA or KK. These are the hands you want to be playing in capped pots.
With regard to question 2, you should 3 bet with your big overpair especially given the two flush and you having the Kc. The loose, goose is betting because he has two cards and the raiser probably has an overpair but maybe a draw. Your hand rates to be best and you should play it as such for now.
With regard to question 3, I would lower the boom now having neglected to 3 bet on the cheap street. It is unlikely this board has given even a so-so player who called 3 bets cold pre-flop a better hand than yours.
With regard to question 4, when they all check I assume no one has a Club flush and my only worry is trip Tens. I would bet my big overpair.
P.S: You have used a poker term incorrectly. Someone who flopped two pair did not get counterfeited. Their second pair got overcoated by the running pair of Tens giving you the better hand. Counterfeiting is when a card shows up on the board that duplicates a card in your hand allowing someone else to have the same hand or a better hand. Hence, the term "counterfeiting". Here is an example: You have QJ and the flop is T98 rainbow. A Jack shows up on the turn. You just got counterfeited because anyone with a Queen has the same hand you do and someone with King-Queen has a better hand. If the river now brings a Queen you just got fatally counterfeited since the best you can do is tie.
Interesting...Overcoated?...I've never heard of it...learn something new every day I guess.
Jim,
Thanks for the clarification. Actually, I never heard of the term "overcoated". I always that that if I had 45 and the flop was 10 4 5 and the turn was a 10, then my bottom two pair got conterfeited. I guess then, according to your definition, this is overcoated?
I always learn something new on this forum everyday. Thanks!
Jace
no topic. last word is opinion.
Jim is correct.
You cannot counterfeit something unless you "copy" the same thing, am I right? It's just like Jim described in the QJ analogy. Another example of counterfeit is in Omaha Hi/Lo, when the board pairs your low card, it devalues your key low hand.
Overcoated is a term that's not widely used and you have to have been playing forever to have heard the term. Not that I'm saying Jim is an old man or anything.
~stephen
overall, I think you were too passive in the hand.
If you can be very sure that #3 will bet the turn after you flat call on the flop, then a flat call is fine. if you just flat call on the flop then you must raise on the turn unless the Dreaded Ace falls. my 2 cents
Jace -
I play 9-18 at Lucky Chances quite a bit and have been in games like this one... I was in a great one on Saturday night. My policy is to wait for premium hands and when I get them, fire away. Raising on the flop would have made the draws and lone aces pay the maximum. Same goes for the turn. I agree that if reraised on the turn, you would be way behind. You probably don't have enough info about #3 to fold, however. Still, in the long run, raising pays in this situation, at least with a table of Lucky Chances wild men.
BTW, why are you sure that #3 didn't flop two pair? Aside from calling three cold pre-flop, his play seems consistent with two little pair to me.
Jim,
It's possible that #3 had 25, but it's hard for me to imagine that he'd play such a hand. I think that if he had 8x, 85, or 82, then he'd have to call me on the river. As I was driving to work later, I thought about what types of hands he would bet if he had a pair. I believed that if he had any 8x or even 5x, then he would have to call my last bet given the size of the pot and the fact that he was the last player left after #1 and #2 folded. If he had A8, I think it's an automatic call. Hell, I could have just had AK or AQ.
Later on, #1 and I went to have a smoke and he told me that he had AK and put me on a big pocket pair. He believed that everyone else (#2 and #3) was probably on some type of straight draw or held overcards. I just told him that I could beat AK, but didn't tell him exactly I was holding.
ive done a cut and paste, hopefully you can follow it:
-preflop you capped KK. -Anyone just cold call here?
YES. in this case you want to see who else caps it. one of those three probably will from what youve told us about their looseness. plus you want to deceive them as to your great hand in case you flop a monster.
-Flop: 2c 5c 8s -Question 2: Should I have made it 3 bets here
YES. youre being too pessimistic about their holdings make them pay dearly for their draws and their fishy play. Plus you want to see if you get reraised.
-Turn: 2c 5c 8s (10d) -Question 3: Try a raise here or just call down?
Call makes more sense here since, as you said you missed your chance to probe for info on the flop (not to mention thin the field). Still a raise here might not be too late and might be smart for value. That's a decent board for KK so far.
-River: 2c 5c 8s 10d (10c) -Question 4: Did I make a good bet here?
Not really. who's gonna call with a worse hand. Someone might have a ten or a baby flush.
just my opinion.. now to go read everyone elses.
I would of just called preflop and check and call all the way.
chitown
Hey Jace,
Q1: Cap or call… could go either way here… I suggest you mix it up a bit and try to keep your opponents off balance.
Q2: Absolutely you make it three bets here. Make the draws pay and see if you get reraised. You might also thin the field and increase your chances of winning.
Q3: Since you didn’t raise the fop… yes raise the turn. If you raise the flop and someone bets into you again… beware a set of 10s. The hand played like that was possible. If I get the set here, I would go for the check raise.. still you have to bet out. Just an egg’s thoughts…..
Q4: The only hands I can think of that call you that you can beat are QQ and JJ. For everything else, this is a big bet donation… can you call a raise here if you get check raised… 10c is a nightmare card for you. Check and flip over your hand…
Just an egg’s thought
Northern California, a rammin'-jammin' $20-40 game (kind of a redundant statement when you're talking about N. Calif $20-40... Rammin'-jammin' goes without saying).
The game I am sitting in has more than its fair share of loose players and one bonfide maniac (he raises 97% of his hands pre-flop... if it's raised to him, he will 3-bet or cap in the dark). He had gotten on a mega-rush and piled up a mountain of chips, but had cooled off a lot and spewed back a coupla racks in the last hour or so. He's visibly steaming with each successive beat he takes.
The maniac is two seats to my left, which I don't like, but even if I had been sitting to his left I wouldn't be able to try to isolate him because everyone else at the table would know what I was doing.
So on this particular hand, I am early-ish position (one behind UTG) and I look down to see KhKc. I am about to grab eight chips and fire in a raise, but I know it will be done for me, and I can limp-reraise when it comes back around to me.
No need! Not only is it capped by the time it gets back to me, but ALL NINE players called the cap! At this table, I am not even certain that anyone has AA, because people have been playing any two cards. Now, that's something I just can't recall having seen before (or at least for a long time): a 9-way cap, preflop.
The pot is $720 as we take the flop (smile)
FLOP: T82 rainbow
It's checked to me and I bet out, knowing that I will, in all likelihood, get raised. Sure enough, the maniac raises me, the SB check-raises for three bets, and I cap it.
Seven players see the turn for four bets!
$1,280 in the pot (I have to confess that my heart was pounding like a wildman; I had no idea where I was at by this point... I had to assume someone had flopped a set or at least two pair? The SB check-raiser I put on T8 for the top two, but the maniac could be playing a straight draw or overcards. The other four players were a mystery to me.)
TURN: Kd (board is now **Th 8c 2d Kd**)
I made my set, which is currently the nuts. The SB comes out betting this time, and I make it $80. The maniac just flat calls this time (must have had 62o or something)... everyone else now folds around to the SB, who makes it three bets and I put in the cap. Maniac calls. Only the three of us remain.
$1,760 is now in the pot... This is officially the biggest pot I have ever played for, and my heart is doing backflips in my chest.
RIVER: 9c (final board is **Th 8c 2d Kd 9c**)
Possible ruh-roh... no one could possibly have been putting all those bets with a gutshot, could they? But then again, I DID mention that this was a game in Northern California, right?
One of the players who had already mucked yells out, "Trip Kings no goot! Trip Kings no goot!" I try to ignore him, but he hoots derisively and points directly at me... "I know what you have! Trip Kings no goot!"
I wanted to deck the guy, who then turns and points at the SB and yells, "Pocket A no goot! Pocket A no goot!" I started to get a sick feeling in my stomach, but said nothing... while the SB glares back and snarls, "Why don't you shut the f*** up?" at the guy making the comments.
The dealer called time, and reminded the SB that the action was on him to check or bet. The SB was clearly rattled by the heckling, and he tossed eight chips out as a bet. I raise, and the maniac ponders for a while and even flicked his cards with his forefinger about an inch toward the dealer before grabbing them back and protecting them... He announced that it was too big a pot and he had to call. The SB just called and as he did so, one of the other players announced, "Dealer, I want to see ALL called hands, please..."
Since I was first, I rolled over my set of cowboys.
The SB wound up and punched the table-top, and I mean HARD. He flashed T8 for the two pair and mucked dejectedly. The maniac tried to stuff his cards in the muck, but the dealer acted like a hockey goalie and made a nice glove-save and turned over A2 (the guy put in $400 with bottom pair, top kicker... Northern Cal., remember?)
I dragged the $2,000 pot and had a quiet grin on my face for hours (actually days later, I'm still grinning thinking about it).
To the heckler, I turned and quizzically asked him, "Trip Kings no goot?" He sheepishly admitted that he thought for sure someone made a straight on the river. I started stacking like an octopus and was still stacking three hands later.
I started out typing this post with the notion of soliciting feedback about if I had played it correctly... but now that I think about it, I don't think I could have gotten any more money out of the pot than I did. But if anyone has any feedback or constructive criticism about the way I played it, I would be happy to hear it...
I guess I'm sharing the story because the old poker adage goes: "Few players can remember the truly big pots they have won, strange as it might seem; but all of them, with remarkable clarity, can recall the outstanding bad beats of their career." This hand I think might be the exception to that rule.
I very much doubt that I will ever regularly play a limit that makes a $2,000 pot seem routine, so this might remain a highlight of my poker career.
Rage away,
Mike D.
Mike D,
What a F--cking game that must have been!!!!! If you need a partner in crime let me know and I'll fly down.$2000.00!!! What a pot!!!
Rook
why lump all card rooms in NCa as very loose?you were in one game with a couple of dummies. Very seldom do you get that kind of action, the hand was played for you
Hey Bill, why you got to ride the guy on a detail? Let the man have his glory in a dragging a monster pot with less than the nuts. Nice hand Mike!!
I actually played in a 20-40 pot online that was capped 9-ways. I remember the $720. It only got to $1300+ and was won by a guy who came in with 97s and hit a gutshot straight with an 8 on the river. He gloated like hell which was his style. I think his handle was chance. He was known for criticizing other's play. A few hands later I called his raise pre-flop with 97s (different suit) for the hell of it and sucked out something on the river to beat him! Then the moaning started. One of MY more memorable poker moments. At any rate, just seeing a pot that big is exciting, let alone winning it. Congratulations.
Hey Mike,
I’ve been to N. Cali and love your games there. The only comment I would make is this.
Assuming you’re a respected player by some of the folks in the game then why slowplay your KK preflop and “let some else raise it for you”. What happened was a pot was created that was sooooo big, people now had proper odds to call for all sorts of outs. Let’s see… the 10 to 1 gut shot on the flop is looking at a $720 dollar pot before the any betting and so it is clear that even if capped to them it is proper to call. On the turn, your 10 to 1 gut shot is now getting appropriate odds to call for the river (perhaps not because of the two diamonds, but you’ve never heard the crying call… “the pots just TOO big, I gotta call!”). So …. If the gut shot comes on the river… can you really sit there and think bad beat… bad beat…. Even though that’s the way you feel… what if he had QJd … still a bad beat?????
So…. Raise those big hands early, thin the field if you can. The pots you take down won’t be as big.. but there will be a lot more of them.
Just an egg’s thoughts…..
Egg,
You're absolutely right, now that I have re-read your post a couple of times... this hand just as easily could have gone the other way, as I had played so passively. I would have been *furious* at myself if I had lost that pot because someone had limped in QJ, and then called the cap because the "pot got too big".
I think that the biggest leak in my game currently is that I tend to play too passively, especially at 15-30 or above. I will indeed work on becoming more aggressive (I think I have the "tight" part down already), and hopefully that will yield good results.
Playing passively didn't hurt me in this example (and I'm glad), but it very well could have. Thanks for pointing it out to me.
Mike
20-40 holdem. im a 10-20 player but tables are full and the 20-40 game looks loose so i go in...
im in the cutoff with 99
all fold to the player before me who raise. i have no read on him.
i make it 60 (right or wrong)
all fold and he called
flop: 9-10-J rainbow
he bet i raise he reraise i reraise he call (am i too agressive?)
turn blank
he bets.. i raise he call (again too agressive??)
river another blank
just a 40$ hand :o)
Charlie who had a terrible weekend! check i check
he turn over the nut KQo he wanted to checkraise on the river
i think i play this hand way too agressively
Any coment please!!!
I would of called preflop and folded on the flop because i can read people really good.
chitown
mmm even if he would have show me KQ on the flop i would have still call him
Charlie
Raising with 99's to isolate the raiser is good. Remember you may up against another pair.
Four betting flop is good. He would probably 3 bet with many weaker hands, including AJ and JT.
But your clue should have been that he BET on the turn AFTER you 4 bet the flop. Now I would be worried about a bigger set or a straight.
I would have called the turn (outs for a boat). He would have bet the river, and I would have had to call.
I would have lost the same, but not risk him reraising me on the turn. If you flop trips when your opponent flops a straight, well, you're going to lose some money unless you get lucky and fill up.
Bob J.
just call his reraise on the flop and call him down from there.
your preflop reraise is high variance, but it does isolate and give you info if he caps it. if you pack a hefty bankroll and know how to laydown a hand then i guess it's OK, but not good. just OK. with no read a lot of players would call or even fold. usually you only want to isolate when you have a reason for isolating, like you know the player youre up against and you think youre better heads up, or they will fear your 3 bet, or they are fishy, weak, obvious stuff.
you played it fine
I like the reraise preflop to isolate. Although it appears like a good flop for you, it's definitely dangerous. I think you played the flop just fine (with the 4 bet cap). It's a tough flop to read because he may be putting you on a draw or he may be on a draw himself. However, on the turn, when he bets out, that signals trouble to me. Unfortunately, you had no read on the player. Loose aggressive canons would probably bet something like a QJ, KJ, or AJ. However, if he's tighter than that, then I'd worry about TT, JJ, and of course KQ. I would have just called his bet on the turn and river. Tough beat, but you definitely had to call him down.
Good luck and play hard!
nt
this was just bad luck. I would not cap it on the flop heads up. instead I would try and ram and jam on the turn. you had a very strong hand and most of the time you will win.
I'm a steady winner at 20-40 and am looking at moving up to 30-60 any sugestions (from steady 30-60 players) what is a resonable buyin and bankroll,Thanks for the input
From a low-limit player this, actually...
Well, people keep talking about that 300 'big bets' bankroll (in this case $18,000). In mid/high-limit games like $30-60 I can imagne that swings are far more common and also that you can't let the thought of trying to keep fluctation at a low level drive you when you really need some space to play your cards properly.
My experience is that in low-limit games where the tables are easier and probably much more passive (no matter how tight/aggressive I try to play), fluctations aren't really THAT big, and I think half the 300 BBs bankroll would do for most winning low-limit players.
A buy-in is likely to be somewhere between a fifth to a tenth of your overall bankroll, unless you want to be running back to the cashier all night. I've heard it said that good and true poker players don't think about the money while they play, just trying to add clay chips to your stack. With small buy-ins, these clay chips will often be heavily connected to money as you will have to trade more money for chips unless you get off to a winning start straight away. A large buy-in makes you forget about the money for this session and concentrate 100% on the game.
lars
Your buyin will be a rack of $10 chips, $1000. If you lose that, you might want to rebuy. If you are talking about a bankroll for extended play, I recommend $30,000 or more, depending on your style of play. But you can certainly take shots at the game with a smaller bankroll, and then step down if things aren't going well.
These two hands from last night are bugging me.
HAND 1:
I have only been playing for 20 minutes; the game seems loose passive. I have JhJd in the cutoff and three players limp. I raise, the button reraises, the blinds fold, one limper folds, two limpers call, and I call. So there are 4 players and there's $145 in the pot.
Flop is: Ah2h8c.
Checked around.
Turn is: 5h. Second limper bets. I go into a Roy Cooke-like huddle then fold, button calls, first limper calls. River is 7c, and it's checked around again! First limper mucks, second limper shows Qs2s, and button drags with 99. With better knowledge of the players, I would have played the whole thing differently, but with little info, how should I have played it?
HAND 2:
Much later, it is 7 handed and I have red nines UTG. I raise and only the BB calls. BB is fairly new to the table so again I do not have much info. The flop comes: 2s4s6c. He checks, I bet, he calls.
Turn is the 5s. He checks. I bet, he raises, I fold.
Comments welcomed on both hands.
In the first hand I think I would go into check call mode since the flop wasn't bet. I would like to see the river here.
In the second hand I would fold.
~stephen
on the turn, when the second limper bets, representing the heart flush, with a preflop raiser behind you yet to act, you are in a tough spot. you're "in the middle" and out of position. I think it's pretty much raise or fold time and I likely fold most often in your shoes here as well. But had you bet on the flop this situation might not of gotten so out of hand or expensive. I think before deciding what to do you have to factor in that you showed weakness on the flop and gauge what influence this had on your opponents
Since the flop was checked around the limper decided to take a stab at the pot and had he followed thru with his bluff on the river he might have won the pot.
I think you should have bet the flop into the ace on board and seen what the responce was. I'm pretty sure the second limper doesn't try his move if you do but you never know it still could have played out the same.
Who knew for just one more BB you could have won the pot?
Your hand reminds me of a similar situation that happened to me a few years ago. I was in the BB and saw the flop for "free" with A-6 offsuit in a weak-tight game. The flop came Axx and I feared for my weak kicker and just checked. All checked to the button who promptly bet with pocket jacks and caused me to lay down top pair. This player was a "rock" and I'm sure he would have layed down his pair had I bet my ACE. Oops! I try to play a litle more agressive these days :o)
Just my thoughts
Hand 1
The ace is definitely a scare card given the fact that the button reraised you preflop. You definitely don't want to go into a calling station mode here. Thus, it may be better for you to just bet the flop and see what happens. If button only calls, then he it's likely that he doesn't have an ace. If he had a big ace, he'd most likely raise your bet. Betting here would have probably changed the way this hand was played by everyone. Let's go back and talk about what really happened...After it's checked around on the flop, it's possible that one of the early limpers had a weak ace and you're still in trouble. When the limper bets the turn, he may have Ax, flush, or straight. Your Jh would give you the 3rd best flush, but because there wasn't that much invested in the pot, I'd probably fold the hand. If you end up calling the turn, the question becomes are you committed to calling the river if a blank hits (assuming someone will bet)?
Hand 2
I hate these situations. Because you have position and the board is really scary, I might check the turn after BB checks to you. At this stage, you're probably way ahead (BB is still drawing, has overcards, or has top pair) or you're way behind (BB has straight, two pair, or a set). If it's checked around on the turn and BB bets the river (let's say it's a blank), then I'd just call. In your actual situation, after you're raised on the turn, I think folding was the correct decision. Like I said in the beginning, I hate these situations because BB could be on a total bluff, but it may not be worth it to call and find out.
In number two, I fail to see anything wrong with dropping. You showed strength, and BB came over the top. He could be making a play, but my experience is you don't get rich with this kind of call.
On the first hand, I bet the J's on the flop.
There are only 3 big bets in the pot. The bb knows that you don't have a str8 and generally speaking, players don't put preflop raisers on flushes in this situation. Thus, when you bet, you expose yourelf to a bluff raise.
Of course, if the bb is a known bluffer, by all means, go ahead and bet it and let him raise. But I gather that you did not know bb's play. In that situation, I would just check and give him the free card. Don't forget the pot is small and he will often only have 6 outs so giving a free card is no biggie. If he has a lot more outs than that, then you probably wouldn't lose him on the turn anyway. You miss charging him to draw but will often recoup that on the river as he will now be more inclined to bluff.
BTW, given your check on the turn, you almost have to call the river no matter what comes off (including the 4th spade). The pot will have 4 big bets when he bets the river and I think you will win 1 out of 4 times no matter what card comes off on the river (even if it is as gruesome a card as the Ace of Spades).
A Simple Hand – Part 1
This hand comes from a 20/40 holdem game where I have played against (or near) both opponents enough to know their tendencies. I'll try to make this simple hand interesting by providing some extra elaboration.
I'm in the big blind with Ah-2d. An UTG player limps, all others fold and the small blind calls. The flop comes 7h-4h-4d. The small blind checks.
UTG is an off duty dealer who plays too aggressively, raising pre flop with any pair, any two paints, and almost any ace. Sometimes she will limp pre flop with middle cards; however, she will not play total garbage except when on tilt. Post flop she will usually over bet made hands and will bluff and semi-bluff excessively. She will call or raise trying to hit mediocre overcards and loves to bet when a scare card comes. This day she was sitting on about six racks of chips and seemed to be playing a little less aggressively and wild than usual. Also note I know her play better than she knows mine because her style of play has been described to me by friends, who have played her in adjoining games and provided me with scouting reports.
The small blind was relatively solid, but had struggled that day and was not playing quite as aggressively as is his norm.
The small blind checks the flop. Since the flop came babies and I have only two opponents, one of whom has checked and is in a shell of sorts, I decided to bet. I figure that UTG has to worry that I could easily have hit the flop but I'm relatively sure she didn't. I expect at least an overcall by UTG, since she will call with weak overcards, her most likely hand since there was no raise pre flop. I also want to lose the small blind, since my hand does not want to get squeezed off the pot on a later round. With an ace and a backdoor flush I very well could have the best hand, but one that plays better head up against an aggressive opponent.
After I bet the flop, UTG calls and the small blind folds. The turn comes an ace of spades. What is my best play now?
My turn and river play will be described in part 2 below.
Regards,
Rick
A Simple Hand - Part 2
From the post above the board now reads 7h-4h-4d-As and I have the Ah-2d with one aggressive opponent behind me. With a small pot (5 small bets) and against this type of opponent, I believe it is a big mistake to bet. My opponent most likely has upper middle cards and the ace missed her. But if I show weakness she will often bet.
After I check she bets as expected. A check raise would make her give up on her bluffs so I call. The river comes a king. I check again and she bets. I considered a checkraise but felt that she missed and making such a play would show I have no respect for her bets (I don't, but I also don't want her to know that for the future as she may start bluffing less). She shows a JT offsuit (about the median limping hand for her UTG) and I take the pot.
This play may seem obvious to many of you. But I have two close friends who would almost always bet the turn in this spot. They would also win the pot but lose two bets. Against this type of opponent and with this board, it is better to give your opponent the opportunity to bluff off their hand, and top pair no kicker is the ideal bluff catcher. I'll call this play the "delayed rope-a-dope" in honor of Abdul Jalib, now that he has passed on to a new level where mere mortals do not tread. Check the Theory Forum to learn of the lofty levels where Abdul now lives ;-).
Regards,
Rick
The subtle Mr. Nieblo!
s
Rick,
First of all, I think you played the hand very well. My question to you is what would you have done if the turn came a blank like an 8s or an overcard like a Js (with you not knowing that she had a J)? Would have continued to bet or would you check? If you check and she bets, then what would you do?
Jace,
I would tend to check and call this player down. When you get head up with her in a ring game it is the percentage play with an ace high. While doing so I would make sure I kept my normal rhythm. I want her to think that I am thinking of tossing my hand away and not in a mode where I will call her down with any pair and any ace. You always want to encourage a player's worse tendencies.
BTW, if I was playing her head up (i.e., we were the only two at the table), I couldn't do this routinely since she would wise up fast. But in a ring game where you only end up head up once in a while you can rope-a-dope her for a long time before she wises up.
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
Now, I am more confused. Why check the turn when you initiated the betting in the first place and you paired your ace to boot. Why not bet it again and maybe this time, she might raise you since you bet the flop when the ace was not yet there. (Now, if she raised you on the turn, I will just check and call on the river.)
I guess women play differently from men.
Anonymous,
You wrote: ”I guess women play differently from men.”
The above statement makes me suspect you are a woman. It seems we have the additional evidence that you won't listen to what men say so now I'm almost sure you are a woman. Since you won't listen to me read what Dunc Mills wrote below. I couldn't have said it better :-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
Is playing poker like playing cat and mouse?
I still don't understand your logic to check the turn when you already bet the flop. Why not keep on pounding and get more value if she raises your turn bet. With your betting the flop, she won't believe you have an ace and hopefully she still won't believe you have the trips.
Definitely, women play differently from men.
Lady Anonymous,
I don't pound UTG because I believe she can't call a bet or a checkraise on the turn but will bluff off her worse hands since I think that she thinks that the ace is a scary card to me.
In poker you need to use all your weapons and use them in the right spots. A check call is one of those weapons. It may seem like a weak play put in the right spot it gets the money. Learn to use it.
Regards,
Rick
PS Now that I know you are a woman I must limit my responses to you since the LOML is very jealous. Please take no offense.
Rick,
Thanks for your advice. Now I know I am listening to a great teacher. Your point is well taken and I will use it to my advantage.
What does LOML means?
Lady Anonymous,
You wrote: "What does LOML mean?"
It is sort of a private code for extreme affection but for you we will call it (L)ikes to (O)verbet (M)ade hands when a check cal(L) is a better tactic.
Gotta go Lady A,
Rick
Rick,
Thanks for enlightening me. Now I know I am listening to a great teacher. Your point is well taken and I will use it to my advantage.
What does LOML means?
Rick,
One thing is still bothering me. What would you have done if the ace did not come on the turn? Check, bet, or fold if she bets the turn?
Lady Anonymous,
I partly answered this in response to Jace above but I'll elaborate further since you are apparently a very curious lady.
With this player, the most likely pre flop limping hands contain the unpaired ranks seven through queen, with nines, tens and jacks most common. If one of these cards come I can probably still check and call both the turn and river. If two of these cards come I may have to fold. So these are the “bad cards” for me.
If blanks (note that blanks include a king) come on the turn and river I always check and call, but I do it in such a way as to make my opponent think I considered folding (i.e., use a steady one or two second “thinking” rhythm, I don't pull a “Hollywood”).
If a non-heart “bad card” came on the turn then I check and call. If this is followed by another bad card on the river I have a close decision but this player bets so darn much I probably have to call again if this play is made in isolation. However, if I think I will be playing her for a while or many more times I want to reward her over-betting once in a while and this may be the time to make the river laydown since it is now close between calling and folding.
If a bad card came that was a heart I think I would check and raise if she bets. Now she will probably lay down overcards and against me probably won't reraise even if she paired since she will fear the nut flush and I have the ace of hearts. Others may disagree with me here.
If good cards or only one bad card comes I check and call all the way, even without the ace.
Lady Anonymous, I hated to see you bothered so I hope this helps :).
Regards,
Rick
Given what happened, I think you played well. I might have check-raised the turn, but after hearing your explanation, I will probably think twice next time. You knew that your opponent was probably bluffing, so calling the turn was a good move. I like your arguement for not raising her on the river, that you will get more of the same predictable behavior from her in the future. Good post.
Dave in Cali
with your read being so keen i think you should have check raised the flop. you know she wouldve bet right?
"After I bet the flop, UTG calls and the small blind folds. The turn comes an ace of spades. What is my best play now?"
check raise.
mike 1,
I thought she was drawing dead or near dead so a checkraise would make her fold. I wanted to snap off two bluffs. If she did have a better ace (she sometimes limps with A7 suited or something like that), then I am the one in trouble.
Regards,
Rick
I would go for the check raise if I thought UTG was simple enough to fall for it. She should check nothing if you check to her after you bet out on the flop. If I think she will check behind me I just bet out hoping she calls with overcards or a draw. If she calls the bet or the check raise I would just check-call the river to induce a bluff(she thinking I was on the draw)or save money if I am behind.
Tony,
You wrote: "She should check nothing if you check to her after you bet out on the flop."
Not this player. Once the overcard ace comes on the turn she will bet most of the time trying to represent it. I believe she is what SmoothB in another post calls a "betting station". A betting station can be destoyed almost as easily as a calling station. Since I have to go in a few minutes I hope SmoothB will see this and elaborate.
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
I'm a bit confused why you bet the flop when you are aware that UTG is an aggressive player and will bet anything. (Wouldn't it have been better for you to checkraise trying to represent the trips?)
However, since she called your bet, and the turn comes an ace of spades, my turn play would be to bet again.
Anonymous,
I wanted the small blind out. I knew he would respect my bets but not hers as he is observant and has played her a lot. By betting the flop I put him in a spot where he would have to have a hand to overcall both our bets or call or checkraise her probable flop bet. If I checked, then she bets and he can make a checkraise on speculation and knock me out. If he calls her bet I probably don't even overcall.
It is crucial not to bet on the turn head up in a small pot against a single overaggressive player with this type of hand. This player will bet far more hands in this spot then she will call with. I had top pair, no kicker and can beat all bluffs but can't beat a legit ace. But I wasn't worried about the ace since she didn't raise pre flop. By checking I give her a chance to hang herself. Fortunately, hanging is not lethal in California so I can do it a few more times before she wises up.
Regards,
Rick
PS Which Anonymous are you? All posting under Anonymous should attach a number (e.g., Anonymous-36) so we know which Anonymous we are speaking with.
Rick,
You almost hanged yourself instead. What would you have done if SB checkraised?
Lady Anonymous,
If the SB checkraised I would have dumped my hand if UTG had called. His checkraise would mean I was in trouble facing two opponents, one who might reraise and the other (the SB) who is solid. All I had was a weak ace and backdoor draw. This hand wants one overaggressive opponent, not two.
If the UTG player had folded and the SB checkraised I might take one card off but folding would probably be the right play against this guy. He will make moves but not so often that you can routinely call him down with a weak ace.
Regards,
Rick
Rick, if she is as you describe, she will bet this hand out for you. Check the turn, and she is virtually certain to bet out. If she does have a weak Ace, you are likely looking at a split (would she rasie pre-flop with something like A8o?), but more often than not, she sounds like the type of player who will go right where you want them to lead themselves. Call her expected turn bet.
ON the river, I would check again. If she's broke, she will bet again because she can't win a showdown. If she has a better hand than yours,or nothing, you don't risk a raise that might push you off the pot.
If she checks behind you on the turn, check the river to her again. She will now almost certainly try to steal, and you can snap her off.
Now I'll peek.
Wow. Great minds think alike, fools seldom differ.
If I can 'read' the 20/40 players in SoCal so well all the way from here, maybe I've got a chance this weekend in LV. What do you think?
I see the LL players betting the turn ALL the time in this sort of situation. If they're beat, they get raised and make crying calls. If they're boss, they lose the field. Give the opposition enough rope to hang themselves.
Dunc,
You wrote: "If I can 'read' the 20/40 players in SoCal so well all the way from here, maybe I've got a chance this weekend in LV. What do you think?"
Fortunately for you, many California players go to Las Vegas on the weekend.
Regards,
Rick
PS It was so hot here yesterday I almost had to turn on the AC but we have an energy crises so I didn't. I thought you would like knowing that way up there.
I'll give you energy crisis, all right.
It's been the warmest, driest winter here in recorded history. The provincial government has been selling off natural gas to the States in record amounts, which has generated unbelievable profits for the provincial treasury. However, home heating bills are skyrocketing. Sorta like winning a Bad Beat, then getting mugged in the parking lot.
check-call, check-call.
Normally I would bet here, but given that your opponent likes to bet scare cards, and would likely have raised with an ace, I think a check-raise might be in order.
clearly you want to check, call her on the turn...and then check again on the river, and call her again on the river. unlikely she has a hand that can call a bet from you on the turn and/or river, and unlikely that you are giving her a free river that could beat you.
Very good play on the turn. I do it all the time.
But I like to bet the river rather than check (particularly if the flop had 3 different ranks and was 2 suited) but I can certainly see why a river chcek can also be a good play.
I should say that the rope-a-dope strategy is one that I have never really had to use until I started playing on-line late last summer. In the Vancouver live games, you never really had to worry about shorthanded pots. I have had to adjust my strategies greatly playing on-line and the rope-a-dope has probably been the most significant adjustment.
skp wrote : "In the Vancouver live games, you never really had to worry about shorthanded pots"
do you mean pots that start shorthanded (4/5 players at the table), or pots that turn out to be shorthanded by the turn (2/3 players), but started out at a full table?
If you mean the latter, that's a very nice game you have there in Vancouver.
The Vancouver games always have a full table. In fact, they will not start a game with less than 9 players. And if the game ever gets down to 7 players, it ain't gonna last long. The players will just quit and get on a waiting list as there are usually 3 or 4 full tables of 10-20.
You can see that I tehrefore have next to no shorthanded experience which is why I haven't locked horns with you and some of the other excellent shorthanded sharks that Planet boasts of.
Now, the games in Vancouver play a lot differently. There is hardly any need to worry about defending blind steals etc. You usually have 4 or 5 players seeing every flop whether it be for 1 bet, 2 bets, preflop capped whatever.
I have seen several pots where the action was capped preflop with everyone in it. These usually happen in the last hour of play (Casino closes at 4 am) as players desperately try to get even for the night.
It's quite the game but too bad it's 10-20 in devalued Canafian dollars.
Though the Planet games are nothing like the live games that I used to play in, at least at Planet there are some multiway pots...at Paradise, I rarely saw any when I played there. Pardaise and Vancouver live games are like night and day.
In light of the specific traits of this player, I like the check on the river. I think he played the hand perfectly, but this is not revolutionary (as you said, you do it all the time.) Against a less jiggy opponent, a river bet is in order.
Over the weekend I played the following hand poorly. I decided to post this one because the mistake I made is one that I make too often and I think other, less than expert level players, will empathize with me and become more aware.
The game had been passive and moderately loose but is now getting tougher. There are 3 limpers to me and I have pocket tens in the cut-off. I raise because I have a moderately strong hand and becuase I would like the button (a very solid player) to fold. The button 3 bets, the small blind cold calls, big blind folds. I think the initial limper also folded while the other two called as did I.
the flop is 9-4-2 with two spades.
it gets checked to me. I bet, button raises, small blind calls, I call, everyone else folds.
The turn is a non-spade 3. board is 9-4-2-3
SB checks, I bet, and again the button raises. the small blind calls two bets cold and I call.
The river was (I think) a 7, no flush possible.
sb checks, I check and button checks. button has J-J. SB says he has A-K and mucks.
In retrospect I should have folded to the raise on the turn. The mistake I made was not asking myself what hands can I beat? In this case about the only hand I could beat, given the action, is A-9, a highly unlikely holding for the button. I was too focused on the fact that I had an overpair and I (incorrectly) put the sb on a flush draw. fortunately a similiar situation arose several hours later and I was able to dump my hand.
I agree with your self-analysis. You should respect a pre-flop 3 bettor who is also a flop raiser since this combo almost always means AA,KK, or QQ. JJ was a bit weak but it still beats your Tens. As an aside, you may want to consider just limping in pre-flop with pocket Tens next time after 3 other players limp in.
Agree with Jim on this one. I know it seems natural to say 'I have an overpair - raise it!' even if your overpair is not that big.
What on earth was AK doing calling 2 bets cold on the turn? That was dumb.
As for raising with TT. I also agree with Jim. TT is not a good hand to take up against 3 opponents. You want either 1 or 2 or more than 4. With more than 4 in TT is strictly a drawing hand - you need a set because it is tough to make it win unimproved against so many players (but it can happen).
I am not so sure that your play was bad, depending on who the button was.
Against some players taking the button's role, I would have played it the same way you did.
Against others I would have folded to a bet on the turn, and possibly if raised on the flop. (There are some people who ALWAYS have AA or KK here.)
There are some tricky players out there who will raise with AK when bet into on the flop even when the flop misses them. This is usually done to get a free card. Some of them will even bet the turn, hoping to get a hand just like yours to fold (IE representing AA or KK). Against players who do this often I would be inclined to check it down - but I make sure I am prepared to do this BEFORE I get involved in the hand.
-SmoothB-
"Depending on who the button was."
It was me!
I think Boris played the hand perfectly. The real test would have been if I had bet the river. I didn't because I thought I was a slight underdog. I thought Boris had QQ or 10-10, with a slight chance that he had KK and backed down on the turn fearing AA or a set.
Betting out on the turn is definitely the best play again me because there are some hands I could have had where I was going to take a free card with outs, and because he can count on me to raise the turn to blast out the other guy if I think I'm a contender, and because I might lay down with two overcards. Good play, Boris.
Tommy
I disagree. Once you raised the turn I should've folded. You thought you were a slight underdog while I KNEW I was a huge underdog. I really don't think you would raise the turn with overcards.
Yeah, I think you're right, but it's dang close.
Let's say you knew for sure I had an overpair or set. If I added right, there were 15 big-bets in the pot when you faced my turn raise. Adding a couple bets worth of implied odds brings it up to 17, still not enough to draw to two outs. But if there was slightly more doubt as to your doubts as to my holding, the pot would justify calling down.
Tommy
If it were me and I know the button is a tough customer then I would have check called to the river after the flop.
If he's overplaying AK like the SB then he can't bet the river and you should take it down.
~stephen
About a week ago, I'm playing 20-40 with the forum's own Tommy Angelo. I hold Q10o in the cutoff (seat 8), 4 way action with BB, seats 3 and 5. Flop 10-8-xr, seat 3 bets, 5 calls, I raise. Turn Q, 3 bets, 5 folds, I raise, he calls. River rag, he leads again, and though I'm trying to be more stoic, at the table, I can't help but blurt "What the hell can you lead with after 2 raises??" Anyway, the uncoordinated board suggests that I am beat, that a set was flopped. The guy's straightforward play so far, i.e., check raise a solid hand without regard for changes of pace or coordinated boards, makes me want to raise for value. WHat do I do?
Dan
Results to follow
Raising on the river is right against most players. However calling before the flop is a bit too loose in most 20-40 games.
Pre-flop, Queen-Ten offsuit is a button hand or a late positon steal-type hand when everyone folds to you. Your flop and turn plays are fine. His lead into you at the river is ominous given your strong play so far. Nevertheless with the top two I would raise at the river. Sets are hard to come by and you will get calls from lower two pairs.
Jim, are you saying that Q 10 is an ok call on the button but not in the cutoff? I don't think you can differentiate THAT much between those two positions.
Above David also says that this is a loose call in most 20-40 games. Depending on your opponents and how well you play AFTER the flop, this may not be such a weak holding for one bet.
Leaving any specific hands aside for a moment, in my opinion there IS that much difference between the cutoff and the button.
Tommy
The reason for the difference is that if the button decides to play he probably has a better hand with better position. The other problem is that it is not a good idea to open limp with this hand from the cutoff so if you play you have to open with a raise normally. Queen-Ten offsuit is not a hand you want to pay two bets with to take a flop unless you have only the blinds to worry about since at least you will have position despite having not much of a hand.
Did you get a chance to read my reply to your post about my example having to do with folding on the turn when raised? It was called "Don't Forget Ten-Nine". Did it make sense?
Yes, Jim. Your response brought up a couple of points to ponder as do most of your posts. Thanks!
Dan,
Given Seat 3's no respect for your raises, I'd put him on a set or J9 for the straight. Your top two pair represent a strong hand, but you are a couple of hands from the nuts. I think it's best to just call here. If you're still inclined to raise and Seat 3 decides to reraise, then I'd think that you are definitely beaten, but have to call. It doesn't make sense in this situation to bet an extra 20 to lose 40.
How do you figure it's a $20 bet to lose $40? Is there a rule that says he has to call if the guy reraises? Generally on these close-shave river raises, I think it's a good idea to decide in advance what to do if the guy three-bets. If you think it's an easy fold, then raise. If you think you'll have to pay off, then just call.
Tommy
after your question at the river? Anything to help you make up your mind?
I admit his play is confusing, but I put him on a set or J9 and I would not raise here personally. I would just call and hope he is agressive but misguided on his river play.
Great points! Jace: you are right, if I value raise, it's conceivably three bets in my eye. I was one of the few value betting/raising at 6-12 and below, but I must be more willing to make those marginal decisions as I progress to 9-18 and 20-40. Maybe I'll see you at Lucky Chances or CSP someday.
Jim: It was a dubious limp, though I thought game conditions warranted it.
Hillbilly: He didn't do much at all. I am learning, slowly but surely, that there are different levels of 'hollywooding,' which obviously, is less present as players get better and the stakes go up. I thought he MIGHT have been biting his tongue, and he had that squirm of 'monster hand concealation (sic?).'
I just couldn'y believe he'd lead into me a 3rd damn time with less than a set. Honestly, I think my unconscious reads are vastly improving, and I gave him no credit for a straight.
I called, he turned over Q8o from UTG. Go figure.
Dan
"I called, he turned over Q8o from UTG. Go figure."
You hit the nail on the head. the guy is such a poor player it is hard to put him on a hand. Therefore the best play on the river is a call.
vince
I'd go with "concealment".
Good post.
It depends on the player. Will seat 3 play any two cards from anywhere? If so, “respect” his bad play, and a chance he could have J9 or a set and call. Is he semi-solid and limping in with KQ or AQ off – perhaps a deceptive limp in with AA? If he is this type of player a raise would be for value… I know if I have a set, I’m probably going to three bet you on the turn here.
Bottom line, I probably just call here. Any hand he can raise you with you will loose to and this is a classic.. start-stop-start manuver… might have a HUGE hand.
What an egg is thinking for what its worth.
Be careful calling with Q,To in these situations. I read Jim Brier and David's responses. I disagree with both of them. No I mean I agree with both of them. That's the problem with this situation. Either this guy has the same hand as you or he is such a bad player that he is dangerous. I'm pretty sure that the best play here is a raise, no wait a minute a call. Gee I'm wondering how David can say a raise is correct against the "right" player after seeing how this guy played his hand. Just what is the "right" player?
vince
Well ya got the results in while I was posting. I suppose it wasn't Tommy with the Q8o. He only plays that from the small blind. ;)
like a true master player david put the guy on a likely hand having not even been there and was spot on. a raise was correct in this case because the guy would have called with it and not reraised with it. he would not have folded. brilliant really..
Dan,
Was Tommy the UTG bettor in seat 3? I sincerely doubt it given that seat 3 didn't reraise the turn, but if so you can fold here.
If it's not Tommy, I would call only and hope he's betting out because he has a calling hand (lower two pair) and has decided he'll lay it down for a raise.
Matt
Tommy was eithet the button or the SB that hand. He was merely a spectator.
Dan
P.S. Does half of the LC 9-18 and 20-40 regulars post here?? :) I understand that Matt, Jace, Boris, Tommy, Target, Doc (higher limits), and others play there. Sheesh. If the overall player pool wasn't so bad at CSP and LC, these games might not be +ev...but as it is, they sure are juicy!!
P.P.S. Any of the aforementioned play at all in the east bay? There are barely any mid limit games here (I live near Oakland), I might have to hitch a ride with Nate Dogg down to the South Bay!
I was in the nine seat right behind you, right? I vaguely remember seeing you turn over a Q-10 and winning as I returned from the water cooler. No way you were in the cutoff, because that'd put me on the button, and I haven't folded my button in a multi-way limp pot for a month (an ongoing research mission -- results pending).
And if I was the SB then that means you were on the button, not the cutoff. I think the button was at seat one, not that it matters.
I think limping from the cutoff is a losing play with a button-defender on your left. Doesn't matter what the cards are.
Tommy
thanks to everyone all ideas were used and have been profitable and mentally refreshing.the nice thing was i have seen so many mistakes by my opponents that it is really nice to see them making those mistakes and me getting paid off because of it.i will say one session of 9/18 4 hours of play and a $950 win. thanks
I'm curious what you guys would do in this position, I was playing on-line 15-30, 9-handed game, I had just gotten into the game so I didn't have much of a read on anyone, the player to my immediate left limps and I have 44 on the button. What do you think I should do in this spot? I think calling is a weak play because you don't have the implied odds to flop a set and if both blinds come in you likely will need a set. I decided to raise, I'm not sure if its correct though, I think its correct under the right circumstances (tight blinds/ loose limper who probably isn't slow playing in this spot) but I simply couldn't tell at that point if that was the case.
Shawn Keller
I Don't like the play of isolating w/ a small pair unless the limper is the type to play a TON of hands. You'll either be a coin flip or a big dog, but most importantly, you'll be in a tough position since you'll probably flop 3rd pair if not an underpair. You need to be able to read the opponent very well if you plan on making this play and you have to be able to push him off of middle pair type hands. If he flops top pair, he's going nowhere headsup and if he flops ANY pair, he'll most likely have you beat.
Find a better spot to gamble. BTW - Make your hand 77 and I like the raise.
Raise or fold. The one person you can probably beat heads up is the limper. He is in late position and didn't raise, meaning it's unlikely he has a pair bigger than yours. If you smooth call, you attract the blinds, and one of those three will beat you unless you flop a set or get a strange board.
I think you should fold baby pocket pairs unless you can get in for one bet with several players taking a flop with you. It is bad poker to be raising and trying to get it heads-up with a weak hand like this. Unless you flop a set, you have what the little boy shot at (-nothing). Why go to war armed with only a peashooter?
Shawn,
You answered your own question when you wrote: “I think its correct under the right circumstances (tight blinds/ loose limper who probably isn't slow playing in this spot) but I simply couldn't tell at that point if that was the case.”
You need to avoid this type of play when you first enter a game since it depends on knowledge of your opponents. Once you are completely in tune with your opponents and have the right image then it is a marginal play that probably has positive expectation. However, if your pair is a little better (maybe 77), then a raise is OK even against unknowns.
Regards,
Rick
But why is calling so easily dismissed. You do have the button. There is very little chance that the blinds will raise (in most games). In most games, there is also a good chance that the small blind will call.
If you flop a set, I would think that you can win close to $75 strange money on average. Given the small number of opponents, you will likely win the majority of pots when you do flop a set so you don't need to win, say, $150 on average to account for those times when you make a set and still lose..
Now, of course winning $75 on average doesn't quite cover the implied odds you need to try and fish for your set. But you make up this difference by winning some pots even if you don't flop a set given your position i.e. flop comes a raggedy Q72 and everyone checks to you or the flop comes 883 and the small blind bets and you know that this guy will never bet a 8 here etc. etc.
While I think folding is probably a better play than calling, it is only slightly better and since I like to play, count me in. It also may pay dividends from a meta-game perspective...I like that term "meta-game"...thanks Natedogg.
BTW, if your opponents are extremely poor players who are bound to give you lots of action when you do hit, I think that you probably should call i.e., calling then becomes a better play than folding i.e. you can't gain from their mistakes if your cards are in the muck.
I think you make a good argument for calling skp, I also think raising is a viable play if you have a tight image that they respect although it can at times be virtually impossible to achieve a tight image while playing online. Also I think raising occasionally in this spot can be a good play for the long term, if you want to project a loose image encouraging opponents to give you more action in the future.
Shawn Keller
Exactly..there is tremendous value to exposing that hand early in a session. Taking a $30 hit early (like if you get checked to the river, e.g.)can come back five-fold later.
skp,
As a default play I would want one more limper before calling with the button. But I agree that calling can be correct in the right spots as you explained. But the right spot just can't be when you first sit down.
Regards,
Rick
x
I play in a home game (10-20 and 15-30) and I am in the middle of a frozen wave of cards. Every hand I'm flopping top pair top kicker and losing to a gut shot, or some guy flops trips. Anyway, due to this cold spell that's lasted since the new year, my bankroll is hurting. The problem is that I don't have any game ot step down to and the games I play in are so good, that I couldn't really see myslef not playing in them - I'd just like a lower variance when I do play in them for the next few sessions. (I've already stopped jamming my flush draws, but I don't know what else I can do, since My starting hands are pretty tight.)
Thanks.
i dont know if this advice is needed, but you told so little about your play that ill post this. with a lot of people in each hand you have to watch what kind of a hand your developing. if you have to run over 6 or 8 players, dont lose to much with one pair hands. for instance if you have aces, 6 people are in the pot, someone bets, you raise with a overpair, someone else three bets it, consider giving it up. your probable looking at at least two pair. if you can get a feel when you can let loose of a one pair hand itll help, if you are not already pretty good at figuring that out. when a lot of people are in the pot you dont want to take all comers for jammed pots unless your drawing at a big hand (straight or flush).
I have no problems letting go of a top pair when there's some heat on the flop, however, when it's a 3-4 way hand and I flop toppair top kicker, I'll bet it until I find some resistance, which has been coming on the end in the form of getting raised by someone who's caught a gutshot. Surely I can't lay down AQ or even not bet it w/ a board of Q93. I can't assume someone is on KJ when the turn s a 4 and they call and the T hits on the end and I get check-raised, can I? But if the flop is KQT and I have AK and bet and get raised and reraised or sometimes just raised, I have no problem w/ mucking the hand.
My top pair hands have been losing in 2 and 3 ways pots frequently in the last month , and that is why I was looking for a few tips on lowering variance (W/ out sacrificing a TON of EV).
to lower your variance would mean a lower win rate .sometimes people tighten up and they think that this lowers there win rate but most of the time it raises it by not putting you in -e.v places such as 2nd best pair on the board,I have also found as my hand reading improves this lowers my variance.my best advice would by to get a job and save up.
Playing in a game with at least six loose players is not going to allow you to lower your variance. Youmust accept the fact that your variance is going to be wider in a loose game. If youdon'tlike that; goto anothergame. Ifyou continue to play tight; i.e., big pairs and acces, kings and queens; don't expect to do much better than being a small winner. And that will take someluck. With four or more players out after you when you enter a pot, the chances against you grow exponentially. If there are six, seven or eight; you're going to have to be very lucky to win a pot. Are the others worse players than you? Of course! But their collective power willover power youl.
tobeat them, you have to start playing suited connectors starting at 67s, pocket pairs starting at 6s; and even lower connectors and pairs if you are in late position. This will increase your variance; but it will give you more winners. To maintain this style of play, but lower your variance, I recommend not playing these hands routinely. therefore, rather than playing them every time they show up, I play one or another of them once an hour(while contining to play the premium cards as often as I get them) How does it work? The first hour, the only nonpremium hand you play are suited aces. Inthe second hour, the only nonpremium hand you play are pocket pairs .
In the thirdhour, the only nonpremium hand y9ou play are suited connectors.
you see, don't play them all every time you get them; just play them selectively.
You will get frustrated when you muck a hand that ends up winning. But if youadoptthis system, you willwin more; and you won't lose as much as you would if you play all the nonpremium hadsallthe time.
good luck dls
well one tip i would give is stop value betting the river with top pair best kicker when the straight or flush is on the board even if it is the gut card.you can only lose money they don't call if they don't hit it and it sounds to me that if they a check raising you they have a pretty good read on your game.that should cut down on your varience quite a bit also if you are jamming all the time you aren't giving them a chance to bluff at you when you have top pair best kicker which is a great way to make money.one other thing when you make your flush on the turn and you are in last postion against 1 or 2 players try checking it on the turn and then let them bet into you and then raise and after you do that once the way they playe into you will change very quickly.
Hello,
The game is 15-30 HE filled with 6 bad players, 2 decent ones and myself. One of the decent players raises UTG. I am next to act with KQo and I muck my hand. However, as I push my cards with a chip towards the dealer, the cards turn face up and the other players are just shocked that I mucked a KQo. Comments went for a little bit as to How can you muck KQ? I just made a comment to the extent that I don't play those cards.
The interesting part is that the flop came Q52 rainbow. UTG bet all folded and he showed AQs.
Is this teaching too much at the table? What do you guys think?
Carlos
Carlos,
This is a routine fold and probably should be made even if a bad player raised UTG and you were next (KQ suited is an easy call, but perhaps not in a super tough game).
You are right that it is important to discard your hand without exposing it. You don't want to give any information and some of the weaker players will eventually wise up to the fact that they should be making these laydowns too. But once the damage was done, albeit accidentally, a better thing to say in this type of loose game would be “King-Queen has been unlucky for me lately.” Lucky and unlucky cards make sense to loose opponents.
Over the years I see half-decent players exposing their cards during a laydown. A common exposed hand type is Ax offsuit. A few times I talked to the offending player away from the table, making note of a variation of my point above, and the stock answer is that “These people never wise up anyway so it doesn't matter.” I disagree. Some don't wise up but some eventually note that the better players lay down this hand pre-flop and start making these folds too. If players would never criticize or educate their opponents at the table and show their good “laydowns” I'm convinced the games would stay better.
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
Thanks for the tip on what to say. It probably works well. It was a routine fold pre-flop. What got the table going was the fact that the cards were exposed. I certainly don't want these guys folding their KQo when I come in for a raise UTG.
Carlos
I have a question about KQ offsuit. I've had success with KQo 3-betting a late position player who raises pre-flop, (and no one else is in), if the player is known to raise with somewhat inferior starting requirements. I usually do this on the button or two or three seats to the right of the button. Is this a long term positive play? Too agressive? I play it "by the book" so to speak with most of my starting hands, so a 3-bet works in getting the person isolated a majority of the time.
Comments?
I do also do this against loose raisers and steal raises. KQo is a pretty strong hand in the right sitation and this is one of them. In the game Carlos described KQo is a piece of cheese.
It's a good play against agressive *late position* raisers. If you're two or three seats before the button, the raiser is in mid or early position, and it's almost certainly a bad idea.
- target
I've done it before. But only when the game is fairly tight and I feel that someone is trying to steal the blinds upfront.
Also if someone raises late as a potential steal I would 3 bet. Otherwise I will usually fold KQo to a raise.
Carlos
You did well by folding KQ in this spot.
I too have had my cards flip over while mucking - much to my embarrassment. One time it was JT of clubs. This maniac woman was shocked - 'That's my favorite hand!' she shrieked.
Another time I was REALLY embarrased because I folded AQs in the SB after a raise and a reraise from a solid player. God that was embarrasing. Happily, the flop missed completely so I didn't throw the winner away.
As for what to say, immediately stand up and say 'man, I know! I really love that hand but I have to go make a phone call!'
Keep right on mucking KQo to raises from tight players and you will do well, my son.
-SmoothB-
i layed down pocket queens from the sb when it came three bets to me and i showed the left side of the table needless to ssy i ran over the game for the next four hours because everyone thought i was Mt. Rushmore.So showing a lay down in the right game isn't all that bad but a game filled with suckers i like saying thoes cards have not been lucky for me latly that is a line i will be using if it comes up i learn something every time i read here for awhile
I've been at the table for a couple of hours in seat 10 and notice that seats 4 & 5 are just horrible. Their starting requirements are awful. They have no regard to position and almost any 2 cards will do. One hand earlier seat 4 limped in with 23o! Everyone else at the table has seemed to pick up on this but are biding time for a premium hand to get paid off.
Here's a hand that I got berated over at the table. I would like to know if anyone here would have done the same thing. I am on the button. Seat 1 is walking so seat 4 is UTG. Seats 2 & 3 are fairly tight players. I've won a few hand at showdown so my image is good. Seat 6-9 are ok players.
UTG brings it in and seat 5 calls. Seats 6-8 fold and seat 9 calls. I look down and see JcTc. I see that the SB is looking to fold and BB is tight so I think I can get him off the fence. I think that I have a better hand than the limpers and I want the blinds out. I raise. Is this raise or my line of thinking good? The blinds fold everyone calls. 4 see the flop, $95 pot.
Flop: 8c 5c Ts
UTG comes out swinging and all call to me. I raise. UTG reraises and all call to me. What hand should I put him on? Do I reraise? What's the play?
Turn: 2c
UTG comes out swinging again and everyone calls to me. I raise and seat 4 says, "I have outs," and calls. Everyone calls.
At this point I think I do have the best hand unless a scare card falls on the end.
River: 3c
Results to be posted later.
~stephen
buckshot-
close call pre-flop between calling and raising. I understand your strategy by raising and think it's fine, but I would probably just call and (1) if I flopped top pair, raise to shorten the field if someone leads into me; or (2) if I flopped a straight or flush draw, raise to try for a free turn card. I'd be concerned about showing strength pre-flop and then having all check to you on the flop, thus giving them proper odds to call with overcards for one bet, as opposed to being able to raise the flop and get 'em out.
The rest of the hand looks like you played it fine. I would not have capped the flop, but waited to see if you improved on the turn (10, J, or c).
I don't know what those callers could have!. The club on the end would terrify me, and I'd figure to be a 1-5 shot at that point of having the winner.
I strongly dislike your pre-flop raise with Jack-Ten suited. You should not view this holding as any kind of made hand but rather it is a speculative, drawing hand that needs help, sometimes a lot of help. Furthermore, you do not want to discourage other players from limping in by raising. You want company here. You should just limp.
I like your flop raise because you have top pair, a flush draw, and an overcard. With a super draw like this raising on the cheap street is good, aggressive poker. When re-raised, I would assume that your opponent has a bigger Ten but regardless I would not raise again. Of course you raise on the turn with your made flush. When a Club shows up at the river, it depends upon what the action is but you will probably be calling in many cases. You should fold if it gets bet and raised to you, otherwise make the crying call with your 4th nut flush.
I agree that TJ, suited or not, is a drawing hand and needs limpers and help, but I wanted to remove the blinds in case they hit the flop. The only reason I did this is:
Perhaps in other circumstances I would call suited and fold unsuited. It would depend.
I'm sure you felt you were the better player at a table and played that to your advantage.
~stephen
This is BS. Every time I hear someone defend a bad preflop play by saying 'I felt I could outplay the limpers postflop' I laugh out loud and get funny looks from the people around me.
Preflop play is EASY. Postflop play is much harder. You expect us to believe that you can suck at the easy part but be good at the hard part? Gimmie a break.
Also, with a hand like TJ, you most definitely WANT the blinds in if they catch a piece of the flop! That's because if you catch the kind of flop you really want, you will either have a flush or straight or be drawing to one, and you WANT them to be in there putting money in with a pair or something that can't beat your hand if you make it. This is fundamental and you obviously have some holes in your thinking.
It sounds like you are spouting stuff you read in books or on this forum - but you are using them in a context that is wholly inappropriate.
BTW JTo is almost never playable in any game, so I would hope that you would fold it.
-SmoothB-
Jim,
You wrote: ”I strongly dislike your pre-flop raise with Jack-Ten suited. You should not view this holding as any kind of made hand but rather it is a speculative, drawing hand that needs help, sometimes a lot of help. Furthermore, you do not want to discourage other players from limping in by raising. You want company here. You should just limp.”
I would usually limp but raising can't be so bad that you should “strongly dislike” it. The only person a raise could drive out is the big blind (Buckshot said the small blind was already folding). A raise may buy him a free card on the flop, which he may want. It may help him win with second pair since an overcard to a jack should make the board scary to his opponents.
My point is that sometimes it is best to make the aggressive offbeat play if it is only slightly worse (in terms of expectation) than the routine play. This type of move makes it harder for your better opponents to put you on a hand and has to have favorable long-term implications.
Regards,
Rick
If these players are really playing "random hands", and he is pretty sure a raise will narrow it down to just the three of them, he should raise for value. (probed it wins 41.65% and sould do better if he plays better post flop than the opposition)
Gabe
After the 3c fell on the river, what was the action up to the point of your decision? - Rick
I don't really have a problem with your pre-flop raise (see Rick's post) but I do have a problem with your rationale for the raise. You say you made the raise to get the blinds out. If they get out, that's fine but really you want them to call here, don't you?
Well, maybe that's too strongly worded. Perhaps, the more accurate thing to say would be that what the blinds do is neither here nor there as far as you are concermed. This is because given your holding, you are going to have to hit the flop pretty hard to play on. When you hit, you will generally have wished that the blinds were in. If you don't hit, you are not going to care if the blinds are in or not because you will likely just check anyway if the action gets checked to you.
Your post-flop play is fine.
Nicely played, just call the river and see if he has a higher club than you. Or did he have 46c :{(}
Ignore the other players they are usually talking crap.
1) Raising JT suited when there aren't many customers coming is not smart. JTs plays very poorly short handed. Furthermore, it is a hand that makes all of it's money post flop, not preflop, so you want to see a CHEAP flop and then take it from there.
On the flop, you should most definitely raise and cap it. You have top pair and a flush draw. Granted, you can be sure that you don't have the best hand at the moment - BB may have AA or TT. But you have tons of outs.
On the turn you raise, yada yada no brainer.
On the river, I'd just check the 4th nuts because you are probably beaten by someone.
-SmoothB-
Basically, I want to say first that I know the "correct" way to play Ten-Jack. The way that Ten-Jack is supposed to be played, yada-yada. I've read the same material as everyone else and I've put in my time to know how to play that hand. I especially want to thank Smooth-B for his candor, but I'm sure that everyone here on this forum has made a play with a holding that was marginal or questionable at one time in their career.
Anyway, I didn't cap the flop. It was checked to me on the river so I checked.
UTG 7d Th
Seat 5 8d 6h
Seat 9 didn't show but said it was big slick.
I'm not saying raising Ten-Jack is a good play. I'm saying I felt it was a good play at the time given the read I got from the players.
Thanks.
Am I reading this right? A guy came in under the gun with Ten-Seven offsuit? Another guy limps in from early position with Eight-Six offsuit? Was this game played on planet Earth?
Since Buckshot was right, about them having random hands his preflop raise was correct. JT against, random hands, has much more high card value, than it does against average calling hands. He improves the chance of winning the pot. (from 33% to 42%) He gets more money in with the best hand.
Nothing succeeds like success. I guess we should just play poker on the basis of our opponents playing random cards. In that case, Lawrence Hill is probably the greatest poker player of all time.
Yes, Jim. Their starting hands were like that all night. After they blew through 1k each the admitted to being friends and never played before.
My question to you, sir. If you noticed this kind of behaviour would you play the hand the same, given the circumstances?
~stephen
No, I wouldn't. I would adjust my play. I would be much more aggressive with decent hands and start raising with them in an attempt to isolate these kinds of players. I would also be less inclined to fold on later streets.
Given that your opponents are playing garbage like that, in your shoes I would raise with quite a few hands in late position. JTs is certainly good enough to raise 3 garbage hands with. I would also tend to put in as many bets as possible on the flop when I flop top pair and a flush draw.
-Sean
This is exactly what I believe given the players and circumstances (the blinds were solid tight players). Like I said earlier, I don't do this kinda stuff on a normal basis. I was just being ultra aggressive with the blinds and players of this caliber.
~stephen
i would not have slowed down on this hand at all until the river(4th club)i would get as may bets in pre flop and if i hit the flop post flop.the one thing i deon't understand but would love to encounter is that the other solid players at the table were letting you get away with this, i know the poster SmoothB would have played as fast and aggressive as you did and if not it would only cost you more profit.the hands that are played preflop and how you play post flop are very important but noticing game and player trends could be the most important thing in making money at the poker table.think of it like this why with all the talented players they have in the NFL do they need coaches?Answer=To indentify weakness in the other teams play and players,which equals wins which in poker equals money.keep watching the other players and you will get the money my guess would be that you made a good score on this evening and are wishing all the games you play in are like that one.
An interesting hand today on-line. The game is moderately agressive with a few people a little over agressive (including my opponent on this hand).
I have JJ on the big blind. One limper, button just calls, SB folds. I assume I'm best and raise. Limper reraises. I put him on a big pair. Button drops and I call.
Flop is three small cards, all spades. I do not have a spade. I don't fear a made flush since it is highly likely my opponent has a pair. I bet out and get raised. I call.
Turn is the J of spades. I have a set of Jacks but there are 4 spades on the board. What to do here? There is a 50-50 chance that my opponent doesn't have a spade and I may be best. If he does have a spade I still have 10 outs. I chose to check. My opponent bets. I chose to call. I am not sure about these decisions.
River is a blank. I check and call my opponent's bet. Would anyone fold here?
As it turned out my opponent didn't have a spade, and in fact had a grossly overplayed (at least pre-flop)99.
The opponent was pretty loose and agressive and I thought he was capable of bluffing on the river.
What do you all think? I'm happy I won the hand, but I am unsure of my play from the flop on. At no point did I really think I could lay the hand down. If there was a time to lay it down, it was probably on the flop, but I in it vey difficult to lay down overpairs.
Paul Talbot
On the flop, I agree with you betting out and you calling the raise to see what the turn brings. Some may say re-raise, but not having the J of spades seems to me to dictate a call. If a small (smaller than a J) blank comes, or the board pairs one of the undercards, then plan to bet the turn.
Once a J came, but making 4 spades on board, I would have checked. Now you have outs to beat a made flush. Your call was correct.
River is also a check and call situation. Your opponent could indeed have an overpair with no spades or a smaller set than yours.
I think your play was fine.
Nice logic. You put the guy on a big pair, then when three small cards come you bet out. Now he raises and you call. What are you doing? Just cause you have an overpair to the flop doesn't mean you have the best hand, remember you put the guy on an overpair. Stick to your read, don't blindly evaluate your hand on each street. The rest of the hand is based on the read you have on your opponent. Let's think a little out there.
You are of course, correct. This is why the hand bothered me so much. If he has a big pair, then what am I doing on the flop? But checking and calling seemed wrong and checking and raising seemed overplaying it. Do you advocate foldign on the flop here? I was essentially betting on the flop on the possibility he didn't have a big pair and then after the raise playing as if he did. It felt odd to do this and felt wrong, hence my posting.
Paul Talbot
Its a very dangerous situation for you. You have to know the player here. However, if you don't, you can't be doing very badly by folding. Here's why: You are only losing a considerable amount of money by folding if he has two overcards i.e. AK with no spade. He has two overcards with a spade he is a favorite over your hand. Now you would be getting correct odds to play on here, so you would lose a little bit folding. However, what if he has his most likely hand AA,KK. Then you are really hurting chasing for two overcards. In most cases you will be a small fav or a big dog. Of course, the player did not have anywhere near what he was supposed to have, so in hindsight you made the correct move.
Are you saying he's a small fav. or a huge dog post flop? Post-flop he's a huge favourite to AK no spade and still a fav. even if he does have a spade. If he thinks there's a chance the player has AK he should definitely continue on.
When one says one puts the opponent on a big pair, it is wrong to blindly stick to that evaluation. Better to put an opponent on a range of hands and then evaluate your own opportunity to either win or buy a pot based on the flop and action beyond your initial "put." Players will limp and then re-raise a raiser with hands other than a big pair.
As far as "the rest of the hand is based on your read of the opponent," on the turn, Talbot made a set, but the board had 4 spades. He has outs to beat the putative flush. His read of the opponent must be tempered by the board.
No doubt check-call is a weak way to play, but sometimes it is correct.
The chance that your opponent does not have a spade is not 50-50 of course, but less.
After the turn card there are 9 spades out of 46 unseen cards. The probability that your opponent does not have spades is 37/46*36/45=64.3%, leaving 35.7% to have at least one spade. This is an a priori probability, taking into account your opponent's betting pattern will change this number in principle.
But assuming he has a medium to large pair, he has 2 of four cards, one of the four is a spade. He is just as likely to have any combination of those four cards as any other since I don't believe any are exposed yet.
Paul Talbot
I'm interested how you would have played it had a little spade come on the turn.
I think I would have either 1) thrown my own bluff at him, or more likley 2) checked and folded to a bet. Since I had put him on a big pair anyway he has me either drawing dead or to two outs.
Paul Talbot
10/20 at Hollywood (Aurora). I am in the bb with 89o. UTG limps, player to his left limps, middle position limps button raises. All call, including sb. The flop is 5s6s7c. SB checks I bet knowing that player two to my left will raise ( he sees me as weak tight and has tried to bully me around). UTG calls, two to my left(ttml) raises, middle position folds button calls,sb folds--I reraise UTG calls,ttml folds, button calls. The turn brings the worst possible card 9s. I check UTG bets, button raises, i lay down my straight. Though the pot was big at this time, i figured the best outcome would be me splitting the pot w/ an 8 and, worst outcome loosing to a flush. I did all I could to protect my hand and make the draws pay. Did I play this right? BTW--button had AsKs and utg had a pair of 8s. Thank you ahead of time for your input
Eric
You played correctly except that calling the pre-flop raise out of the big blind with Nine-Eight offsuit is a little dicey. Try being suited next time.
Knisch!
Good fold. However, how about just calling the preflop raiser on the flop with the intention of check raising on the turn if a spade doesn't come. Spade comes and you can get off the hand cheaper if you put someone on the flush.
Just an egg's thoughts
Knisch -
I agree with the other players....your straight isn't as good, and the flush cards make it almost worthless. A guy with the 8s could be free rolling on you, and you could be (were) up against a spade draw. Your flop play was correct, and your turn fold was correct.
Scott
jsut one more thing you don't flop a straight very often, right? so when you do the goal is to get as much value for you hand as you can and that can be measured in both money made and money saved.This type of hand is common place in limit holdem and has the makings of bad beat and tilt written all over it but on the flip side it is the nuts after the flop so it has payday written on the other side.This will become routine for you when your game progresses to the higher limits.
i would not have bet and i would not have raised the flop the reason "be patient" wait until the turn and see if the nightmare card comes and then when it does not drop the bomb.by raising the flop to 3 sb if no spade comes and then you raise it agian you are giving them the right money odds and that is not good.everytime they pay for a draw without the correct money in the pot you make money. Do you want to bet even money that you will roll a four before a seven in craps?NO NO NO that is why Vegas has ALL the MONEY same theroy.
I am in early/middle position in a loose 20/40 game. UTG (loose passive) limps, next guy calls...I am next, I limp with 99. next guy folds, two other guys call...and the button (decent player) makes it two bets. Both blinds fold, UTG, I and the other two limpers all call. We take the flop 5 handed, and there is 11.5 small bets in the pot.
The flop comes Td4d3h.
UTG checks. I check, the other two limpers check as well.
The button bets, UTG calls.
What should I do? Call, Raise or Fold?
I think the order of best action is to : Raise, Fold, Call.
Calling is poor in case one of the other guys are holding A3, A4 or just two over cards like QJ. I think it is likely that I am beat with an overpair (possibly by the the button), a T (like JT, QT) by one of the limpers...and even if I am not beat, I can easily get drawn out by an overcard (A, K are very likley, with Q and J a little less likely), and a diamond (I do NOT have the 9d). So, I think I am a pretty likely to be an underdog, and if not, I can easily get drawn out on. Plus, if any of the two limpers between me and the preflop raiser calls, I know there's a good chance I'm up against a pair higher than 9s (be it a lone T or a big pocket pair) and a flush draw, and in that case, it is easy for me to check and release on the turn. If just the button and UTG calls, then I need to bet out on the turn if any card other than a A, K or diamond hits.
You should fold. If you are behind you are virtually buried chasing two outs which is a 23:1 shot. Furthermore, there is a two flush on board and you have 4 opponents. Do you have the 9d? If not, you might have only one clean out and you could catch one of your two miracle cards and still lose to a flush redraw at the river. To play on here is to assume your hand is good. Given a pre-flop raiser and three other opponents I think that is highly unlikely. Don't be fooled by all the checking since a player with top pair would not necessarily bet the flop given the presence of a pre-flop raiser. Finally, it could even get raised after you call by one of other two players.
a call is clearly a bad play...a raise is better than a call...although it may be worse than a fold. what happens after you raise gives you a ton of information...if you get reraised, a fold is in order...if one of the two limpers call, then someone has a T out there, and checking with intentions of folding is in order. but even though I say that, I'm not certian which is better, a raise or a fold. I would lean towards folding as the safe play (less volatility, less chance of making a mistake), but a raise with the knowledge that you can play well after that may very well be theright play if done by an expert player (not saying i am one).
I hope we hear from some experts on the forum like Rick Nebiolo, skp, SmoothB, and others on this one. I will be shocked if they would raise in this situation. But then I have been surprised before. In my mind it is not even close. I have all the information I need when I see that board, the betting action, and the number of opponents involved.
i agree...let's hope Malmuth and/or Sklansky responds as well. thanks folks for a great forum!
I'm of the belief that checking to the raiser is one of the worst plays in poker. You must try to get him to define his hand. I bet this flop every time. If he's got an over pair, he raises. He may also raise with AK, which is why I'll normally take one off should I be raised. If he bets the turn there is a very good chance he has an overpair and a fold is in order.
Given that you checked, your stuck guessing. I'm not that worried about a loose UTG. He could have anything.I don't like to fold here but it's not a bad play (mainly because of the flush draw). I would probably raise and fold to a 3 bet. But then again I wouldn't be in that situation.
I'm interested why you assume the button has an overpair?
But why would you lead into a field of 4 opponents with a Ten overcard to your Nines on the table and the presence of a pre-flop raiser who figures to have AA,KK,QQ,JJ,AK,AQ, AJ suited, or KQ suited in all likelihood? You want the pre-flop raiser to define his hand but what about your other three opponents? Between the two flush and the Ten overcard what will you learn when several players call? Even if your hand is good there are a ton of cards that can come off on the turn which simply get you bet out of the hand. Any card higher than a Nine or any Diamond and you are gone when the turn gets bet. Bottom line is that unless a Nine miraclously appears you will not be able see the hand through anyway.
Why I'm I scared of any overcard? By betting the flop the two players caught betwween me and the raiser must have a hand or a draw. They can not call with two overcards. I'm also putting pressure on the pre-flop raiser who may only have 6 outs to my hands. The pre-flop raiser may also be scared of the flush draw and give up a hand like A-Qo.
Who says everyone is going to call? The two in the middle are in a tough position and if the button is the type to raise with AK it could be heads up.
Although the flush draw worries me, I'm not going to assume that because 4 players saw the flop, all 4 flush draws are covered.
You should be afraid of the overcard because a Ten is a card that any one of your 4 opponents could easily have and they will not be folding a top pair of Tens. Any card Ace through Ten is in "the playing zone" meaning that the likelihood of someone having one of these cards is much higher than what a random probability calculation would indicate given the conditional probability that 5 players voluntarily entered the pot pre-flop. A Seven high flop is much less likely to give someone top pair than a Ten high flop.
Based on your line of thinking, one should bet the flop not just with pocket Nines but pocket Eigthts, Sevens, Sixes, and Fives as well. While the pre-flop raiser may have overcards, he will have a hand like AA,KK,QQ,JJ, or Ace-Ten suited a significant percentage of the time. Furthermore, with just overcards he might well call and take off a card for one bet especially if he has a Diamond. The point is that there will be a significant percentage of the time where between the pre-flop raiser having an overpair/top pair OR one of the other 3 opponents having a top pair of Tens you really have no play here. The rest of the time if you happen to be ahead, the two flush makes it less likely that you can win the pot since it will be harder to end up with the best hand given the number of opponents. You could easily have situation where a guy has a flush draw and an overcard, misses the flush draw but pairs his overcard giving him the best hand. You can't bet him out because of his draw. The other problem when you happen to have the best hand is that once the turn comes you cannot play as such unless a Nine appears or unless it gets checked around which is unlikley given the board and the number of opponents.
But Jim, no one has declared any strength yet. If you bet you likely won't be up against 4 players as this flop will miss most. If I do get 4 callers I shut down on the turn. I also bet JJ should the flop come Q high. Would you fold this hand?
If you had Ac Kc and you were the button would you bet this flop? I think betting 99 in mid-position is a better play. If overcards want to call I don't mind as he's drawing to beat me.
I'm less likely to bet 55 or 66 because I can't beat 77 or 88.
Folding what could be the best hand because you may be drawn out is not good poker. I want to be more sure I'm beat and will invest a little to find out.
"But Jim no one has declared any strength yet."
Not true. You have a pre-flop raiser who raised after several players limped in which typically means a good hand. You also have 3 other opponents who called the raise.
"If you bet you likely won't be up against 4 players as the flop will miss most."
True but the players who remain will frequently have a better hand than yours. Furthermore, your bet will frequently get raised when they do, especially by the pre-flop raiser who is yet to act. The real problem is that with all those players taking a flop, that board has a good chance of fitting one or more of their hands.
"I also bet JJ when the flop comes Queen-high."
A completely different situation and it depends upon the particulars. With JJ I will have usually raised pre-flop and I am not facing someone who has shown more strength than me pre-flop. The number of opponents and the overall texture of the board would govern my flop play. Suppose I raised pre-flop with JsJc and get 5 callers. The flop comes: QhTh7d. If it is bet and raised to me or bet and called to me, I would fold every time since I am looking at 2 outs in almost all cases. Furthermore, if a Heart, an Ace, a King, a Queen, or a Ten come off on the turn I could not afford to hang around anyway.
"If you had AcKc would you bet this flop?"
No, not into 4 players especially since I am last to act and can take a free card. I agree that against that particular hand you would want to bet the flop except you still have the problem of beating out 3 other players. You cannot just focus on the pre-flop raiser since he is only one of your major problems.
"I am less likely to bet 55 or 66 because I cannot beat 77 or 88".
In this situation it is more likely that among all four of your opponents one them has a Ten than it is that one of them would have specifically 77 or 88.
"Folding what could be the best hand because you may get drawn out on is not good poker."
It depends upon how likely your hand is good and how likely it rates to stay good. You have hand that is almost impossible to improve and that is an overwhelming underdog to hold up all the way to the river against four opponents including a pre-flop raiser, a Ten overcard, and board containing a two flush. Your best chance of winning would be if everyone agreed not to bet the flop, the turn, or the river. This would never happen. Your argument is like the Lawrence Hill computer simulation that shows how pocket Deuces is a favorite over AK offsuit. It is like saying if you have pocket Deuces in the big blind and guy opens with a raise under the gun with everyone folding, you should stay with your opponent all the way to the river even if you don't flop a set because he might have a holding that you can beat. This would be a ridiculously expensive way to play poker.
i must say in this hand why not pay for the information up frront with a preflop raise than when the button raises you know it must be (AQs-AA) or even the other nines.The way it stands right now he may have raised with 22 just to get the pot size right and hope for a free roll on the flop after 2 limpers it is time to take control and find out where you are at. Also remember some people do limp with AA thru QQ waiting to bring the pain on the turn.
Normally I don't like raising pre-flop with pocket Nines after a couple of players voluntarily enter the pot. I don't think the hand is strong enough. Your point about the button raise is an interesting one. Occasionally I have seen good players make a "funky" raise on the button after several players limp with any pocket pair or a suited connector since they are not giving up much and it adds some deception in their play. However, I don't believe this sort of thing is the norm. My problem is that I have no interest once the flop comes having failed to flop a set or an overpair given that the board and the number of opponents including a pre-flop raiser.
Winger wrote : "I'm interested why you assume the button has an overpair? "
I don't think I assumed that...if I did state that in my original post, let me know. But I am assuming that someone has a pair higher than 9s...either one of the limpers has a Ten or the button has a big pair. I think that is pretty likely - say about 75% of the time, or something like that. Still, I would be ahead about 25% of the time, and it is a big pot. But there may be flush draws out there, and that combined with overcards would reduce my chances of winning the pot down to about 50% given that no one else currently has a T or higher....thus my chances of winning are roughly 12.5%. This is very rough (I would guess +/- 5%), and it comes close to the pot size, that's why I think it is close between raise or fold.
Unless you are trying to gain information on how to play your opponents on future hands you are wasting your money with a raise, and just throwing it away with a call.
Let’s say you raise and get called in two spots and the turn is not a 9. In fact, let’s say it’s an 8c (maybe you’re only blank turn card assuming you have the lead, which I think you don’t). You can’t check, so you bet. Now you’re preflop raiser raises again, or one of the other players calls your bet what do you do… you can’t keep pushing this hand. You have to get off it cheap.
You lost. Muck and move on.
Just an egg's thoughts
Just another egg wrote : "Let’s say you raise and get called in two spots and the turn is not a 9. In fact, let’s say it’s an 8c (maybe you’re only blank turn card assuming you have the lead, which I think you don’t). You can’t check, so you bet"
I can, and will check if one of the limpers between me and the button calls. If one of those guys calls, I'm very sure someone has a bigger pair.
However, if only the button and the UTG limper calls, then a bet is in order...and then if I get raised by either, then its muck city.
As soon as you check, you have lost. So what you are saying is that if your raise doesn't win you the pot right there you are willing to muck the hand. What percentage of the time do you think that with two players already in for one bet, they will both fold to a raise?
Doc, I don't think you have a choice. Muck and save the bets.
Just an egg's thoughts
"What percentage of the time do you think that with two players already in for one bet, they will both fold to a raise? "
none, but also completely irrelevant to what I have stated. I don't mind those two players nearly as much as I mind the other two players - the two players who have already put money in the flop will both call a raise, we all know that. I will check the turn if the one of the other two (the two who have not put in any bets yet on the flop) calls the flop, since then I know I am beaten...but if they both fold, and the button does not 3 bet, and the turn is a blank, then I think I have a very good chance at having the best hand.
I agree that having already checked, your best course of action is to fold, raise and call in that order for all the reasons mentioned by you and everyone else in this thread.
skp,
What do you think of betting the flop?
Regards,
Rick
DocRiver,
I've skimmed the whole thread this time and have time for a few brief comments.
First, I do think the button could raise preflop with a much wider range of hands than Jim described. I also think the flop caller to your right sounds weak or is on a flush draw. A agree with you that if you can isolate with a raise your prospects are reasonable. And your game plan for the turn and river is reasonable. But a lot can go wrong, as others have already said. So IMO a raise is wrong but not by a lot.
Like Winger, I favor a flop bet in this spot. Now you can find out if the players between you and the pre flop raiser have anything. If they fold then you are in a fairly good spot, even if the button raises, which he would probably do with overcards. If one or more pre flop limpers acting after you call and the button raises you fold (or fold to any raise).
Regards,
Rick
I didn't want to open another can of worms with that suggestion but I think you make some good points.
It's one reason why I started my earlier post with "having already checked..."
Also, I think your decision to bet the flop depends on how loose the players between you and the preflop raiser play. If they are apt to call with a wide range of hands (i.e. middle pair, overcards, gutshots what not), then the bet makes less sense because you wont really know what the hell they are calling with and wont really know what to do on the turn even if the button just calls the flop bet. On the other hand, if the middle limpers will either raise (most likely with a Ten) or fold (given your early position bet and the preflop raiser yet to act behind them), then your flop bet makes a lot more sense.
Am I making sense?:)
skp,
I agree to make a bet here you would want predictable opponents to your left. Your success would have a lot to do with unstated intangibles but something about it feels right. For one, you don't get tied on if raised and end up with two opponents. It is a lot easier to throw away a pair just under top pair than top pair itself so a probe bet is just that. You don't usually call if raised and you have more than one opponent.
One of the better scenarios comes when both opponents between you and the button fold, the button raises (with either an overpair or overcards) and you get head up if the blind also folds. If a blank comes on the turn, you can bet again and the typical button player will usually call with good overcards or even fold mediocre overcards. If raised you have a judgment call based on your opponent’s style. If you check the turn overcards will often check behind. Now you may end up value betting the river if another blank falls.
Also note that some overpairs will tend to check the river so that your effective odds may not be as bad as you think.
Regards,
Rick
I wouldn't argue with any of the above.
Note that all of your arguments work even better when you flop middle pair (as opposed to holding a pocket underpair) as you now will probably have 5 outs as opposed to 2 if you are trailing. Of course, it also helps if you have an overcard as a kicker.
I don't like a flop bet because it allows the two limpers between me and the button with hands like QJ and KJ to call...while a checkraise will get those hands out. It maybe that I am only getting one overcard out (if button has AK, and UTG limper has a Q or J), or maybe I'm not getting any overcards out...but I think it would be worth it to get one overcard out.
One other thing - there is a high chance the button will bet. Given that, a checkraise steals the initiative - and thus it makes it tough for him to call a turn bet with AK....if I bet on the flop, and he raises me with AK, he'll be able to see the turn and the river for no more bets...whereas if I checkraise him (and given he doesn't 3 bet the flop), and a A, K, Q or diamond doesn't hit the turn, then I can bet out and make it tough for him to see the river.
I think this is a fascinating hand because it brings out how different players view a very common flop situation and where player sensitivites are. Instructive post.
Jim, do you think the difference in opinions exist because of the difference in the games we play in? There is a big difference in playing at the Mirage and playing in California. I've noticed your posts are getting more conservative since moving to the Mirage. Do you note any changes in your play?
Yes, the locals who play at the Mirage especially in the $10-$20 game play in a very tight and predictable manner. I love playing against them. It is only the tourists who make a lot of goofy plays that can become problematic. However, the tourists play so badly pre-flop and on the flop that their game is a big gimme.
I have played in California and there are not nearly as many decent players on a per table basis as at the Mirage. The reason the California games are more beatable in the long run than the Vegas games is because the pre-flop errors most of these people make are huge and cannot be overcome. In California, "any suited two will do". Their flop play is also horrid. These California players call flop bets with just an overcard- no pair, no draw, no real hand at all.
It may be that my play is in fact shaped by what I see at the Mirage and your observation may be valid. For what is worth, after I ended by playing session this evening, I took this problem to 3 of the best players I know of who play at the Mirage. Two of them are $20-$40 players and one of them is a $6-$12 player who sometimes plays $10-$20. Not one of them would bet here. In fact, if the flop gets bet by anyone they would fold.
everyone checked to the button, who bet, and UTG limper called (we all know this).
and I.......
folded.
lol
(n/t)
one other question do you belive that there was anything you could have done to win this hand.Also i have to say one more think that happens to golfers and pool players it is called anylasis paralysis.
decent player UTG limps...another guy limps...I have JJ on the button. I raise , blinds fold, UTG calls, other limper calls as well.
the flop comes AsTd3c
checked to me, I bet, UTG calls, other limper folds.
turn is a Kh.
UTG checks, I bet, he calls.
river is a 4d.
UTG checks.
Should I bet or check?
Based on his betting, I thought it was highly likely that he had something like Axs - making a pair of aces. (a big pair like AA, KK, QQ, TT, AK, AT, KT are pretty out of the question, because I would have heard from him on preflop, on the flop or turn, I'm not all that worried about JT since I can beat it nor QJ since I would've probably seen a raise on the turn....the one hand that I may be scared of is KJ or Axs. Now, the question is : Can he and will he fold this hand, aces with no kicker or just a K on the river if I bet? Most people will fold the KJ, some people will fold Ax, others won't. This guy may, and based on the potsize, I think it is worth it to give it another bet on the river.
In general, giving this action from UTG, showing he probably has either Ace-no kicker or KJ, should I bet on the river again hoping he'd fold? Should I have even bet on the turn to begin with? Should it be that if I bet the turn, I should bet the river, or check them both?
You should check. You correctly bet the turn to get a cheap showdown. When he calls your turn bet he either has a pair of Aces or a pair of Kings or he is chasing. Now since he did decide to call your turn bet, he will not be folding a better hand at the river when a blank comes and you bet.
i agree that he won't fold most of the time, but I am being offered about 7-1 to make the bluff. will he fold a weak ace more than 12.5% of the time? i just want to make sure you are answering that question
If he were going to fold a weak Ace he would have done it on the turn. With any Ace he has already committed himself to the river once he calls your turn bet. He is hoping his top pair of Aces will hold up and that you have a hand like the one you have. Don't expect a loose, goose to suddenly start trying to play good poker at the river by making tough folds.
He could esaily have KQ or KJs, or QTs or JTs. KQ is the most likely for obvious reasons. If he is a good player, he would be very unlikely to have an Ace.
I think you have to bet here, to get him off the king hands.
Dan Z.
ok, maybe my definition of good player is different from many people's definitions. i guess i shoudl qualify it by saying something like : one of the above average players in my local casino.
out of those above average players in my local casino (which may not necessarily be good players in other people's definitions), a lot of them would still limp in with A-x suited hands. I'm not saying it is good to limp wiht them UTG, I'm just saying that many of them do. I guess this is anote to Las Vegans to visit your friendly neighbors to the west.
If he was going to fold a pair of Kings then why wouldn't he do it on the turn? Is he chasing 3 outs?
Catching a King on the turn could make him think that he has anywhere from 6-9 outs. eg. He has KJ and figures that a King or Queen would be good and perhaps even a Jack. Having done that, my experience is that the guy will call with his King on the river. Just like Doc only has to succeed 12.5% of the time with his bluff, the guy with the King only has to succeed 12.5% with his call. In fact, the latter number is even lower as Doc will have added another $40 to the pot with his river bet.
In sum, I agree with you that checking the river is probably the better play. Now, if you start noticing that this guy lays down a lot on the river in this situation when you make a value bet with AQ, then you can say to yourself "all right, maybe this guy doesn't make that crying call at the end". You therefore make a mental note to maybe try a few more bluffs against this than you might against other players.
(n/t)
Based upon the flop and action, I would put him on an ace. You preflop raise, an ace hits the flop and he is going to call to catch an undercard?
On the turn, he committed himself to the pot. Don't bet here. If he has an ace he won't fold. If he calls, you lost. Save the bet. Flip over the hand.
Just an egg's thoughts
i must say very good question. he can in my HO only have Axs or if he is really weak Axo.Now when the King comes it could be Kxs so i would not bet again due to the fact if he calls the turn he is going to call the river and that comes from your last post about K9o if he called on the flop with a ten just be patient and hope the other players at the table don't get his money.i like to think that every pot i win doesn't have to be big so if a player wnats to put in 2sb pre flop and then one on the flop and will check to my jacks on the turn and river with 2 overcards and i take it down i am happy.I know from reading some of your other posts you realize this s not your time to try to obtain more bets it is time to save bets and take down the money if you have the best hand.Reading the player in this spot is alot of energy used up for a small pot.Use your reading skills when you get "PAID" I would love to know of what you think about this response.
I am on the button with K9o. Everyone folds to me, I make it two bets. The big blind (decent player) calls me. The flop comes K45 rainbow. He checks, I bet, he raises. I decide to call. The turn is a T. he bets. I think to myself "am I going to call him on the turn if I call him on the river? Yes....since I am, I might as well raise him now, and maybe he'll fold a better hand, or fold a straight draw or an ace." I raise with the intention of checking the river (or folding if he raises me back or bets out on the river). He calls. The river is a A. He checks, I check, he throws away 67 for a busted straight draw.
Please comment on the turn raise with the intention of folding to a reraise or a bet on the river ... and with intentions of checking down the river if called on the turn.
You played this better than I would have. I am unclear about your turn raise strategy. I am surprised he called your steal raise with Seven-Six offsuit even out of his big blind. This is a horrible heads-up hand. When he check-raises you on the flop with that board I would put him on a bigger King or two pair. I would call and fold when he bets the turn when a blank comes. You went on and invested two big double bets in a situation where you don't rate to have more than 5 outs when you are beat and you will frequently have 3 outs and sometimes no outs. If this were a $10-$20 game there would be $105 in the pot and it costs you at least $20 to see the river and you are talking about investing $40. A 5 outer is an 8:1 shot and a 3 outer is a 15:1 shot. Your whole line of play only makes sense if you think the guys is semi-bluffing a straight draw with specifically Seven-Six or Trey-Deuce neither of which are hands he rates to have.
he could also have a weaker King, like Kxs - as you see from his 76o call in the big blind, he wouldhave been likely to call with Kxs also, and maybe other Kx offsuit hands, or maybe with pairs like 66,77,88,99, or TT which he may not have 3 bet preflop with....also, there's a chance he's got K9, or KJ and may fold them since a turn raise is scary looking (AK, KQ). but the whole strategy is basically this : if I'm going to go ahead and call the turn and the river as well (and I did since I thought he was capable of checkraising a middle pair, a straight draw and even aworse king), then a raise on the turn (with intentions of folding if shown anymore strength) would either get him to fold a better hand, or, more likely, mayhim put in another bet with a drawing hand or a worse King.
as far as calling with 76o in the big blind against a button raise, I think in California, 25% max of the players would fold that hand in the 20/40 game, the other 75% would call. I think its a poor call, but itis still done often, by even fairly decent players. what do you Californians think?
But given that the guy plays as loose as you state, why would you expect him to start playing decent poker on the turn by folding when you raise when he has a bigger King or a better hand? Sounds like the guy came to gamble and he will simply shrug his shoulders and call you down.
I guess my point is this : where I play (Cal), players will often play very loose in the blinds, especially against a button raise...and yet play decently postflop. the two does conflict with each other somewhat, but I do think many players exhibit this personality...including this player.
put another way - the thought processgoes like this
preflop : he raised on the button, that means he could have anything, since everyone folded to him. since he could have anything, if i can hit a hand, i have a good chance of being ahead.
postflop : oh, crap, he does have something strong since he is raising me on the big street. that could mean AA, AK, KQ, KK. a raise on the turn, especially since I checkraised him on the flop, is very strong, and usually does not signify a bluff, especially by this player, who is solid.
this particular player can think like this, along with many others where i play. that's why a raise on the turn is good versus a straight draw, a middle pair, a weaker king, and possibly a stronger king (especially since, if i do not raise the turn, I would have decided to call him down anyway due to the fact that he could have a weaker king or a middle pair, or bluffing the straight draw).
anyways, those are my thoughts - what do you think?
Sounds too deep for me. How do these guys play when they have a real hand or at least one that beats yours?
C'mon I can't believe that you don't use this strategy yourself.
I would play it the same way, except I probably wouldn't have gone after the blinds with K-9o. A lot of the value of this play is when the blinds fold. In a loose game I think it loses this value.
your decision to go after the blinds with K9 is just a matter of personal style and a read on who the blinds are and what the chances of them defending are.
AFTER the FLOP, I think you played this like someone who has a very good grasp on the game of poker. If you are going to call the turn and the inevitable bet on the river, why not raise the turn, and check behind on the river when your opp will more than likely check to you.
If you lose, you lose the same amount. If you win, you either win the same 2 bets, assuming he would have bet the river, or you win an extra bet if he would have checked the river to you.
It is rare to find a player who would 3 bet you on the turn without having a made hand already. I use your play frequently and just hope the people I play against don't read many of your posts.
Wonderful play. Glad Cali doesn't have many players like you.
Where do you play Doc, I get to Cali to play everyonce in a while.
Just an egg's thoughts
He beats the shit out of us at Planet Poker.
Doc,
I'm not crazy about the turn raise here unless you think there's a very good chance he'll fold a better hand OR you think he'll call you down all the way with something weaker. (note that both of these will never happen - it'll be one or the other) Consider the possibilities:
1. If he happens to have the 67 and misses you might win an extra bet on the river anyway with a bluff catcher. If he hits you will save money if he would bet the river after you raise him.
2. He has a weaker king or smaller pocket pair THAT HE WILL FOLD IF YOU RAISE. Do you want him to fold here? If you think he'll call your river bet, he has at most 3 outs (15-1). Give him the cheap card so he'll call your river bet. The pot is only 5 big bets. So by just calling and betting the river, 14/15 times you win 6 big bets and 1/15 times you lose 1 bet (EV = 5.5 big bets). By raising, if he folds you win 5 big bets every time. The situation is even better if he has the pocket pair.
3. If he has a big King he might even reraise you denying you the chance to hit your kicker on the river. By just calling twice, you give yourself the 3 outs.
Bottom line, you are likely way ahead or way behind and I think it's unlikely you'll get him to lay down a better hand, so maybe calling is the better play
What do you think?
Puggy
Thanks for the comments. here are my comments to your comments.
1. If he happens to have the 67 and misses you might win an extra bet on the river anyway with a bluff catcher. If he hits you will save money if he would bet the river after you raise him.
Not necessarily. He may bluff the river again, or once he sees I've called on the turn, he may give up the pot on the river. There's a good chance that he won't bluff the river, thus I gain an extra bet by raising the turn (of course, I check the river no matter what, or fold on the river if he bets, no matter what, so I don't lose anymore money if he actually hits).
2. He has a weaker king or smaller pocket pair THAT HE WILL FOLD IF YOU RAISE. Do you want him to fold here? If you think he'll call your river bet, he has at most 3 outs (15-1). Give him the cheap card so he'll call your river bet. The pot is only 5 big bets. So by just calling and betting the river, 14/15 times you win 6 big bets and 1/15 times you lose 1 bet (EV = 5.5 big bets). By raising, if he folds you win 5 big bets every time. The situation is even better if he has the pocket pair.
This is the biggest problem with raising the turn...that he may lay down a weak King. I don't want him to lay down a weak King, but he's likely to call with a K. even K2.
3. If he has a big King he might even reraise you denying you the chance to hit your kicker on the river. By just calling twice, you give yourself the 3 outs.
If he has a big King, I doubt I'd see a reraise back at me, as he'd have to be afraid of a set. But if he does reraise me back, clearly he has a K with a better kicker, AA or a set. And in any case, a reraise from him means I can easily muck my hand...and I would have lost the same exact amount (notice that if I just call the turn, I'd call the river as well, losing 2 big bets).
I don't think I should raise all the time on the turn with hands like this, but I think this is the type of hand and the correct situation to do it with.
Doc,
My comments to your comments to my comments :).
1. If he happens to have the 67 and misses you might win an extra bet on the river anyway with a bluff catcher. If he hits you will save money if he would bet the river after you raise him.
Not necessarily. He may bluff the river again, or once he sees I've called on the turn, he may give up the pot on the river. There's a good chance that he won't bluff the river, thus I gain an extra bet by raising the turn (of course, I check the river no matter what, or fold on the river if he bets, no matter what, so I don't lose anymore money if he actually hits).
Response: If your play is to raise the turn and put no more money in the pot, then if he bluffs the river you cost yourself the pot. By just calling both streets, you prevent yourself from being bluffed out.
2. He has a weaker king or smaller pocket pair THAT HE WILL FOLD IF YOU RAISE. Do you want him to fold here? If you think he'll call your river bet, he has at most 3 outs (15-1). Give him the cheap card so he'll call your river bet. The pot is only 5 big bets. So by just calling and betting the river, 14/15 times you win 6 big bets and 1/15 times you lose 1 bet (EV = 5.5 big bets). By raising, if he folds you win 5 big bets every time. The situation is even better if he has the pocket pair.
This is the biggest problem with raising the turn...that he may lay down a weak King. I don't want him to lay down a weak King, but he's likely to call with a K. even K2.
Response: I agree.
3. If he has a big King he might even reraise you denying you the chance to hit your kicker on the river. By just calling twice, you give yourself the 3 outs.
If he has a big King, I doubt I'd see a reraise back at me, as he'd have to be afraid of a set. But if he does reraise me back, clearly he has a K with a better kicker, AA or a set. And in any case, a reraise from him means I can easily muck my hand...and I would have lost the same exact amount (notice that if I just call the turn, I'd call the river as well, losing 2 big bets).
Response: Except that if you muck your hand, you give up the chance to catch your 2, 3, or 5 outs on the river (depending upon what he has). Note if he has AA you have 5 outs and definitely would like to see the river.
I don't think I should raise all the time on the turn with hands like this, but I think this is the type of hand and the correct situation to do it with.
I think there are many situations where raising the turn is correct, and one of them here would be if you think he will call you down with a weaker king. But if you give up if he reraises your or bluff bets the river, I think you're better off calling twice.
Puggy
I agree with your thought processes.
I would just point out that you simply do not have enough info to put this guy on a hand up to the point where he bet the turn.
Your raise came from the button. The guy could have called your raise with a wide range of hands and could also be checkraising the flop with a wide range of hands. I am not saying that that is proper bb strategy against a button raise but that's how many players will play it. As such, there is no way I am folding K9 here until he shows me a better hand.
That said, your raise on the turn makes sense so long as you don't overdo it.
skp, what do you think about my posts above?
Puggy
The key really is the frequency with which you make these plays. If you start raising on the turn and then checking down the river too often, then you open yourself to a 3 bet from your opponent on the turn which you may not call even if you are ahead or have the pot odds to draw out on your opponent.
It's really just a question of balance. I think the point here is that the turn raise (with the intention of checking down the river) is another arrow in your quiver and you ought to reach in and grab it once in a while.
Doc,
I've read some of the other responses (not all of them), but the one thing I didn't see here is this: You say that you will fold if he 3-bets on the turn or bets out on the river, but very many aggressive players (myself included - although I wouldn't have played his hand here) would often go ahead and fire on the river with the pot this big and a hand with no chance of winning a showdown. Folding to a 3-bet on the turn I agree with, but if you really think your opponent could be on a draw, don't you have to pay-off a blank river?
Just curious,
Steve
well, I don't think he can bluff on the river. A bluff is usually run by people who think there is some chance that you will fold...since I raised the turn, showing a lot of strength, it means there is very little chance of me folding on the river....I think very few people would have the balls to bet the river...and I am vrey confident that this guy would not have unless he definitley had me beat.
i like the play and this is one i have in my bag of tricks with the same thought process "turn call=river call=$80 turn call+turn raise=$80+ the chance to win right there i like it and alot of players will never get it doc. i like your play
20/40 game. I am in the big blind with KsKd. everyone folds to the button ( a very solid player) who raises. the small blind three bets. I four bet. Both call.
The flop comes As9c8c (two clubs). SB checks, I bet, button calls, SB folds.
The turn is a 6 of clubs. I check, button checks. The river is a 4s. I check, button bets.
Call or fold? (8 BB in the pot)
You have to call for just one bet. Is there any chance you could raise here though and put him off Ax I'm wondering? This would be the place for that play if there ever was one I'm thinking. depends on what this solid player thinks of you. Anyways, 8BB is enough, you have to at least call. too bad you probably got beat.
This is a somewhat complicated hand which leads me to tend to think you should at least call. Im still in the when-in-doubt-call stage.
I REALLY don't think a checkraise here is going to get this guy off of Ax, do you?
Sounds like a waste of money to me.
-SmoothB-
A call is automatic here. When he checked it back to you on the turn he said he was afraid and he denied an Ace. When you check the river, he could easily be making a play for the pot with a lower pocket pair than yours.
Docriver, I'm surprised you even post this message. I've played against you many times (with nothing but the utmost respect for your game) and I think it is an automatic call for you.
The only thing I can see that would even make you question this call would be if the opponent checked behind you on the turn (with an ace) worried that you were check raising him with the flush.
However, you stated that this was a "very solid player." If this is the case, how likely is he to put you on a flush draw (even AK clubs) when you 4-bet preflop.
If he had the flush, he wouldn't let you see the river for free. I think your only fear here is him holding 44 and catching his set on the river.
I'm almost positive you did NOT lay this hand down.
.
I like your check on the river for a variety of reasons in this type of heads-up situation. This is along the lines of Rick Nebiolo's post the other day with his A-x,and he checks to allow a player enough rope to hang himself.
There is little chance that your opponent has any sort of good Ace behind you. However, he might be checking behind you on the turn with a very good hand to try to induce you to bluff on the river. When you now check your KK, two good things can happen. One, he might try to bluff and you can snap him off when he wouldn't have called had you bet. Or he might bet a weakish hand for 'value'. Two, you save a bet when he is lying in the weeds, assuming that had you bet the river, you would pay off a raise.
10-20 of HE , 11 players at the table , if SB is on the seat 1 and Button seat 11 , I am on the seat 9 with 77. Maniac millionnaire maroccan open with a raise , 3 middle position loose player call 2 bets . Should I call ? I call , and player not too bad call 2 bets on the button , SB fold and BB calls , Flop come 2d-3d-6c . Maniac bets , 1st loose player raise , one fold , the 3rd loose calls 20 , and I make it 30 , Button call 30 (i'm confused , i'm scared a little bit about 88 or 99 ) . The BB fold , and they all call . The turn is a Q , check to me , and I bet , I want to make fold hand like AJ or KT or 88 , 99 etc and make pays flush drawer, was that the move to do ? Button calls , maniac calls and 1st loose call but 2nd loose fold . The turn bring a Jack (no diamond) , check to me , and I check , Button check , I show my 7's they all muck except the button who slowly show me Jd8d , Was my play too aggressive ? Was my call pre-flop bad , considering the players in the hand and the raiser ?
I think you overplayed your pocket 7's immensely. You 3 bet a flop of 3d2d6..? With so many callers I doubt you're the favorite. I don't like your call on the flop either. Even though a Maniac is UTG, i would still probably lay down pocket 7's here.
Your call with four people into you for two bets is in a loose game your call is OK here.. But…depending on the game you are in, you could be a significant underdog already. OK, so now you are in the pot with the smallest possible overpair on the flop and you three bet. Not a bad move, but you could just call here.
On the turn and river overcards come, and you keep firing. Betting the turn is OK I guess to try and represent a big hand and get others to lay down. Why bet the river… anyone that calls has you beat?
Just an eggs thoughts
i would say in this game the sevens can play ok but when you look down and see the seven you have to say do i want to play or fold?when you decided to play you should have 3 bet pre flop to show more power than you have if you 3bet pre flop and then raise on the flop and fire the turn and river the jack never calls you.unless he hates money or can read you like a Dr.Suess book
If the j8d calls all the way to the river ... hits his jack... and doesn't call 1 big bet in that huge pot(that he already put all that investment in) he is an idiot. I think you are wrong here buddy! I would love to have you in my game. The aggressor(77) could have been betting ak of diamonds the same way. How can you lay down top pair with all that money in the pot?
A fairly loose 40-80 LA game and I am new to the area and know no one at the table. Shortly after sitting down, I am dealt two red 10's in the cut-off. There is one limper, I raise, and the big blind and the limper call. The flop comes K-8-3 all spades. Big blind bets, limper folds, I raise. Big blind calls and we both check the turn, which comes a blank. Another blank comes on the river and the big blind fires out. What are the odds of my 10's being good? I would appreciate any input, especially some math help. Thanks. Results to be posted soon.
Scott,
I might have bet the turn but that wasn't your question. Since you checked the turn, you have encouraged an aggressive move of some sort from the big blind on the river. That could include a bluff from a missed flush draw, or a value bet from an eight or slightly better pair (such as 99). The big blind could easily put you on a big spade that missed and is betting his bust. He could be value betting a small pair (probably with a spade). He might hope you lay down a better ace if he holds the ace of spades.
Adding all these up, I would guess you are good about 30% of the time, making it an easy call with six big bets at stake.
Regards,
Rick
That's what I was thinking-- bet the turn. If check-raised, muck. If called, check the river. At least this way you charge him if he's got a big spade, which won't happen if you give him the river for free.
I have a question for you. When you raised the flop was it with the intention of checking the turn? If so then the river bet should be expected. Your raise on the flop with the check on the turn looks like a free card buy to your opponent. So you have to call now. If you had bet the turn you could have layed down to a checkraise or checked down the river if just called. Notice if your opponent was on a draw this takes away his free card and he won't call a river bet with a bust anyway. You have the best of both worlds.
To your question:
Your opponent is making one of two bets: a value bet or bluff. His value bet range is any pair and up, I would guess without knowing him. With the low range (I would not value bet this) he is hoping you will call with a naked, unimproved ace. He may even be dreaming you could fold a bigger pair, since he does not know you either. The upper range hands would probably not have been played so weakly however. A king or better would probably reraise the flop, or just called and led out again on the turn, if a non spade fell (in the instances he did not have a spade). It is unlikely but possible that he had a monster flop and intended to checkraise you on the turn. So if we look at the range of made hands, you see that many of them would not be played that way, and the ones that are you can beat. The hands you can't beat that could be played that way are weak kings (although many would lead again on the turn at this level), QQ (probably relaunch flop), JJ (ditto).
And then there are the bluffs. There are many of those, including any hand with a big spade that missed.
So what are your odds of being good here? I don't know but I know that you should normally call a typical opponent.
Regards
This sounds like a spot where the math won't be very realistic. The reason is that your check on the turn will frequently encourage the other player to bluff. How much he is encouraged will depend on the player, but given the way that you played it and considering the size of the pot I would certainly call against most opponents.
By inducing a bluff now you have to play the player.Some guys I play with I would lay down because they are just so weak tight,I'd save the bet,others get paid,I question the other plays,especially the raise on the flop,what about releasing right there?Unless I misread you have 2 red 10's and kinda boxed yourself in with that raise.
You raised the flop and checked the turn. Your opponent is likely to suspect you have a high singleton spade and are fishing for a free turn card, and his bet on the river with little or nothing is to be expected. I think this is an easy call.
If the flop had been KJ3 your decision would be more difficult.
A9suited
Suppose Scott had held AKo with the As. What do you all think of checking the turn now since the BB may fold to a bet but as we saw will bet out on the river for reasons others have stated? Would betting the turn be better hoping you can win a BB on the turn and river be better?
rob
I hesitantly called him down and he turned over K-9 with no spades. He proved to be a very good player, maybe he played this hand conservatively because he didn't know me. Thanks for the input. Scott
9 handed game with one small Poster at Paradise ($3/$6)
UTG call – I’m 4 off the button with JsTs – with a limper and a poster I think that is OK ? – so far there haven’t been a lot of pre-flop-raising – Poster check – CutOff and SB call - BB check – 6 players - $18 in pot.
FLOP : [ 5d Jd Th ]
It’s checked to me – I bet – Poster,CutOff and SB call – 4 players - $30 in pot.
TURN : [ 5d Jd Th ] [ 7d ]
I don’t like the turn but I bet it anyway – Poster call – Cutoff raise – SB fold – I call – so does Poster – 3 players - $66 in pot.
RIVER : [ 5d Jd Th 7d ] [ 4c ]
Check to CutOff who bets – I call – Poster fold.
SUMMARY : Pot: $75 | Rake: $3
I lost $24 [ Js Ts ]
CutOff bet $24, collected $75, net +$51 (showed hand) [ Qd 8d ]
On the river I call because of the size of the pot ?
On the turn I somewhat know I was playing a 4-outer of 46 producing this relation: 4/46*pot-6>=0 => pot>=69 – which somewhat seems to be OK !?
But since I know I will call the river no matter what and I don’t expect to make a lot of money should I make my hand this relation seems more proper: 4/46*pot-12>=0 => pot>=138 – that is not OK !?
Maybe I shouldn’t have been there in the first place ?
n/t
Of course you *at least* call with JTs before the flop. You might want to raise sometimes in this situation (it might have saved you the pot here).
You could have easily have been raised on the turn by someone holding Qd9s, KQ with a diamond, Ad10c, Ad9s, Ad8s, etc. If you are going to lay down top two two pair they would be correct to raise you with many of these hands.
Against a very predictable player, you might be able to lay it down on the river, but I think you played it fine.
You are of course right. I have a clear call on the Turn. But there is a big difference between low/limit and high/limit. Semi-bluff-raising the turn and other fancy play doesn't work very well in low/limit. People don't do 'em a lot. That's why I 'knew' he had the flush.
Thanks for your comments !
i will be at soaring eagle on a thurs-fri-sat what are the 10-20 games like?
They are good games. The $20-$40 games are even better. By a good game, I mean that they are on the loose side with not too much pre-flop raising. I played there for one weekend while I was visiting my daughter in Detroit.
iI play often at the eagle..very good games. The 20-40 is very sweet. about 20% rocks 70% loose 10% solid. A good player will do very well here.
These games have gotten looser in the past year although I'm not sure why, since it's basically the same core of players. I have noticed a new crop of CMU students there (doubtlessly playing with Stafford Loan money, which should make Michael 7 happy) who all think they're Mike McDermott, so I imagine their enthusiasm for the game is at least partly responsible for the recent improvement of the games.
Theoretical question.
You are in a normal 9 handed 20/40 game, in seat #2 with the big blind. seat 3 and 4 folds. Seat #5 makes it two bets. Everyone else folds, including the SB.
You are in the big blind and have A7o. do you call?
I have always called with any ace, but recently, I am beginning to doubt calling is a good play. maybe Axs, or AT and higher, but A7o is real tough.
these are my thoughts : the guy raised in mid position, so it is unlikely he is on a steal. if he is a player who is not way too aggressive, the possible hands he can have are : pairs, AK-AT, KQ, KJs.
Against these hands, I am dominated by 48 hands (AK-AT), have an ace for an out against 7s or higher - 39 hands, and are ahead only against KQ, KJ - 32 hands.
If an ace hits, against 48 of the hands, you will donate. Against 39 of the hands, you will either gain one big bet, or at most 1.5 big bets (if you checkraise the flop, he may call, but will fold to your bet on the turn...if you flat call his bet on the flop, he's likely to check the turn, and maybe he'll call your river bet)....and agianst the other 32 hands, you are ahead, but don't have position, and without a A or 7, it may be hard to continue.
the more I think about it, the more I think folding in this spot is correct, due to all the negatives.
does anyone disagree, and if so, why?
This is an easy fold. I wouldn't even think about calling if a reasonable player raised. Why do you think this is a calling hand?
Ace-shit offsuit is an automatic fold even against a middle position raiser. You will only flop an Ace a fraction of the time and it can be easily dominated. What you are building is an expensive second best hand in many cases. Being out of position is also very bad.
You should fold it even if wasn't raised. (Hyperbole alert)
Regards.
lol
x
I fold ATo and lower. ATs and AJo are marginal. It depends on what I know about the player. Generally I call.
Chris
Big blind is a very tight player....known to make many big laydowns. He thinks I am a tight solid player.
I am in middle position with AK...I raise...everyeon folds to the BB whocalls.
The flop is Kh8h3c
BB bets, I raise...he calls. The turn is a 5d.
He checks, I check
Why did I check? Well, I was 95% sure he wasn't on a heart draw cause he would just check/call with that....I am also pretty sure he doesn't have trip 8s or trip 3s, but that's a possibility. Most likely, he has a hand like KQ KJ, KT or K9s (notice he cannot have a King and a heart draw at the same time since the Kh is on the board....if the board was Kc8h3h, then I would bet on the turn sincehe could have a heart draw and have a King at the same time. ).
ALso, i'm pretty sure he would lay down KJ, KT, K9 if I bet on the turn again, since he knows that i know that he knows we both know that we are solid players, and a raise preflop, raise on the flop and then another bet signifies either AA, AK or KK in this spot. I think there is a very high chance that he will laydown a King, but if I check, he may put me on a heart draw and bet out on the river when a heart doesn't hit...and then I can raise him.
Well, it worked out perfectly...a 5c hit the river...and he bets out. I figured, well great, now I can raise and collect the bet that I would've gotten against most normal players on the turn as well, which I don't think I would've gotten from this guy.
I raise. He flashes me KJ and folds.
Given that I knew my opponent well, I was able to play this hand and either gain one big bet or lose no big bets (maybe he calls the turn, but probably not the river)....in exchange for giving him 3 outs. Mind you, there is only one player that I make this play against, and it was this specific guy...everyone else I would have bet the turn and river as well, and put him on a worse King.
knowing what i know, in which types of situations would you steal against this guy? i don't know if I would try to steal with the same board with a hand like AQ or AJ...but I believe it is important to steal from him with a hand like TT, 99, 88 with a board like J32 and he bets out on the flop...since there is a good chance he may lay down a J, a raise on the flop and a bet on the turn is almost mandatory if it is headsup. but of course, it can not be done too often otherwise he may get wiser.
Looks like you got an extra double bet out of him that I wouldn't have. Given that your read was 100% accurate, it is okay to give him a shot with his 3 outer when the pot is small like this. I agree that a good player will fold if you bet on the turn. But the problem is what happens when your read is not 100% accurate? Suppose that it is only 60% accurate or 70% accurate?
This seems like a lot of work just to finagle an extra double bet out of him with some real dangers of putting an entire pot at risk or at least not charging him on the expensive street when he is drawing. But, like David Sklansky stated in his recent essay, reading hands and opponents is the most important poker skill at the higher limits. I hope you can keep firing with 100% accuracy.
"I agree that a good player will fold if you bet on the turn."
If you are going to fold top pair heads up a strong aggressive player will simply run you over. He can beat you by mere force and no cards. Of course if you are planning a counter strategy designed to exploit this that's fine, fold.
This is why a hand like King-Jack offsuit is such a troublesome hand when facing a pre-flop raiser. The only reason you were in the hand to begin with was because you were partially in having posted a big blind so you were getting 3.5:1 pot odds. Now when the flop comes King-high you bet your top pair and got raised by the pre-flop raiser. You correctly call and take off a card. But when a blank comes and the turn gets bet you have to find the good sense to fold otherwise you will be paying a double bet on the turn and on the river just to make sure you don't get bluffed out. I think against typical players this will prove to be an expensive way to play poker over the course of a year.
Your advice would make more sense if there was no raise pre-flop.
"Now when the flop comes King-high you bet your top pair and got raised by the pre-flop raiser. You correctly call and take off a card."
Why is it correct to take a card off then? You are getting 6.5-1 drawing to maybe three outs, with redraws against you. Or may five if you are against aces. Or maybe zero. Are you calling the flop raise hoping that the opponent will check through the turn (which as we see is often a trap). Seriously?
Also, how do you believe the raiser would play if he held QQ or JJ or KTsuited or AQ? If you believe these hands won't raise the flop then you are right. I think they often will raise the flop and bet the turn. (Not to mention all the other crap they could have.)
By the way, folding KJ here preflop is a good fold.
It is correct to take a card after getting raised on the flop because 1)you may improve and 2)the turn may not get bet since your opponent may be horseing around with a lesser hand. Players frequently display puffery on the cheap street and then back off on the expensive street. It depends on the player but most players will not follow through with a bet on the turn when they get called and checked to with the hands you describe. A top player might but not a typical player.
I agree that if you are going to misplay your troublesome holding by paying off all the way to the river when it is obvious you are beat then you are better off folding to begin with. This is what Mason Malmuth means when he talks about playing well post flop.
I dont agree with your analysis here at all. In the case all the blind did was bet out and call a raise. A player with any kind of holding will usually follow through on the turn against a blind. If they don't they are either weak players or they are setting a trap as did docriver.
Calling the flop with about 7.5 to one with between zero and 5 outs is dubious at best, if you intend to relinquish your equity so easily on the turn.
With regards to the preflop call with a horribly dominated hand against a tight raiser: you will almost always get heat. It will be difficult to determine the times he has you drawing thin (as here) to when he has say QQ. A good player will force you into making a tough decision by raising and following through on the turn. Just read the posts here. Below there is a post where the poster has red tens and the board comes high all spades and raises the blind's flop bet. Most of the responders recommended following through with a bet on the turn. Including Rick N and myself.
Indeed post flop play is where the money is at. Learning not to be easily pushed off pots is very important part of this. It's what turns a break even into a medium winner and a medium winner into a large winner. Luck is not the most important thing in poker. Just look at what docriver is now planning against the guy who made this fold. He's planning to knock him off some more pots. Not a good thing for our folder (who shouldn't have shown the hand). This would be less true if the player was well enough versed in poker theory to construct a good counter attack, but very few of these types of players are.
Notice that not folding here is NOT a fear of being bluffed. It is preserving the equity in the pot that is rightfully yours. In the cases where the raiser is indeed this predictable, folding would have been correct, of course. I do not believe typical high/mid limit players are this easy to read.
Good luck. I will look forward to any of your articles although your participation in this forum is probably more involved than an article could ever be.
Regards.
many players will raise the flop with a flush draw...note the two hearts on the flop...the whole key to my trap was to make the big blind think that I was actually trying to get a free card...and once I chekced the turn, he suspected that, and bet out....this was a bit of an unsual play on my part. typically, when someone does that (raise the flop with position, then check the turn when a non flush card comes), it means it was a flush draw. note, that the bet on the river meant it was a horrible bet by the big blind, since he wants me to bluff my missed flush draw, if I was indeed on a flush draw, or just call down a higher K...even if I have QQ, I may do the same thing...I sure would have bet the river if he checked it.
yes the KJ played poorly. notice here if you had, for example, a flush draw, by merely keeping the heat on you could get your opponent to fold a hand as strong as a king while he is a significant favorite on the turn. if he folded here to a semi bluff that's got huge profit written all over it. thats a fundamental theorem birthday cake. dont let this guy breathe for a second. eventually he will have to adjust, but many of these types are not well rounded enough to adjust properly. (they would be if they posted here) at that point you counter adjust. i suspect what he will do is avoid you.
Regards.
backdoor if your opponents play like you describe then perhaps your are right and maybe you should not even call out of your big blind to begin with. But I would also recommend that you find another game since the vast majority players I play against would not keep betting the turn in this situation unless they had AA,KK, or AK. Players of Rick N's caliber or yours are not in anyway typical.
Backdoor's hinges seem to be on very straight..
You don't have to be 100% accurate. Sklansky discusses this in his book The Theory of Poker in the section "Analysis At the Table." Also in Sklansky's book, "Hold'em Poker" he outlines a play similar to the one that docriver made. He states that when you are capable of recognizing situations like this and can pull these types of plays off successfully you can consider yourself a true expert.
Against a tight weak player as you describe your play on the turn was excellent. Against most players its a good move also for different reasons.
If your actions by raising the flop and then betting the turn truly indicate that you would have AA, KK, or AK, then of course his fold would be correct. Which is precisely why you are playing too tight in this spot if your actions indicate such predictability. I am actually having my doubts that you are this predictable, is this a little PR?
Overall, reading your posts below, I think your thought processes are good.
Regards.
I think it depends on how are you going to play 99-QQ, AJ(s), and AQ(s) when the flop comes as it did? If you are going to raise the flop and bet the turn (as I believe you generally should in a heads up situation as this one) then you need to bet your made hands on the turn too. If you are going to take one off on the turn when your opponent checks to you then your play is fine. It's all about balance.
Rob
Playing tight is not playing KJ
are you suggesting that this is a folding hand in the big blind?
Depends, are we talking early middle, middle middle or late middle position.
I think folding in late middle postion is too tight, but only because you can go a bit further if a K or J hits.
Against a tight raiser its a good fold, unless that raiser is also predictable and allows you to easily escape your hand by allowing you to safely fold top pair. Or if he will easily fold if he misses. Against this type (which you are not, as your trickery on the turn shows), you can call with almost any two cards and just move him off the pot after the flop whether you hit or not. The only time he will win is when he hits the flop real hard. These players are goldmines and generally cannot be found past 20-40 unless they have a trust fund.
In sum, fold KJ even in the big blind against a tight early or middle raiser provided the above conditions are not met or you have particularly excellent post flop reading skills.
Mainly this post is to thank you guys. Excellent post and excellent replies. WOW do I learn a lot on this forum. Thank you!
I have been trying to put myself in the BB's shoes while reading these replies. KJ (and to a lesser extent KQ and AJ) are real trouble hands for me to play..and of course I am a bit gam-bel-ey(tm)..If I am in the BB with it, it becomes a huge problem for me to choose the best course of action. That hand can look awful pretty in your BB. Up till now, I would strongly consider protecting my blind with KJ.. if I am head-up. As my records show, this is a leak in my game. After reading these posts I think I will lean less toward protecting with this trap hand. I think the tightness of the raiser and his position are really key in making this decision. If he is in early or mid position and on the tighter side be extremely inclined to pass because you are more likely dominated..and who the heck wants to be dominated and first to act..that just sucks. If he is in later position and on the loose agressive side, be more inclined to protect or even dare I say every once in a blue moon re-raise. Is my thinking correct here?
Backdoor, if you are in the BB's shoes in this situation and believe the mid position raiser to be very tight are you always going to lay this down? What would you do with KQ and AJ in the same situation. What if the hands are suited. How much does this influence your decision?
Docriver, I am also curious what limit this game was.
Regards,
Joe
I made a strange play with pocket Aces in an ultra-loose 10-20 game tonight. The hand reminded me of a hand Mason Malmuth published in Poker Digest a few months ago. In fact, I was thinking about the way Mason played his hand during my hand. Here it is:
I am in middle position with Ac As. A solid player limps UTG, the next player folds, a loose player raises, I reraise, the loose player to my left caps it, the loose player in the small blind calls, everyone else folds. We take the flop 5 handed. There are 21 small bets in the pot.
The flop comes Jc 7c 2h.
Everyone checks to me, I check, the player to my left bets, everyone calls, I call. There are 5 players and 13 big bets in the pot.
The turn is the Kd.
Everyone checks to me, I bet, the everyone calls. There are 5 players and 18 big bets in the pot.
The river is the Qh.
Everyone checks to me, I bet, the player to my left calls, everyone else folds.
Because the pot was huge, I was trying to play my hand in a way that would maximize my chances of winning the pot. However, I don't know if I got it right.
In hindsight, I think I should have bet the flop and hoped that the player to my left raised. I checked in the hopes that it would induce someone to bet a weaker hand into me on the turn. Provided that the turn was not another club, I could then raise and charge the legitimate draws two double size bets, and possibly knock out some of the weaker hands that might draw out on the river. I also think that betting the river was a mistake. After all, the player to my left capped it before the flop, and I had two of the Aces, so I should have put him on KK, QQ, or JJ. Given that there was one of each on the board, I should have checked and called the river.
Well, you checked the flop with only 1 player left to cat behind you So, I gather you did that hoping that he too would check and then someone in front of you would bet the turn so you could raise and narrow the field (and maybe even make them think that you have a stronger hand than Aces ie. JJ).
But the plan backfired when the guy to your left bet. This is because once the player to your left bets the flop, it is unlikely that you will be able to get a bet from in front of you on the turn with which to limit the field.
Accordingly, I think you should just forget about any fancy play notions and checkraise the field on the flop when the action gets back to you. Who knows, maybe the flop bettor wil oblige you by 3 betting and thereby limit the field.
Notice also that since you have the Ac, you can withstand some heat on the turn even if a club gets there.
You lost several bets by not check raising the flop. Perfect situation for you when the player to your left bets and you let it pass.
River bet was very questionable. Player to your left likely holds QQ or KK (even loose players get dealt these hands).
With 5 people in I try to limit the field and I think a bet on the flop was the best idea, hoping the capper raised. But there's nothing wrong with playing a hand a little differently now and again.
Its not a perfect situation for you when a player to your left bets. It would be if you had a stronger hand but in a pot of this size you want to win the pot not collect extra bets. I think playing it tricky was the way to go.
It's not likely that this flop hit more than one other player so I think it's safe to bet the flop hoping the preflop capper will raise and force the others to look at 2 cold. With this flop you don't have to wait for the turn.
The interesting thing is that the hand turned out just the opposite of what you were hoping for. On the flop and turn everyone got the best price short of a free card.
The problem with this hand is that the capper is behind you which means that you can't control the betting. If you check the flop he bets (which he did), and if you bet the flop he either calls or raises and everyone comes anyway.
So because of this I agree with your flop check. I'm not so sure about the rest of the hand since the board is developing kind of scary. If the king doesn't hit your turn bet is certainly correct, but with the king-jack combination it becomes doutful. In addition, I would switch to a check and call mode on the river after the queen comes, especially with all those players in there.
Mason,
Thanks for the quick response. The pre-flop capper and I ended up splitting the pot--he had the other two Aces.
Mike
coming from a holdem player what is better to learn omaha or stud? thanks
jc
ny
Can be found at:
http://www.cardplayer.com/brier.html
My version, not necessarily perfect:
10-20 game, limit holdem: u r in middle position with the KQo. five players in front of you limp in. You limp , and only the small blind limps in behind you. $80 in the pot and eight players.
flop is T 7 3r...blinds and two early limpers check. third early limper bets, and both middle limpers fold. Should you raise, call, or fold?
What do you all think?
I would likely call with my probable 6 outer given that:
a. The pot has 9 small bets;
b. I am last to act and therefore have little chance of being raised i.e. in a multiway pot, even someone with a set may not necessarily go for a checkraise;
c. Hitting a King or Queen on the turn can likely only make two pairs for a player holding a ten which is most likely the bettor. In other words, it is unlikely that anyone is playing Q7/Q3/K7/K3. If I held AJ, I would be less willing to call as now it's entirely possible that someone is playing A7/A3 in addition to AT.
d. The flop bettor is to your immediate right. In pots this size, the flop bettor will likely bet the turn even if a King or Queen hits and it doesn't help his hand. Thus, I am in good position to raise the turn and limit the field. This is an important consideration when deciding whether to peel one off. You have to consider how your position in relation to the position of the probable bettor on the *turn* interacts with the texture of the flop when you go on to catch a pair on the turn.
e. The board is rainbow and somewhat raggedy (although there are some straight draws out there). This is of course another important consideration. In essence, when you call with overcards, you have to hit twice. You have to catch one of your 6 outs on the turn and then you have to catch a blank on the river. A board like this increases the chances that the river will be a blank particularly if you are able to make it 2 bets on the turn and limit the field.
Based on all of the above, I would call.
You also have a backdoor nut straight draw which is another reason to call.
As can be inferred from my posting this, I question the call. I am not certain however.
The limpers have something. What do limpers normally hold? Hands like medium pairs, high connectors, suited connectors and suited aces. The also tend to hold medium cards like jacks, queens and kings. Legit limping hands include KQ, KJ, QJ, KTs, QTsuited. We can see these hands are potential trouble to our overcards. One of them means less outs and a split possible.
Even if said hands have missed the flop, we are both possible dominated (QT now leaves us with only three outs, KT, none, for example), and carded. By carded, I mean some of our outs can be legitimately considered dead. For example, QJ, who will now likely fold, takes away one of so-called outs. I think it is correct thinking to assume that the limpers had something before the flop. Normally, with five of them, I would guesstimate two of these outs are gone, on average, to be safe.
So we are left with 4 outs, none to the nuts, with plenty of redraws. So, not including implied, what would we need for a nut four outer? I would say about 11-1. Regarding implied odds, this is a dangerous game indeed, because you are not drawing anywhere near the nuts, may be dominated or almost completely drawing dead to a made set. Additionally, with eight people seeing the flop, redraws are bound to be plentiful. So implied odds are probably negated by the potential of reverse implied odds.
There is also the danger of four people remaining to act. Yes, they have already checked, but thats how a checkraise starts.
So if we assign this draw an equivalent of 4 nut outs and do not consider implied due to the possibility or reverse implied, we are left with a 11-1, getting 9-1 with a threat of a checkraise.
In reality we have somewhere between zero and seven outs. Zero outs when drawing absolutely dead (which is almost impossible) to seven outs when all your outs are available and clean (which is also almost impossible or at least very unlikely). ( I use seven outs, generously assigning a full out to the backdoor straight. None of these outs are to the nuts (except the runner runner straight) and many of them make us costly second bests hands.
Considering all of the above, as well as Brier's and skp and others views, what do you all think about that call?
Regards.
I said I'd raise often in response to a similar post in the Begginer's forum.
By raising you open yourself up to a reraise. So the raise cuts your draw from 9-1 to about 5-1 (assuming the original bettor and no one else calls). A reraise on the part of the flop bettor would now reduce your odds to 11-3, with little chance of a free card. On the occasions when you are checked to on the turn, this disallows the option to raise the flop bettor and cut off the field when you hit(as skp correctly pointed out), somewhat offsetting the advantage of the free card when you don't hit.
Would you raise a gutshot here?
I do not agree that a raise is normally the right play, but of course I could be wrong.
Regards.
As I posted in the beginners forum, if you have "good control" over the player often you can get it heads up and take a free card on the turn if you miss. If you make your hand on the turn and its good (same situation as calling except pot is bigger) you make more money. If I got reraised I would fold. Yes there's a risk but so what? I'm not saying it's always right but when it is it's very right IMO.
Backdoor and skp,
I must confess that up until I read the forum, I probably called with overcards less than 99.9% of the poker playing public. I still tend to call less than most, and I would want a safer board (e.g., 9-6-3 rainbow) and better position most of the time.
But it is amazing how compelling both skp's and backdoor's arguments are. Against typical players I would tend to fold, but typical in my game include lots of checkraisers. I don't like having to call two bets on the installment plan and I worry about making a hand that is not all that strong even after I hit. So in this sense I agree with backdoor.
That being said, I find skp's reasoning very sound. If you can usually see the turn for one bet (the limpers don't checkraise much) AND the original bettor has a lot of follow through (if you hit your overcards) then calling is probably right.
I played nine hours today and I have to say that reading these posts is just as much fun and interesting. Good job.
Regards,
Rick
skp's reasoning makes sense thats for sure. overall, i think it is the safer path to fold in these types of situations. Do you know how to account for all the variables and possibilies of drawing dead? How do you adjust for the fact that you have six/seven outs and maybe drawing dead. I believe 11-1 is a good estimate but I don't know for sure. Of course more money in the pot could also mean more danger too (more players, for example). How did you feel you did folding overcards all the time? A small time pro that I know always always always folds overcards with more than two opponents and he has done well but in small limit games for small rewards.
I have routinely folded in this spot and similar and have done very well.
Regards.
backdoor,
Before I read the forum, the few times I did call with overcards it was usually AK or AQ. The simple concept that KQ is usually safer never occured to me at the time.
Although skp's position arguements make sense, I still prefer to call with overcards when my call closes or almost closes the betting. I also prefer that no card be higher than a nine and I have a backdoor flush or the board a rainbow.
Folding all the time can't be bad for loose games where hitting your overcard often gives someone two pair.
Regards,
Rick
-snip-
… and carded. By carded, I mean some of our outs can be legitimately considered dead. For example, QJ, who will now likely fold, takes away one of so-called outs. I think it is correct thinking to a …
-snip-
So if we assign this draw an equivalent of 4 nut outs and do not consider implied due to the possibility or reverse implied, we are left with a 11-1, getting 9-1 with a threat of a checkraise. In reality we have somewhere between zero and seven outs…
-snip-
Argh! You can’t do that! If you start including the Ks and Qs in the opponents’ hands, you have to take into account the non-Ks and Qs as well.
23 cards have been dealt.
We know exactly what 5 of them are.
If I understand correctly the cut off and button folded. In such a loose passive game its unlikely either of them have a K or Q.
That leaves 14 cards in the hands of the other players seeing the flop. You make the conservative estimate that two of your outs are in their hands. Leaving four outs.
If we go with that, then there are 4 outs in the remaining 29 cards. This gives you odds of just under 6-1.
In other by your own estimate the odds of hitting a K or Q have improved over the first degree estimate of 6 outs in 47 cards.
In fact although your argument is fallacious I would tend to agree with your conclusion that the odds of a K or Q appearing on the next cards have dipped a little below 6/47. This is because I would tend to place the number of Ks and Qs in the opponents hands as slightly more than two. However I would judge if you both hit, its about 2 to 1 that you’re the dominating party.
Hmmm all in all I think the first degree estimate of 6/47 or about 7 to 1 is good enough.
Your post illustrates the difference between math and poker.
My post wasn't a math post but a poker post. I am not trying to determine the probability of how many cards are out and how many cards are remaining. In order to avoid the use of a term I call a fulcrum, I didn't explain it well. I was trying to assign an equivalent number of outs considering the number of players and the possibility of being dominated. There is no way to really do this mathematically, I don't believe. (If there is let me know) By creating a fulcrum we can now estimate the approximate odds required for our draw. The only alternative is to know that you have between zero and seven outs and use your judgement regarding remaining players to act and possibly drawing dead factors. This is not an easy thing to figure out and does not lend itself to easy mathematics.
I did say "two of your outs are in their hands", and that was a bad explanation. but, I also wrote, "we can assign this draw an equivalent of four nut outs..." Now how can I assign it an equivalent of four nut outs when it is not to the nuts? I can't. Its and EQUIVALENT. It may be wrong. I don't know. Its an attempt to quantify poker knowledge, not a math question. How does your method, (correct math wise) account for the times that your opponents hold KK, QQ, or KQ or a set.? It doesn't of course.
Do you understand what I am trying to say?
You are welcome to take seven to one.
Thanks for your input, at least someone's reading these posts, they are a lot of work and it doesnt pay well.....
yes us lurkers do read your posts and they are highly regarded...gl
Backdoor, I read all your posts as I can follow your explanations easier then most. I appreciate the work and thought process all the posters put in, as it is a immense help to folks as green as I am. There are some folks who can figure these problems out on their own, I just don't happen to be one of them. I need a helping hand to push me in the right direction. LOL....okay, sometimes I need lots more then that. Thanks to you Backdoor, and the rest the posters, the help is valued, and appreciated. Buckcp
backdoor I think you are one of the best posters on this forum and I always read and value your opinions. Don't get discouraged about the pay. Why just a few weeks ago David Sklansky stated that he was tripling my salary!
Unfortunately I am in the Malmuth Department, and there is no money in the budget for raises.
While you are better off, ya gotta really admire the lucky ones in the Ray Zee division, all them perks.
Regards.
Sorry for being picky.
If I understand what you want to do, is to determine your chance of winning the pot in terms of outs. So a Q is not a full out because of the chance a Q gives someone a better hand, or someone might redraw? So is the Qh one out, half an out, three quarters of an out? Do you work this out by instinctive judgment or several pages of mathematics?
I think its perfectly possible to do this sort of thing mathematically. Just assign a range of hands that the limpers would call pre flop with. Give some simple rules about how they would behave on the various streets and just hack it out. Maybe if I get an afternoon free… Often doing this sort does not tell you anything useful. Sometimes it can give good insight, and it can be nice to confirm that ones looser reasoning is correct.
Still it’s a lot of effort, and most people would say its not worth the it.
Note this is not what I was doing in my previous post, where I was answering the question what is the probability that a K or Q will be the next card, which seemed to be the calculation you were doing. Which of course does not address the issue of how useful a K or Q would be.
Well you have my point now exactly. I have done this "mathmatically" if you will. But you will find that it quickly bogs down into what assumptions you use and such. If you want to create a simple version of this fulcrum...take the limpers, in this case five (not seven, as I don't include the blinds for obvious reasons), and estimate what kind of cards they hold. Determine in a pure sense what kind of odds reduction you would have in terms of Ks and Qs. But you must also try to factor in an allowance that this is not purely K and Q thing, its more complicated than that.
Extreme illustration:
Imagine a sitution where none of you opponents held a K or Q. You might conclude that is excellent..you now have ten cards reduced and your chances increase from 6/47 to 6/37. But of course if someone also holds a set here, you are up the creek without a paddle to use a technical term. Not only are you drawing dead, but you are drawing dead with lots of chances for it to cost you. Additionally, any adjustment should be pro rated back to "out of 47" format for ease of use, as was my "two out" fulcrum adjustment.
What we need in poker is not some vast complex series of equations, but simple easy to implement shortcut adjustments. I go out of my way avoiding math in all my posts as it is boring and of limited use (when it gets complicated, I mean. I am not talking about basic poker math stuff). That is what my fulcrum above is. I have tinkered with them and believe most of them are pretty close to what would be arrived at in pure math terms. But I'm not worried though, because I can always just resort to my experience and judgement.
Anyway, this thread is old now and its getting boring. Wait until you see how fallacious my other fulcrums are. But I think I am going to keep them in the drawer for now.
Regards.
10-20 game, limit holdem: u r in middle position with the KQo. five players in front of you limp in. You limp , and only the small blind limps in behind you. $80 in the pot and eight players.
flop is T 7 3r...blinds and two early limpers check. third early limper bets, and both middle limpers fold. Should you raise, call, or fold?
I think that if I am going to continue on with this hand I raise here...
A raise could puts lots of pressure on drawing hands as well as weak 10's who may call one bet, but not two increasing my outs.
It will usually buy me a free card on the turn which I will be happy to take if I miss.
It could win me the pot in a showdown if the the bettor has a hand like 89 which is not impossible.
It will help me define the hands of anyone who calls.
I could see raising or folding in this spot depending on what I know about my opponents, but calling would not be in my arsenal here.
I have been playing hold'em for twenty years. known as a tight agressive player with good discipline. I play 15/30 or 20/40 four days per week in a 11 handed loose game. I have only had two bad years in twenty however My bad run began in may of last year. I could usualy book some kind of win weekly till last may. Now I have gone eight sessions without a win. Everthing gets beat on the turn or river. Last Monday I had pocker AA,s six times in four hours. Lost on every one and many against two players. I have KQs in big blind flop three kings loose to AK. I again have KOs in big blind raise by player in late position three take flop. Flop is QQ8 two of us flop three Q,s and the raiser had pocket 8's. Few hands later I take flop in middle position on 8,10 suited five callers. I flop a flush only to lose to turn card pair to make someone a full house.I seem to get pocket aa,kk,qq,jj raise and lose on every hand. I play suited connectors in multiway pots and never flop a draw. I gone for eight plays and never flop a set. I have read mason,s tip's on running bad to no avail. Many sessions are producing 1500 to 2000 losses.I have tried to remain in control and win the first pot I enter with little success. It seems like I seldom start out ahead lately. In the last week of December I booked three good wins in a week to just loose my wins the following week. Part of it is the game I play in. Eleven handed and a raise will bring in players. I seldon if ever go on tilt however I have noticed that I have been making at least two mistakes in a session. I am interested in any advice from somone who has experienced this kind of run. I like to think that skill plays a good part in winning however My card have been breaking all percentages in negative performance. I did not play this week and I am thinking of laying off for some period of time. It,s hard to not play when you love poker but my mental state is not good and also the I have lost a great deal of money. I have read every book etc. and love to read the comments from this web page. Any and all suggestions will appreciated. It seems like many messages ask abut how to play the hand with the hand seldom losing. How to play AK,AA, KK, QQ, is not my problem. it's how do you win with great cards.
When you say, "I did not play this week and I am thinking of laying off for some period of time.", it sounds like taking a vacation from poker is an incredibly rare event for you. Do yourself(and the people in your life) a favor and take that extended leave...the longer the better. [Twenty years without regular vacations--whew!]
Laddie,
I had a similar run last year, and it lasted for several months. I had never experienced such an extended losing streak, and I began to question my ability (and sanity!). Previous to this, I've always had a solid hourly rate in the limit I was playing, and a good ratio of winning:losing sessions.
I did take a break of about a month. I don't play every day, I'm a weekend-vacation warrior. Heres is the good news - the streak did end, and it has actually been running the other way lately.
Although Mason discusses extended bad streaks in Poker Essays as a distinct possibility, until it happens they seem impossible. You think, I have an edge over my typical competition, and it will pay out over a month, etc. Now I know what Mason describes is really possible, and has nothing to do with your skill. I agree with the previous poster that you need a short break, but only for your psyche. It doesn't seem possible, but the worm will turn! Give yourself a few weeks, read but don't play, look for a few fine-tuning adjustments, and come back fresh. I did, and it worked.
Ah, we love the pain.
Don't just take breaks. Make sure they worked. No matter how long your breaks are, if you feel shakey and afraid at the table after you start off poorly, you'll slip right back into the defeatist attitude. It's simply not fun. Wouldn't you rather be enjoying yourself? Wait til you can.
You might try going to the casino with only five or six hundred. That way if you do lose again, you won't lose much. And while playing, this protection might come as quite a relief, and being short funded might insure that you play your snuggest game.
Good luck,
Tommy
I think tommy's is the best advice. Taking time off doesn't mean that a bad streak is over. The fall of the cards determine that (unless you're on tilt, which you said you were not).
Going in short stacked will make you tighten your game, and riding out 4 losing sessions of $500 each is easier to make up that 2 losses of $2000 each.
Take a break if it will mentally recharge you and make you more alert at the table to put on your "A" game. Otherwise, just limit the losses during the bad run.
Good luck
You've been playing for 20 years and this is the first time you've had a run of cards like this? Wow.
natedogg
$15-30 hold'em somewhere in Northern California. Fairly tough game. "Joe" limps UTG (#3 seat). #4 folds. "Mark" in the #5 limps. #6 folds. I'm in the #7 seat with red aces, and I raise. Everyone else folds except Joe and Mark. These guys are decent players.
Flop comes 8c 4d 2d. Checked to me, I bet, Joe checkraises, Mark cold calls, I 3bet, Joe calls, Mark caps and we both call.
Turn is the 2h. Checked to me, I bet, Joe folds, Mark calls.
River is the Qs. Mark bets out. Like the moron I am I just call. Sigh...
sucker
I'll assume you were shown 88. Whenever you see someone cold call and reraise in the same betting round, it almost always means a set. Next time he's foolish enough to give you a freebie, take it.
I don't think Mark has 88, because then he would have raised the turn with his fullhouse.
I agree with Tommy Angelo and PiquetteAces on this point
Mark : QdXd Joe : A8
I think Mark has the diamond queen and another nearby diamond.
Tommy
That's what I thought too, except that if Mark is a decent player he: a) Should have raised from middle position with only one limper and high suited connectors, and b) shouldn't have capped it on the flop, out of position, with a draw.
But you're right, that's the only hand that makes sense.
My guess is QdKd
I totally agree either QJdiamonds or QK diamonds MAYBE Q10 diamonds
I was shown 8d xd (9d 8d to be precise). I assume that his bet on the river was intended to make me fold 99, TT, or JJ, especially since he was going to call anyway.
But it doesn't matter. The point was that by looking back on the way he played his hand, given that he was a decent player, there was no way I could be beat on the river, unless he was being super tricky checking and calling with a full house, trips, or QQ on the turn which is very, very unlikely. I had given every intention of paying him off, why would he not checkraise after I bet on the turn? The best he could have on the river, by the way he played it, is queens and eights (Qd 8d). Thus I should have raised with my aces up.
However, being the sucker that I am I didn't think it thru enough... I realized it at the moment I said "I call" on the river that there was no way I could be beat. (Of course this is easy to say now since I actually saw the hand, but still.)
I thought I would share this with the group since it's been a very long time since this kind of unusually clearcut hand reading situation has come up for me. Hopefully next time something like this occurs I will pay enough attention and think it thru enough to make the proper play.
sucker
IMO this was an excellent and valuable thread. Don't beat yourself up too much your opponent probably would have folded to a raise on the end.
15/30 Game. UTG raises, I am next to act and call with AcKc, cut off cold calls, and the BB comes in for one more bet. Flop comes Qd Jd Td. BB checks, UTG bets, I raise, cutoff calls, BB reraises, UTG folds and I and the cutoff call.
Turn is a blank and BB bets out. What is my play? Also should I have 3 bet pre flop and 4 bet the flop? Results in a seperate post.
Thanks, Calvin
Both I and the cutoff called the turn. The question here is: I should have raised to force the the cutoff to pay the maximum for his likely flush draw (he held the Ad). I was hesitent since even though I felt he was probably on the draw, either he or the BB could have flopped the flush. River was also a blank and the BB bet out. I called and won the pot as the BB had flopped the bottem end of the straight. He held 8h9h.
Calvin
BB should call preflop and raise on the flop with non-flush hands such as TT, 98s, K9s, QJs and any number of hands with just the Ad or Kd.
But there are maybe 2 dozen combinations of Axd, Kxd and Xxd, and quite a few of these are either the nuts or the nuts unless you have miracle cards. I can think of a lot of reasons he'd choose not to slowplay.
So I'd just call all the way. I would definitely have raised preflop if utg can raise with AJ, KQ or less, but otherwise just calling is OK although raising is probably better.
Calvin,
I haven't yet looked at your posted result. Whether to raise UTG pre-flop, to me, depends on UTG's style. I would favor re-raising UTG with suited slick unless he is prototypical rock. I think the value of blowing the field out behind you is considerable. As it happened, it looks like you may have been unlucky enough to flop a straight vs. a flopped flush. The question is, if & when do credit BB with the flush, and do you fold or just call down. There was another caller, so one of them likely hold a flush.
I think i would have 3 bet PF.
I would certainly have 4 bet the flop, since the BB could have a whole range of hands that you can beat, like AA, KK, QQ, JJ, maybe even Ad etc. With the cutoff just calling i assume he's on a flush draw, most likely the nut flush draw.
So when the turn is a blank with the BB betting out i would raise to let the cutoff pay for his draw and it's still very likely you have the best hand. However when you would have 4 bet the flop and the BB would still bet into you i would have called him down.
So far, I don't see any big problem with your play, but I hoped you raised the turn...
1st hand: I am in the BB with 7d9d. UTG calls, next guy (4th position) raises. 3 callers, SB calls, I call, UTG calls. 7 of us see the flop. Flop comes down 2c6d8d. SB checks, I check, UTG checks, raiser bets. All 4 in between call and I raise. UTG folds, original raiser 3 bets it, 3 of the other players call, and I cap it. 35 SBs. Turn in a Js. I check, raiser bets. 2 fold in between, one calls, and I call. River is a 7 of spades. I check, raiser bets, other guy folds, and I call. He throws the AdKd face up and I win with my pair of 7s.
Very next I pick up KdQd in the SB. Steamer open raises from UTG. Everybody folds, and I call. Flop comes AsKsTd. I check, he bets, I call. Turn brings an 8s. I check, he bets, I call. River brings the Jc. I check, he bets, I check-raise. He calls, and flips over 88. I win with my straight. He quickly burn't off his remaining 600 bucks and left.
Sometimes being the river rat pays off!
Those are kinda fun when you know he'll be over playing til he calms down
Joe -
Isn't it fun when you're not the one on tilt? I hope you remembered to be nice to the guy, even though you were taking his money. Some of the players I play with like to needle bad players, and it's just bad business, IMO.
Here's a play that put a player on tilt at our 10-20 table.
The only woman who was at our table is a regular Omaha player. We could tell because she was very selective in her hands, and she only continued playing when she had a monster. She was very easy to get out of a hand. Previously, I had caught quad Queens on the turn and beaten her heart flush for a huge pot. She wasn't as upset about losing the pot as she was upset about my slowplay check and call when I caught the case Queen. I was running pretty well, stealing more than my share of pots, and she was having problems adjusting to Hold'em with only two cards and no high/low nonsense.
I had AsQs up front, and I called pre-flop. She took the flop with four of us, and it came T T 3. I bet out...kind of a semi-bluff...if anyone had another ten, he would raise me. If no one did, I could still win if I got an Ace, a Queen, or a flush (only one spade out there.) The guy next to me called, and everyone else folded, including the woman. Turn was a blank, and we checked it. River was another 3, and now I thought I may have the best hand, tens and threes with an Ace. I bet, he called, and we both turned over an Ace to split the pot.
The woman was almost furious...she said she had 99, and then she said something about how "we're giving him (me) too much respect," and how I didn't bet my hands the way I should...which I took as a compliment, since she couldn't put me on a hand all session (but I made a mental note to switch gears and tone down the bluffing for a while.) She dumped about a grand at our table, which I think is pretty hard to do, even though she was winning a pot now and then.
Needless to say, she was definitely on tilt. I didn't do anything deliberate to needle her, but another player at the table went out of his way to give her the business. After she busted out, she got up to leave, and this player made some sarcastic remark like "go back to Omaha," which none of us appreciated at all because she may have come back in the future. Now, I seriously doubt she will...and she'll probably tell all her Omaha friends not to play with those guys at the 10-20 table.
Scott
im looking for hold em 8-16, 9-18, 10-20 games in l.a. area. how's the hustler casino? im looking for the game with the least rake/collection. any opinions? thanks in advance.
5 handed sb is tight player bb is me #3 loves to see the flop #4 good young player #5 older player who has read every book but playes passive unless he has the nuts. #3 calls #4 folds #5 calls(button) sb folds i get a free roll with A477 suits don't matter. i know this is a trap hand but i am stuck for free flop is 3sJs5c i bet #3 calls #5 raises i call as does #3 turn is 6d i check(nut straight,2nd nut low)my intention is to check raise but i am unsure about the spades.#3checks #5 bets i raise #3 cold calls #5 reraises(i know now this is A2 maybe with spade redraw) at this point is it better to call or reraise? well i reraise and make it 2 more bb to #3 and he calls. river is the 3c i bet #3 raises and then #5 raises i muck and the #3 rolls over 3d5sQs10d Question did i over play the hand? Please advise this is a great mix game with the potential to make alot of money.i know in holdem it is correct to make people pay for their draws i am not really sure about omaha.
In the future, this post should go on the Other Poker Games Forum.
I think you played it fine.
Definitely put future posts in the other games forum, you'll get more responses.
three limpers in fairly loose 10 20 game. me sb with jj i raise and get called by all three and the bb. flop is q23 off suit. i bet(?) and get 2 callers. turn comes j. should i check for a check raise or bet? i bet and got o callers.
I think you pre-flop raise with pocket Jacks from your small blind with 3 limpers is marginal. Make it one or two limpers and I would raise or change your pocket Jack to pocket Queens and I would raise.
On the flop, when you get called in two spots with a rainbow board like this, you have to think someone has a Queen. On the turn, I would attempt a check-raise since I would expect one of my opponents to bet his top pair of Queens and a free card is not the end of the world since your set is unlikely to get run down.
IMHO, You must bet again. Loose 10-20 players can have a draw to a straight, esp. a hand like A5s or A4s. Also, a weak queen which they won't bet is possible, or a smaller pocket pair which they won't bet but will call with. A KQ or AQ would have likely made some noise before now. QJ is unlikely, but will also raise your turn bet. Dito for a slowplayed AA. Weaker queens may not bet if you check.
Someone could also have a smaller set, who will raise your bet.
Good luck.
Dan Z.
If I'm sure someone will bet, I'll go for the check-raise. Otherwise I bet out. I hate losing a hand like this to a gutshot str8 when I gave out a free card.
Loose 10-20 game. UTG calls, as does the guy to his left, i raise in early middle with AKo. Three cold call behind me including the blinds.
Flop is K-8-3 rainbow. I couldnt be happier. Cheched to be and i bet, cold caller raises. From his play I am almost 100% sure he has a weaker king than I do, probably KQs. Everyone folds back to UTG, who then raises. Its hard for me to give him a set being that i believe he would have waited until the turn to lower tha hammer given this beautifully uncoordinated flop. Hard to give him two pair either, the board is pretty safe. I make it 4 bets, as i am SURE i have at least one of these bozos beat.
Turn is the 5c, putting two clubs out there but clearly this is not an issue. UTG bets, and I call. If he has K-8s or K-3 suited i certainly have outs. Flop raiser calls behind me, with what i am now SURE is the 3rd best hand. River brings an offsuit 9, UTG bets out unhesitatingly. Would anyone fold here with the pot being so bloated? I call (unhappily), and the bozo behind me makes a pitiful overcall. UTG shows down K-8d, I muck, and the overcaller shows everyone his KJc, as if it were ever good for a second.
Comments?
Unless you yourself are known to be an out of line player, you are pretty much marked with a good hand when you bet this flop into 5 people. UTG's check/re-raise should tell you you're beat. If this is so, it matters little whether or not you have a better hand than the guy behind you, since both of you are now drawing. Against a reasonable UTG, you should probably fold the flop.
Anyone else agree with folding this hand on the flop here?
I know it might seem insane to fold top pair/best kicker in this spot, but I count 9:1 immediate odds with the possibility of further raising behind you. You have to consider that at least some of your outs are negated. The very fact that this board is so harmless, is a bad sign for AK. I suppose the central figure in this hand is UTG. You need to determine if he would check/3-bet a worse hand such as KQ.
.
There was almost no chance of another raise behind me as the only player left to act had a relatively weak hand. If if UTG has two pair I may have outs. On the turn I may pick up more. I cannot believe folding in this spot is good poker. If anyone can correct me please feel free.
I hope you don't think I'm suggesting that you go around folding top pair/top kicker just because someone else shows strength. All I'm saying is that there might have been more than met your eye at first.
There was almost no chance of another raise behind me as the only player left to act had a relatively weak hand.
This is only a presumption on your part, probably aided by 'after the fact' analysis. You cannot possibly know this at the decision point of folding to 2 bets, calling 2 cold, or capping the flop. Weak players flop sets too. Consider that this player was willing to raise a pre-flop raiser with a king on board. Furthermore, UTG knows this, and was still willing to re-raise THIS player. I am only trying to correct your thought that because this flop was harmless, this must be GOOD action for you, when in fact, it might mean quite the opposite.
If these were very good players, it's possible UTG checked KQ figuring you'd bet a hand like QQ. Now, if the 3rd player would raise with a weak king, he might 3-bet a worse hand than yours. But this scenario while possible, is unlikely.
What's more likely, is that you experienced a slight case of tunnel vision, and saw your hand only as it related to this 'harmless' flop, without considering other possibilities. You need to at least consider that the combination of 'harmless flop'/excessive action, often means AK will be behind more times than not.
I stand by my original statement because it's true. You were getting 9:1 with the possibility of further raising behind you. In addition, some of your outs are almost certainly negated.
The pot is big. I may have outs. I may pick up more on the turn. Folding here is insane.
Capping the flop with an obvious worse hand, is well, not insane, just not good poker. I'm also quite sure I know what I'm talking about. Since you seem to have it all figured out, what was the point of your post again?
Once UTG three-bet the flop with no draws out there, I would assume that I am behind -- best case scenerio is I'm tied with AK. I would call the rest of the way. There is no way you can lay down top pair, top kicker with this board.
BTW, where was this game.
Same loose 10-20 game, only now looser. Several players will limp with almost anything. Two limp in from middle, I raise the button with AJo simply for value (their average hands are middle-offsuit 4-gappers. BB calls and so do limpers.
Flop: 9d Jh 4c. Checked to me and I bet, called only by one of the middle-limpers.
Turn: 9d Jh 4c 7s. Checked to me, i bet, he calls.
River: Kh. Given my opponent I do not care much for this overcard. He checks, I check. He shows down K-8 offsuit and drags the pot.
Comments?
Do you really want comments on these hands or did you just want to air your bad beats out of frustration? They are pretty normal hands with loose opponents.
I do think you overplayed your AK with the 4-bet on the flop though.
Be careful with your big unsuited cards; they can be alot of trouble in a [very] loose game.
This is not aimed at this particular hand - it sounds as though you played it perfectly.
I would have probably bet the river; do you have a tell on this particular player ? ( Nice check )
It is nice when they go to the river with only a handful of outs and then don't charge you when they get there.
P.S. I just logged on; if any of what I said has already been covered, mea culpa.
J-D
What's your question?>>>>> Or point?
You were lucky he did'nt bet the river other wise you would have lost another big bet.
Still its that odd bet saved here and there that make the difference.
"You lost much more money on this hand than I would have"(Jim Brier)
I limp on the right of UTG with TAs. Middle position average player raises, late position loose player cold calls.
I decide to reraise to induce fear to AJ and AQ in the intervalle. Besides I need to cover my limps reraises with big pairs (although I am fully aware that bare limps without reraising are far more important to cover my limps reraises).
Flop is 455 I bet both call...oh well
Turn is an ace I check middle player bets late position folds (he probably had something like KQ or KJ) I call
river is a 4 I check call
I took the lazy path by check calling the turn and river. I think I should have invested one big bet at most from the turn on against most players.
You probably should bet the river in case he decides to check behind with KK.
I don't understand the check-call on the turn at all. You represent a monster hand pre-flop by limp-reraising and then when the card you should have comes you check. I really think you should bet here. You could even consider check-raising to make the guy think you have something huge.
So what were your thoughts at the time you made the ckeck-call? I think it is unlikely that you get raised by hands like AJ or AQ but you might get them to lay down every once in awhile so it costs you the same but you might win a few more pots.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
No way he would fold AJ or AQ here. Even with a check raise on the turn. In fact he might fold this AJ or AQ if I would have bet the turn and check raised the river for some pride consideration. Still very unlikely.
The advantage of checking the turn is that he might bet hands that are surely beaten in a showdown from his perspective, that is 77,88,99,KQ. When you bet he would only call with a better ace and hands that are inconsistent with his flop play and his preflop play. That is he might slowplay KK on the flop but he probably would have reraised the flop especially with a third player. If he had TT-QQ he probably would have raised the flop. So I would either bet the turn and check fold the river or play the way I did.
In fact against a tougher player I would rather check fold the river than fold to a raise on the turn as he might do this raise with the 77,88,99.
Finally if he has AK(consistent hand) he would raise the turn and check-call is also preferable if you want to see the showdown.
So the only question is should you (check-call check-call) or ((bet-call and check-fold) or (bet-fold to a raise))? I am starting to prefer the second alternative because 77-99 and QK are not that likely and an average player is not that likely to bet them.
loose game. both blinds are extremely likely to call 2 bets cold. average player raises and it is believed they have a marginal holding. holding aqo, should a player reraise the average player's raise? this makes both blinds misplay (assuming a random hand) preflop, but makes their natural tendency to call down with anything decent proper after the flop.
I'm in a very loose, very aggressive $20-$40 game. It was one of the best tables that I've ever sat in. With all the rumors I hear about California players, I imagine this table is much the same. There are capped pots preflop with any 2 suited cards, any Ax, and any pairs. Limpers typically come in with any connectors in every position. It was great, but I had this hand run down and I wanted opinions.
I'm in the BB with Js Ts. UTG brings it in and the next 4 positions call. The button raises and the SB and myself call as does everyone else. 8 players, $400 pot. This a good call?
Flop: Jc Jh 3c
I remember contemplating a check raise here for a couple of reasons. I'm not sure what was/is the correct play. I thought the check raise would be good to limit the field if I thought it would get checked around to the button, but I didn't think this likely. Any one of the players would bet to take a shot at the pot representing the Jack and anyone with a 3 would bet thinking they had a good two pair. I didn't doubt someone out there had a 3. I also thought about waiting until the turn so the pot would be built up a little bit and I could maxmize my winnings. I know if someone before the button has 2 clubs they will bet it out knowing the button would raise and they could get another raise in to inflate their odds and increase the pot if they hit.
I also thought that playing this hand straight forward would be best. Betting out the flop and hoping to put in as many bets as possible so if there is a flush draw out there I might be able to put enough pressure on the pot that they would fold on the turn if they miss. On the other hand, a flush draw will probably put in as many bets as they could too.
Since I have much experience at these kinds of table I wasn't too sure the best play. What is the general consensus as to the best play?
~stephen
In an 8-handed pot, a call from the BB with JsTs is automatic. In fact, a re-raise is probably positive EV play here (in other words, a re-raise from YOU pre-flop will show profit in the long run).
This is a very similar situation to once I held JsTs, and actually put in a re-raise in a family pot (not 8-handed, but 7-handed I think). Flop came, like yours J-J-x. To make a long story short, I lost quite a few bets to KJo.
The problem with your hand here, is that you won't get much action unless you are beat. You have two options:
1) Slowplay, try to get people to stay in with two over-cards and 3's and hope someone who's getting good odds with two clubs or a pocket pair doesn't hit. Bet on every street unless someone else does, but do not raise. It's not ANY point in giving free streets for everyone here. Another plus point is that you won't lose much either, to a bigger Jack (eg. if the board shows Jc-Jh-3c-10h-6d, you might want to consider just calling a raise at the river here. Same goes if the raise comes on the turn.
2) Play it VERY strong. You will still get action from flush draws, loose players with something like A3 and big pocket pairs. Trouble is here, overcards and poor 3's will probably fold. Bigger trouble is that you stand to lose a LOT vs a bigger Jack.
All in all, this is not the greatest of situations. You will only get real action from a better hand, really. Play it straight-forward. Taking down the 8BBs in the pot pre-flop plus some additional bets on the road (8-handed flops usually goes down to a showdown, really) is not bad at all. It will keep you going for an hour or so.
lars
I like the check-raise because it stands the best chance of narrowing the field, and the pot is already 16 bets. The second most likely outsome is that it builds a pot if players make bad cold calling errors. If the pot were small I'd probably bet it out. Even in games like this, betting out tends to keep the pot relatively small (the junk hands can't call) while giving the pairs close to correct odds to call.
First of all, a call here is automatic, especially against such a big field. On the flop, I'd probably just check and see what kind of action transpires. That should give you a good idea of what types of hands are out there. Assuming that someone bets, I'd go for the check raise. On the turn, if a non-club hits (unless it's the 10c), then I'd bet it out. The same goes for the river. My only real concern other than clubs is someone with a bigger Jack. It would be nice to see the results of this hand.
Buckshot,
Pre flop you had an easy call.
In general, I like betting out on the flop from the blinds with trips. Your opponents tend not to believe that you have it and will play hands that are almost dead against you. Unfortunately, with seven opponents the other jack can easily be out and you may not even be leading. So on the flop put in all the action you can. But on the turn and river you might slow down a bit once it gets narrowed down and you have an opponent or two who won't shake.
Regards,
Rick
I think unsuited its only worth a call.
On the flop I would do whatever was going to get the most bets in. I do not think there is a clear cut answer as to whether beting out or check raiseing is best.
How agressive was the flop action usualy? Were most flops being raised? were some of them being checked out? How tight is my image?
I don't know if your questions were rhetorical, but I'll answer them anyway.
How aggressive was the flop action usually?
If a player paired the flop and there was someone with a flush/straight draw the flop was normally capped.
Were most flops being raised?
See above.
Were some of them being checked out?
This never happened.
How tight is my image?
Everyone told me I was a tight player.
The action was crazy. I saw players cap all the way down on a gutshot draw with 3 players, sometimes putting in raises heads up with a gutshot or flush draw down to the river.
~stephen
this is an easy call.
depending on how agressive the button is, I would lay low until the turn and see what falls. If no club then I would probably check-raise the turn and I would check-raise for sure if the button continued to bet. If one of the two players to your immediate left comes out firing on the turn, and there is no possible flush, then I would just call. your kicker makes this a tough situation because you can't lay down yet you may be pounding the pot with a second best hand.
It was checked around to the button who bet and I called. There were only 2 other callers. I think the button sniffed out something was wrong because he gave a little sigh before the turn was flipped.
Turn: 9h
I bet it out and was called by the other two players and the button folded. I just knew there was a flush and straight draw out there.
River: 8c
I checked and the first guy bet and the second guy raised. I folded and after the first guy called I said, "straight and flush."
The first guy had 2c 5c, the second guy had 7s Ts. I still don't think I win the pot because the only flush draw would call it down.
~stephen
I read most of the posts y'all put on here, and most give pretty sound advice. I enjoy talkin' to the players who have an understanding of how this game is played. Though I disagree sometimes with the general concensus, it is nice to know that there are other players who can see all the little subtleties of the game.
I have an experience I wanted to share and get y'all opinion on it. I'll keep it as short as possible, but some of the details are necessary to paint the picture.
I live down in Houston and travel to the Lousiana border to play. The only game worth playin' is Tex Hold' em. Down here we play $10-$20-$40, where you can bet $20 or $40 on the river. I wish a few of you guys would venture down here and check the game out, because the level of competition here is so soft and predictable, I will soon be purchasing a new car all on winnings from this table.
There are no real players that I can see. There are a few who consider themselves pros but who would get eaten alive against tough competition. They raise UTG with 2 suited paints everytime and cap it with 78s with only 4 players.
The game is easy, to say the least. I've been playing in it for over 6 months and the worst I have finished for a session was down $60. A $500 win in about 10 hours is common place, numerous times, I've booked more than that. I would love to see y'all sit in on this game. That's why I'm anxiously awaiting my first trip to Vegas in April so I can see how the big boys play.
Anyways, I'm sitting at the game, in my usual 2 seat and just playin' tight and aggresive like you are suppose to. After about an hour, I'm up about $100. Then a player busts out and they call for a player from the must move. In sits a guy whom I will never foget. He sat in the 7 seat so basically he was directly across the long side of the table from me.
He had on shades with the brown/auburn looking lenses, kind of like what Dobson wore in the Poker Million except not as gaudy of frames. He was balding but still had enough hair to be slicked back. I'd say he was late 30's. But what caught my eye was the jacket he had on. It was black and made out of . . . heck, I don't know, nylon? It was shiny, button down. But most important it had "Bellagio" stitched to it.
Nobody cared, nobody even glanced up, nobody focuses on anything other than the 2 cards that are directly in front of them in this game, but I knew this guy was a player.
I think most typists find it easier to press the 'g' key than the ' key, so I find it strange that this post contains 2 "talikin'" s , 1 "playin'" and 3 "ya'll"s.
Put it this way: If someone wanted to write a story in which a Texan praised the person's play, he might make the Texan sound like this.
Obviously this was written with a little color. I like it.
So we settled into play, I kept an eye on him the whole time, seeing just how good he was. I won my share of my pots, and so did he, turning over solid cards each time. He stole one, I stole one. We never seemed to play a hand to the river where we were both in, but whenever one of us was still around to see that last card, we usually won.
Then a hand came up that meant virtually nothing to the table, but meant everything to us. I was to the left of UTG, he folded, I raised with QQ. All dropped around to the "Bellagio" Guy (BG) who reraised me. All dropped back to me and I called. Flop came all rags, highest card was a 7 or 8. I checked, he bet. I thought for a minute, showed him my queens and folded.
He kind of stood there for a minute, showed me KK and dragged the pot. From then on, we dominated the table. I felt above the table, beyond it. I still stayed with strong cards, but now, BG and I would cap preflop with our strong cards. We pounded every pot. Got callers quite often. One of us usually released on the flop, but I knew going in that we had the best of it.
Sometimes it seemed like I would build a pot for him, raising and trapping all the players who had call his bet for another one. Sometimes he built it for me, or secured it by checking raising me when I was weak to force the others to call 2 cold.
When the players began to realize that they would have to pay for inferior cards and tightened up, we simultaneously switced gears and loosened up. When we did loosen up, I have to admit, we caught our fair share of flops, but there felt like there was no risk.
On a few hands we reraised the river to get it heads up and showed A-K vs A-Q with all low cards on the board. No one thought anything of it though as we had been pounding all night.
After the smoke had settled, a mere 10 hours later, he had had enough and cashed out approximately $1700 above where he started. I stayed for another 45 minutes or so, and cashed out $1270 above my $700 that I had started with, a sizable win for only 11 hours of play. I wanted desperately to try and find this man and talk to him, to see what he had thought about our run, but he was gone.
I never said 2 words to this man, but through the game, we had become synchronized, in rythm. I played off him, off his hand, and it seemed like he played off me. We owned the table, yet never said a word to each other. It was a thrill to play with someone as good, if not better at this game than I was and to be able to play off that person.
So were we colluding? I never made an agreement to split anything. I was there to play, to gamble, with no guarantees to the outcome. He never said he would help me and I never said I would help him. We didn't meet afterwards and divide up the money.
But there was something that made me feel like there was no risk involved. At almost any given time I could tell you what he had, and I'm sure he could do the same, yet I didn't want to butt heads with him. We worked together to make money. There was no agreement, but that is what it felt like. Is this wrong?
Looking back, I see this experience as one of the best possible positions a good player can find himself in. I don't feel as if I've done wrong, but I do believe that those other 8 rotating players couldn't have won much while we were there.
It was a privilege to play with this man, one I will always remember. I consider him only real player to ever sit at my table. (except for when I sat across from J. Bonetti in a tournament one time). He is the best I have ever seen, and yet, I haven't seen him sense. Too bad, I could use some big wins like that on a more regular basis.
So what do you guys think? Anyone ever have an experience like that? Was it wrong to build a pot I had very little chance of winning for another? I had strong cards most of the time, and I turned over some big hands, but is the rest of my thinking wrong? And how much are those jackets at the Bellagio?
To be brutally blunt, I think your play of the first QQ hand against this guy shows that you have a lot to learn about playing limit hold'em, even at the mid limits.
Were you trying to "advertise" to the world that you are dreadfully weak-tight? Were you trying to slap the live ones out of their calling station funk and force them to think about something other than the two cards in front of their eyes? Or did it mean more to you to get the respect of the PLAYER when you should really be concerned with getting his money?
I know it is harsh, but these are the questions you should reflect upon if you want to learn something from this experience.
Good luck.
Hey Mike,
I'm not to worried about the play of that hand, that wasn't the point. I read the man for AA or KK and I go with my reads. I'm wrong sometimes, but I'm usually right. If you think laying down with a big pair when you think you are beat is weak-tight, then maybe that's what I am, but I don't think so. I respected the player, because of the cards he had been turning over and maybe, to some degree, because of the jacket.
Maybe I played that hand wrong, maybe I didn't, but that isn't the point of my post. I made a read in that hand and went with. If I had been wrong, I probably wouldn't be writing this, but showing him the Qs, showed that I had respect for him. He was confused by it for a minute till he realized (I think, can't be for sure) that I was showing respect. He returned the favor by flashing the kings.
It is playing together feeling that I am curious about, the unspoken agreement to attack the weaker players.
But isn't there always an unspoken agreement at the table between good players to attack the weaker ones?
For example, I was playing 15-30 at Bellagio on Friday and after a couple confrontations with the only other tight and decent player at the table we pretty much avoided each other (were never past the flop together) but played very aggresively against the other players who were showing worse cards or playing more timidly than we were. I have no idea if the other player thought about me, but I didn't want to go against hime without something big and we never ended up head-to-head after the first couple hands we played against each other.
Your situation is a bit different since you both recognized that building big pots pre-flop benefitted your tight pre-flop play. What I'm wondering though is, if you were both solid, tight players, how often would you both get hands at the same time that could both pound the pot?
Paul Talbot
I have to agree with Talbot here....if I'm one of two or three good players at the table, I'll "steer around" them and go after the live ones at the table. If I do happen to pick a fight with one of the other good players, I have a big hand to do it with....occasionally they can be bluffed too, but I'm probably just as bluffable. It just makes sense...why go up against the only other good player at your table with a marginal hand when you can wait until the hand he's already out of? Like that quote in Rounders, "when you watch the Nature Channel, you don't see piranhas eating each other."
I haven't seen this phenomenon of trapping the fish between the strong players when one of the "strong" players really doesn't have a hand that warrants preflop raising. Usually when that happens at my table, both strong players actually have strong hands, probably the result of tightening their requirements based on who's in the hand. The trapped callers are just along for the ride if they haven't folded already.
Sure, the cards can run over one or two players at the table at any given time. If I were in the Colonel's situation, the only thing I'd be worried about is those players wanting to play with me again after taking so much of their money.
Scott
It's a very fine line that you were walking.
Using the "common knowledge" of the situation you were both in, in order to deviate from your "standard" or "normal" style (whatever those are or may mean), is fine. Really, it's a form of adjusting to the game in order to improve your own result.
Using an understanding (even if it's non-verbal) between the two of you, in order to deviate from your "standard" or "normal" style (whatever those are or may mean, especially when it results in you making plays which you know are for his benefit, is not fine.
In the first case you are both, separately, adjusting (possibly simultaneously) to improve your separate lots.
In the second case you are adjusting as a team to improve your mutual lot.
I would have said you were on the right side of the line, except you mention occurances of building pots for each other. If I haven't taken this out of context, and you were aware at the time you were doing this, then I must conclude that you crossed the line.
Eric
You guys were protecting each others raises would be the common vernacular. I hope you only reraised with premium hands though, otherwise you were just being dumb, no matter how lucky it turned out.
If I reraised someone pre-flop with KK and he mucked QQ with a rag flop I think I would go after him all night. Did you ever get the feeling you were forced to make other tough laydowns throughout that session?
Basically you played good poker at a table with only 1 other good player and you both were rewarded accordingly
Colonel,
What in the world is going on! You're lucky the guy did not take all your money. He found a lake full of fish!!
10-20 game with some decent players and one player (Maniac) who played almost every hand, most to the river.
Here is an example: Maniac limps with Q9o, next player raises with AK, I three bet with QQ, the big blind calls, Maniac calls, AK caps, I call, BB calls.
Flop is: 4-6-10 rainbow. Check to AK who bets, I raise, BB folds, Maniac calls, AK calls.
Turn is a 7, fourth suit. You know the rest -- check/check/bet/call/call, 8 on the river.
Anyway, that's to give you a flavor. Later, Maniac raises first in and it's folded to me on the button with AK. I reraise. BB calls as does Maniac. BB just sat down but I remember him being loose aggressive.
Flop is 5d5h6s. Check to me, I bet, BB check raises, Maniac calls, I call.
Turn is 9c. BB bets. Maniac calls. I fold.
River is a 6. BB bets, Maniac calls. Get this: BB turns over Js8s for two pair, jack kicker. Maniac MUCKS HIS HAND.
Obviously, I had some info on the Maniac and if he had check-raised me, I would have called him down no matter what. But with little to go on with the BB, should I have called down with AK?
Bear in mind that the BB just sat down -- I don't think he knows how bad the Maniac plays yet.
This player is not a maniac. He is a calling station. A maniac is one who RAISES wildly with very strange cards and continues to raise after the flop with even the most marginal draws.
natedogg
Firstly, what you are describing is the play of a complete fish, but not a maniac. There IS a difference. Other than that, I think you are being too results orientated. The BB plays his hand SO badly that is causes you to lay down the best no pair hand. Big deal. Continue to play well. Doesn't sound likely you'll have too much trouble getting the best of it from both of these players.
I don't think any of the previous reply is true. BB played his hand very well. He figured by check-raising, he could knock out the maniac who wouldn't call for two bets, and get it heads up with a player he could push off any hand but a big pair. You just CAN'T lay down AK there, you will get totally run over by any player even slightly perceptive. BB generally would wait till the turn to raise if he has a 5. Other than that, you're drawing to 6 live outs, enough to call the turn. On the river, the chance that BB is running a stone cold bluff is high enough that you can call. You've also counterfeited the possible hands 22 33 and 44.
I would have made it three bets on the flop. BB will almost certainly not cap now he has failed to push the maniac off his hand and you are showing a lot of strength. They will both check to you on the turn and you can bet again, with good outs if you are losing and still the chance that you have the best hand. On the river, check behind them. You let BB take control of the hand by playing passively and as a result he got the free money from the moron, not you.
Chris
"He figured by check-raising, he could knock out the maniac who wouldn't call for two bets, and get it heads up with a player he could push off any hand but a big pair."
The maniac's (who turned out not to be a maniac), presence after the flop, was probably the reason Scott folded the turn. Heads up, what makes you think Scott folds to the BB's check/raise?. So, what does check/raising without a hand accomplish for the BB, other than lose money?
-------------
"On the river, the chance that BB is running a stone cold bluff is high enough that you can call."
Heads up, I agree. But making a habit of overcalling a third player is gonna lose you a LOT of money in the long run.
-----------
"I would have made it three bets on the flop."
Again, heads up maybe. But making it 3 bets without a hand or reasonable draw, against two opponents who have put in 2 bets before you, is throwing your money away more times than not.
------------
"BB will almost certainly not cap now he has failed to push the maniac off his hand"
Now you're doing some great 'after the fact' analysis, but... In real time, this assumption requires too great a leap to conclusion.
----------
"...and you are showing a lot of strength."
Or showing that you're capable of being a slight maniac yourself.
---------
"They will both check to you on the turn..."
If you've found a game where your opponents will always play this weakly, God bless you. Most of us don't have this luxury.
--------
"On the river, check behind them."
I agree.
--------
"You let BB take control of the hand by playing passively and as a result he got the free money from the moron, not you."
But the BB took control on the flop with a jack high nothing! (however, I do like his bet on the turn with a gutshot after no one showed strength on the flop).
I agree with all of your ideas, and if it were heads up, I'd have no argument. But what I'm saying is that the third player complicated things for Scott. You can't go around splashing chips and raising multiple opponents at whim, or just because it's aggressive poker, without a hand or some other good reason.
Exactly. Thanks.
BTW, the guy is certainly more fish than maniac, but on the first hand he raised preflop with 4-8s (online so I called up hand history). Bad terminology but I still think it's an interesting situation.
I am in the bb in a 20-40 Planet Poker game with KcQs. 2 middle position limpers and button limps. sb calls. 5 way action.
Flop: 10s10h5s
Everyone checks.
Turn: 9d
I bet and button calls.
River: 4c
What should I do now?
I think I would bet if I thought the button would fold an Ace. If you think the button had paired the 9 then don't bet and just check. It would be hard to believe that the 4 helped him.
~stephen
Bet of course, and prepare to lose.
If button wouldn't lay down two pair, betting only helps if you drive off Ax or perhaps get a call from a lesser no-pair hand. More likely button just folds or you take the worst of it either by running into a better hand or getting bluff-raised with a busted draw.
Since you can beat most busted draws, check and call. (If the button rarely or never bluffs, check and fold.)
There's a small psych benefit of checking and calling too: you cannot be bluffed and so never have worry that you were blown off your pot.
Pre flop: Borderline raise/call.
Flop: You don’t really have anything so check got to be ok.
Turn: With two overcards and a gut-shot, it looks like a sound semi-bluff. You might even be winning.
River: You have set up your River bet on the turn, so it would appear consistent to follow through. However would the button fold an ace or call with a worse hand?
Unless there is something special about the button, I will bet out and not second-guess myself.
I doubt that button was on a flush draw because he most likely would have bet the flop with that. He could've still been holding a ten, ill-advisedly slowplaying it. On the other hand, I can't believe you've fooled him into thinking you were slowplaying trips. My guess: he was holding a 9 with a decent kicker and was planning to call if you bet. What did you decide?
I would check call.
If he called the turn with ace high or any pair then he would call the river with those hands. Besides it is very likely he would check down those hands.So when he bets after you he has either a big hand or a busted straight draw (7-8 or JQ) that you beat
I checkcalled and snapped off the button's bluff (he had 87).
Essentially, I was thinking along the lines of what Renaud and Matt said.
I figured:
a. The guy probably would not call the turn with Ax as the pot is fairly small and he could be drawing stone cold dead. So, there was little danger of losing to a bigger busted hand. Also, if he called the turn bet with Ace high, he would probably call again on the river and hope that I was on a draw.
b. He would certainly not fold a 9 or a pocket pair on the river if he called the turn. I would note that it is unlikely he has a pocket pair as he would likely bet on the flop if he did. If I check, he may check back a hand like J9 or something.
c. He may bluff with a busted draw. He certainly would not call my bet with it. Worse, he may bluffraise with a weaker drawing hand and I would have to fold. The only legitimate drawing hand he could have which beats mine would be AsXs which I don't think he would have given his flop check in last position. Besides, if he had that hand, he may call my river bet anyway.
All in all, checkcall seemed to be the best alternative.
Same Planet poker 20-40 game last night.
I am on the button with KcJc. A weak player limps in middle position. The bb just came into the game. I have never seen him before. The sb plays well.
I raise. Both blinds and the limper call.
Flop: 10c9d5s
It's checked to me. I bet. Sb raises. BB folds and limper coldcalls. I 3 bet it with a view to getting a free card on the turn (?).
Turn
The free card trick does not work. sb bets and limper calls. Except I don't mind the betting because the turn is the lovely Qc.
Of course, I raise. Sb 3 bets. Limper coldcalls. I cap and they both call.
How should I play the river if:
a. The river card is a club and sb bets and limper calls.
b. The river card is a club and sb checks but limper bets.
x
I would say you could raise in either case. Your second scenario would be the most dangerous for you, but either way you still have the second nuts.
Answers to questions:
a) The river card is a club and sb bets and limper calls.
I would have to put SB on Ace-Ten or a set. Once the limper calls and he's a bad player he could have anything. I don't think I would be afraid of the limper and raise.
b) The river card is a club and sb checks but limper bets.
Here's a situation where the limper could have only a pair of Tens and doesn't "see" the flush is out there. I've seen this alot. I don't think I would raise in case he does have the nut flush. I would call.
~stephen
Got to run but in situation a) I would raise I'd be hard pressed to put the sb on a nut flush and couldn't believe that the weak player would not raise with it. In situation b) I would call. Even though I wouldn't be that concerned about the weak player having a nut flush, you're likely to get a crying call from sb. So you're only risking one bet to win the same amount of money.
With 2 nd nut flush wouldn't you raise in either case?
I put the SB on a set so in a) raise with your 2nd nut flush and hope the weak player has a weaker flush, str8t or two pair hand. In situation b)if you want the overcall from the SB you could just smoothcall but he may or not call anyways and if you raise the weak player will call so you get an xtra bet from him.
If re-raised, c'est la vie, pay off the Axs, right?
forgot you were in the BB but I would still raise and payoff a re-raise.
skp,
I haven't read the other responses yet. Here's my two cents:
a)the river is 2c, the SB bets, and the limper calls.
Most weak players usually aren't sophisticated enough to call hoping for an overcall, and I expect that he would have raised had he made the flush since he expects that you will pay off anyway. So that leaves the SB. Judging by the previous action it certainly looks like you have the SB beat. I mean, how the hell can he expect you to have a straight? And it's unlikely he gave you all that action on the turn with just a four flush and a pair (or a four flush and straight draw). He certainly does not have 9c 5c... a set seems most likely. So in this spot I would raise for value.
b)the river is 2c, the SB checks, and the limper bets.
Weak players usually need a pretty good hand to bet on the river. Plus with all the action you guys have been giving him, he is almost certainly not bluffing. If you raise here you may get reraised. On the other hand, if you call, you may get an overcall from the SB. And although it looks like you are beat by a backdoored flush the pot is so big you cannot comfortably fold unless you really know your player. So in summary I would call in the b) scenario. It is the superior play to raising in this spot.
sucker
Does the flush card pair the board? If so and the SB bets, he has a full house or quads (he has a set or QT on the turn, and the board Q and T are clubs). Call.
If the river doesn't pair the board, you can raise regardless of the action. Only the limper can beat you: if he bets or raises his "logical" hands are Ac9c or 8c7c, but he could have two other clubs. You are therefore odds on to raise, and he may well reraise with a lesser flush giving you a bonus.
I would have analyzed the questions the way Tom and Sucker did.
As it turned out, the river play was strange to say the least. Sb bet out. Limper called. I now figured I had the green light to make it $80 based on what Tom and Sucker have pointed out. Sb calls and limper makes it 3 bets...doh...I call and sb folds. Limper shows Ac6c and takes down a pretty big pot....oh well...weird result but nevertheless, I agree with Tom and sucker.
Weak player calls two cold on the flop with an overcard and a 3 flush. Hmmmm..... And on the river he overcalls with the nut flush and then raises. Well the river makes a little more sense sort of but the flop play is mind boggling. I guess I would surmise it to say that he is a either horrible, horrible player or he knew what was coming.
He is a horrible player and a regular donator. He lost another rack in about 3 hours last night despite winning that big pot.
There was a fairly interesting thread over on the small stakes Forum a while back. I am posting it here to get more opinions. It's a problem that is not likely to come up very often but I found it interesting for that very reason.
Hero is in the bb with the all-mighty 53 offsuit.
There are 2 late position posters. A middle position player raises. Everyone folds including the 2 late position players.
There are therefore 5.5 small bets in the pot when it is bb's turn to act.
Is a call from BB out of the question? What do you guys think?
BTW, you are to assume that the middle position player wouldn't raise unless he had a fairly decent hand (although truth be told, I think bb may have a tougher decision to call here against someone who might make dubious preflop raises).
I think that only a person who has been hitting WAY more flops than they should could even THINK of calling here. You are in terrible position, you have terrible cards, and just about the only thing you can hope for is a nice straight draw, which will still cost you a lot of money to play. I would fold this hand just about every time.
natedogg
Why do you say that you need to flop a straight draw or some other monster draw? Will not a flop like 983 suffice?
BTW, my position on this is in that other thread on small stakes. I thought that 53 was a little too weak of a hand to call despite the 6:1 preflop odds. Make it 54s or perhaps 87 offsuit, I think I would call for sure.
But the idea that calling here is criminal is something that I don't quite understand. It tells me that people give too much attention to preflop raises and not enough attention to pot odds and how heads-up play differs from multiway play.
Note that if the 2 late position players had called the preflop raise, I would no doubt fold my 53 despite getting better pot odds because now I can't be very happy when I get that 983 flop.
I misread the post and was thinking that there were two limpers and then there was a raise. In which case I would fold 100% of the time.
I still think that when a player raises into two posters, knowing that they will likely defend, my 53o from out of position is next to worthless and 95% of the time not worth another small bet. But that's just me.
Now that I'm more clear on the context, let's take your question about why not a flop of 983? Why wouldn't I like that flop?
I still hate this flop. Now I've got bottom pair and I'm out of position. If the player is aggressive, he's going to raise me on the flop AND the turn if I'm betting my bottom pair.
Even if he missed the flop, there's a good chance I'll lose by the river. I'm going to be putting in a lot of money to see a river that I'll almost definitely have to check and call. I just don't see how this can be a winning play long term. UNLESS the raiser is absolutely predictably weak-tight and will fold on the flop to a bet from me. Barring that situation, I don't think that playing 53o from out of position against a raiser will get the money too often.
natedogg
Once you get that 983 flop, you are probably ahead. Obviously, you can't assume that you are ahead to the extent that you would go to war with the other guy on the flop or turn but on the other hand, you certainly should not give up your hand too easily either.
There are lots of ways to play this hand now. i.e. bet the flop or perhaps checkcall the flop and then bet the turn. I may even just checkcall to the river assuming 2 paints don't come off. I may have to give it up if an Ace hits the turn.
But it's probably wrong to routinely bet the flop and then fold to a raise. It's probably also wrong to checkcall the flop and then fold on the turn if he bets again after you check.
Now, note that you wouldn't go around calling raises all night and playing bottom pair this way all the time. You would get killed. But this is an unusual situation with the 6:1 odds you are getting preflop.
skp,
I posted below before reading you or natedogg. It seems we all agree that it is not worth a call against two or three opponents. But we also agree that having one opponent makes the hand much easier to play. I think it is an easy call (unless your opponent is super tough) but I won't argue with anyone who thinks it is close.
The fact that you are head up is an important concept that applies to blind play. For example, when defending your big blind against a late position steal there are far more hands you should play (or reraise with) if the small blind does not call than if the small blind calls. And if you are the small blind you should go out on a limb with a reraise to drive the big blind out with more hands than you should just call with.
Regards,
Rick
How would you play the flop and turn, assuming a moderately aggressive opponent?
Personally I would probably do something like bet the flop and call a raise. On the turn, I would either bet and call a raise, bet and fold to a raise, check and call a bet, or check and fold to a bet depending on the opponent, although against most moderately aggressive opponents I wouldn't check-fold. Bet and fold to a raise would probably the most common, except against opponents perceptive enough to realize that the stop and go means I'm probably relatively weak, and who like to pull "raise the turn and check behind on the river plays," in which case I'm obligated to call the raise.
That's why I hate stop and go plays, but I don't much like 3-betting the flop with bottom pair/no kicker/no draw.
-Sean
I generally would not checkraise the flop which is what most people do in this instance.
I would either bet and call the raise or just checkcall.
My turn action would therefore depend on the flop action I took and of course the turn card. There are too many forks there to discuss but if it's a non-broadway card, it is highly unlikely I will fold. Against an aggressive opponet, I may very well checkcall again.
If the turn card is a Ten or nine and had I bet the flop and been raised, I would probably bet the turn. I would also bet the turn if I hit a 3 or 5 and look to get a 3 bet in.
If I checkcalled the flop, I would not bet out on the turn if it's a Ten or 9 as that will look to my opponent that I am trying to pull the wool over his eyse and he may very well raise with just overcards and I may have to give it up.
I don't worry too much about giving free cards here as I only have one opponent and he therefore will typically have no more than 6 outs. If he has an overpair, I have 5 outs. Checkcalling (though seemingly weak) can often be the proper play. If he has AK, you got him by the proverbial balls on the flop and you shouldn't outplay yourself by getting aggressive and then folding to his aggressiveness on the footing that he must have a real hand because of his aggressiveness.
In other words, if I bet and get raised on the flop and then give him a free card on the turn, well so be it. Of course, if the river card is anything other than a Queen, KIng or Ace, I would bet my pair of 3's for value and expect to be called by his AK/AQ.
I participated in that thread and think that I would probably fold against most players. However, I think calling is a small mistake, at worst, and might even be positive value proposition if you consider implied tilt odds, advertising, varying your play, etc.
After all, it only costs you a single small bet, there are already 6 in the pot, and you only have to beat a single hand. The only way it becomes expensive is if you are against an opponent whom you will feel compelled to call down to the river if you pair up on a ragged board.
BTW, this is one of those situations where you could do a reasonable TTH simulation against typical opponents to determine the "cost" of calling here. Maybe I'll give it a try after work.
skp-
I goofed around with TTH on for a while on this problem. Based on analysis of 300 hands to simulate this situation, I think you are actually "winning" an EV of 1/2 a small bet by calling here as opposed to conceding your blind.
I set it up so that I actively played the 53o against programmed opponents, and fine-tuned it based upon my preliminary results to make it more realistic.
I concluded that the call actually makes more sense against a loose raiser, as you are less likely to be dominated by an overpair. But that is probably influenced by my reluctance to fold a pair in a heads-up that has 6 small bets in it pre flop.
If you are interested in trying it yourself on TTH, I can send you an email describing my methodology. It was a little tricky.
Michael,
I don't have TTH. Do you recommend that I get it?
Not really good for advanced experienced players. It has some good simulation capabilities that I can't figure out how to use. I only use it to teach newbies how to play. It is very good for that and pays for itself compared to the expensive real life learning curve.
Skp,
The three key points are 1) all the dead money, and 2) the fact that you will be head up versus one opponent and 3) have a hand that will not get in trouble due to domination.
You play for a pair or a straight draw or perhaps take a stab at a flop you think might have missed the raiser. With your legit made hands on the flop (including one pair) and draws you usually go to the river.
Not having a third party is critical. If a third party had called you have better odds but post flop you can get pushed around or squeezed off a hand too easily. I would fold if any of the posters or the small blind had called but I would call head up every time with the extra dead money in there.
Regards,
Rick
If we assume the mid-position player has a fairly decent hand, I would probably recommend a fold, because in my experience, raises don't vary nearly as much by position as they do in mid-limit games. Additionally, if the small-stakes game had a rake, you need to tighten up preflop so I might again recommend a fold. But if we assume a non-raked medium stakes game, and that the middle position raiser has at least a typical middle position open-raising hand, say 66/JTs/KQ or better, I think we can call here. Abdul recommends calling with as little as 54 or 42 vs. such an open-raise from middle position and that's assuming only 3.5:1 as opposed to the 5.5:1 here. It's also possible that the raiser has a weaker hand than a typical mid position raiser would have on account of the posters.
-Sean
Even against your biggest nightmare, 55, you need pot odds of only 7-1 to call here. Against anything else it falls to below 6.5-1, so you are profiting preflop from the call. The question is whether you make or lose money after the flop.
I think I would call if my opponent was fairly predictable postflop, would raise in this spot with many non-pair hands, or if I felt I had a very tight image.
Thank you for reposting this on the Medium Stakes Forum. I didn't have the courage to after the way I was shredded on the Small Stakes Forum.
It's very relieving to hear from many of the better posters on this forum that this play, while mavbe not correct, was in no way a horribly loose call.
My thinking at the time of the call was almost identical to what Rick Nebiolo pointed out.
There was dead money, I held a hand which was not likely to be dominated and was easy to release if I missed, and up against a lone preflop raiser. I figured most flops that hit me, miss him, and he would still likely bet my hand for me.
It's nice to know that I'm not as stupid as they (especially Smooth) said I am.
No problem but old Smoothie is indeed a very valuable poster. I just wish he would tone down his criticisms a little.
hey you i never said you were stupid remember. i liked your play. i just lacked the education to explain why. all i knew was that with that dead money you couldnt be far from wrong (as you and everyone else already pointed out). cheers, mike
.
-Sighted signs
Eagle eyed AB spotted these for your elucidation: Funeral parlor. Parking for clients only.
Showhouse advert. The shower door has been removed for your viewing pleasure.
At the hairdresser. If you want any dying, bring your own ingredients.
At the tailor. We have shirts for man with sixteen necks.
-YOU KNOW you're in California when:_ Your co-worker has eight body piercings and none are visible.
You earn over $250,000 and still can't afford a house.
You take a bus and are shocked at two people carrying on a conversation in English.
Your child's third grade teacher has purple hair, a nose ring and is named Breeze.
You've been to a baby shower that has two mothers and a sperm donor.
You have a strong opinion about where your coffee beans are grown and can taste the difference between Sumatran and Ethiopian.
A really great parking space can move you to tears.
A low speed pursuit will interrupt any television broadcast.
A man gets on the bus in full leather regalia and crotchless chaps. You don't even notice.
Your car insurance costs as much as your house payment.
Your hairdresser is straight, your plumber is gay, the woman who delivers your mail is into BD/SM and your Mary Kay rep is a guy in drag.
It's sprinkling and there's a report on every news station about "Storm Watch 2001".
You pass an elementary school playground and the children are all busy with their cell phones or pagers.
It's sprinkling outside, so you leave for work an hour early to avoid all the weather-related accidents.
You and your dog have therapists.
- There is only on play the correct play(Doyle Brunson)
-Today we are off to the bull ring of poker. Out comes the bull amongst cheers of anticipation of the crowd. Today will not be a good day for either the matadore or the bull. But what's this where is this matadore. Men on horses called picadors enter the ring. The bull charges in his rage and flicks his head to the left to hit the picador. The picador places a sharp lance in the bulls lefts shoulder. Again the bull charges and flicks his head left to hit the picador again the bull feels the sharp pain of the lance on his left shoulder. This continues till the bull no longer flicks his head to the left and the picadors feel the bull runs straight. Only then does the matadore enter the ring. The bull charges the matador but runs straight and the matadore easily avoids the bull and will surely die. If however the bull flicks to the right or left while charging the matadore he may kill the matadore. But his tendency has been cured by the picadors. Poker much like a bullfight requires you to cure tendencies of opponents and wear them down. If they like to check raise do not bet take a free card. Timid opponents must be bet agreesivly to make them fold. Bulls surely should not be bluffed they will not fold. People who bet the flop and not the turn should be called on the flop and bet on the river. If they bet to much call them down with weaker hands. If they like to make it three bets make it four with larger pairs or AK. You on the other hand must become unpredictable. You do not want have straight tendencies. Check raise sometimes, bluff sometimes, three bet with nothing sometimes and bet till the flop sometimes and to the turn and river other times.(Example courtesy Rick Greider Teacher of Champians)
Bravo, Bravisimo, Good one too!
vince
Get your hinnee back here. I miss my thai food eating buddy. Knock them dead. Taking an early out today.
"You have a strong opinion about where your coffee beans are grown and can taste the difference between Sumatran and Ethiopian."
Neither can hold a candle to Kenya AA.
J.F. -- reporting from SoCal.
Kenyan's have the speed but I hope not in poker. All the best. Play well and have fun. I still have not figured out how you guys catch the gazelles to eat.
"Your child's third grade teacher has purple hair, a nose ring and is named Breeze."
and after seeing the teacher, you're still not sure of its gender.
great points
Vince:
When you coming back to Vegas, I need to load up on some more cash for my vacations, 3 weeks in Mexico has been rough, but the bull is not dead
see you in a couple of days "Hosh"
Jace
Somewhat loose 15-30 game. My image is very tight, but I've taken a few tough beats recently.
Early pos loose player limps, relatively tight-aggressive player limps from middle, I raise from button with KQs. Blinds fold.
Flop comes 10-J-3 rainbow, none of my suit. LP bets, Middle player calls, I raise. LP folds, MP calls.
Turn is a rag. MP checks, I bet. He thinks for awhile, then reluctantly calls.
River is another rag. MP checks, I bet. He calls, then shows J-9s and rakes.
Should I have bet the turn? I really thought I could win right there, as I read MP as weak.
Should I have bet the river? I was sure it was my only hope to win the hand at that point.
I can't believe this guy called on the river, even with top pair, given my image. Could the fact that I was losing have affected the situation?
Thanks for your input in advance!
Pre-flop, I would not raise with King-Queen suited on the button but I would never say this was a bad play. For me, King-Queen suited is a funny hand. I don't like raising with it myself but I will call if someone else raises. This is an inconsistency in my own thought process that I have never been able to work out.
On the flop, your raise is fine because you were the pre-flop raiser and you are representing an overpair at this point. You have 14 outs with two cards to come between your straight draw (8 outs), a King (3 outs), and a Queen (3 outs). So you have a ton of outs if you get called or re-raised and you might be able to win it on the turn when a blank comes.
Your turn bet is absolutely correct. You must follow through with a bet here on the expensive street when your lone opponent checks to you. He will frequently fold and you have a ton of outs if he doesn't.
The river play is a problem. Without an Ace you have no hand to showdown which is why I don't like raising with King-Queen suited to begin with. You cannot win a showdown but given that your opponent made the critical decision of calling your turn bet it seems impossible that he would fold unless he was on a draw like Nine-Eight which you can beat anyway. I don't know what I would do. I would probably just check it down and save a big double bet.
I think your opponent's play was questionable but he did get a good result. His top pair/no kicker hand is suspect. He cannot beat Ace-Jack suited, King-Jack suited, Queen-Jack suited, or Jack-Ten suited which are hands you might raise with on the button, not to mention AA,KK,QQ or JJ. He is playing you specifically for AK or KQ suited.
I find KQ to be the most difficult hand to play. We've debated before on this board about which hand is better, AJ or KQ, and most people tend seem to prefer KQ, but I have a strong preference for AJ because at least when I miss I have an ace-high to show down, and I can beat the yo-yo who's been calling along with A7o.
Personally, I like raising with KQs before the flop to knock out weak aces.
Since you described the guy as relatively tight aggressive, I assume there aren't very many ace high hands he could be calling with, really only AK/AQ, and both would usually be raised before the flop. Therefore, I think it's perfectly fine to just check behind on the river and hope that KQ is good; that he's on Q9 or 98. The only time I'd bet is if I was up against a player who specifically check-calls/check-calls/check-folds, and those types would generally be considered "weak-tight" or "weak-loose," not "relatively tight-aggressive."
As far as why the guy called on the river, it generally doesn't matter how tight your image is. The players with weak pairs always seem to put the preflop raiser on AK, so even if he thinks his jack is no good, he'll call you down just to make sure you don't have AK. I suspect that if an A or K hit the river, he might have folded to your bet, which of course does you no good.
-Sean
(n/t)
This raise is almost mandatory on the button against 2 limpers. One thing that it will do allow you a good chance to win if an ace flops. You also have the best hand (almost certainly) and you can knock out the blinds. I think this is a pretty easy decision, unless the blinds play so terribly that it's worth getting them in the pot just so they can screw up, or you fear the early limper is trapping with a premium hand.
KQo is a better hand than AJo in my opinion. If the ace flops, you can usually tell if you've lost, or can bluff. If the K or Q flops, you do not have to worry about overcards - only 1 rank is scary. AJo has 2 overcards to fear with a J high flop.
AJ off will only get wanted action with a jack high flop, or an AJ flop.These are more rare than a K or Q high flop. A J high flop can more easily make straight draws or 2 pair hands than a K or Q high flop. It can also make more sets in an unraised pot.
KQo can flop 2 overcards and a gutshot, or an open eded straight draw. AJo cannot. KQo can play on with overcards a lot more confidently than AJo - both the ace and jack are highly probable kickers for players flopping top pair on an 8,9 ot T high flop.
In short, I like KQ much better than AJ in any pot that's not going to be played in a shrthanded, "showdown hold 'em" fashion. Ajo is probably better for a late position first in raise, or defending against one. KQo plays against a field much better than AJo.
I respectively disagree with your arguments concerning AJ offsuit versus KQ offsuit and I hope Sean Duffy can join us in this discussion.
With Ace-Jack offsuit, when an Ace flops you almost always have the best hand in an unraised pot because anyone with AK or AQ would have raised pre-flop. Your Jack kicker is golden in an unraised pot. With a Jack-high flop you have top pair/top kicker and if the pot was unraised it is very unlikely anyone has KK or QQ. Since you will be betting and raising on the flop, someone with King or a Queen will frequently fold and never get to see the turn. The King and Queen overcards are usually bet out on the flop unless they have some other draw going. You will also get paid off big time with AJ offsuit on a Jack-high flop when someone has King-Jack, Queen-Jack, or Jack-Ten because these are very common limping hands and your Ace kicker is priceless allowing you to get payed off all the way to the river.
Ace-Jack offsuit will also get action from most any Ace when an Ace flops in an unraised pot and hands containing Aces are very common limping hands. Again the Jack kicker allows you to get paid off all the way to the river since your kicker is boss in an unraised pot.
KQ offsuit has only one advantage and that is its ability to make one extra straight using both cards (i.e.-King high straight). But this only adds about 3% and that assumes you get to see the hand through all the way to the river. If you ignore runner-runner than it only adds about 2%.
But the real reason that Ace-Jack offsuit is superior is because in those situations where no one makes anything an Ace-high with a Jack kicker will usually get the cheese whereas King-high hardly ever will.
I think I sort of agree with both of you. Dan said he prefers AJ in games that feature shorthanded pots, and it's rare that I'm in a game where more than 4 people see the flop on average. I don't really consider the games I play in to be all that tough per se, but the soft spots tend to be either overaggressive or overly tenacious, and AJ plays much better against these types than KQ because at least you have something to show down with AJ when you miss.
In a multiway pot, I'm not really sure which hand I prefer. My inclination would be to prefer AJ but I can't imagine that the difference is more than a fraction of a small bet.
-Sean
20/40 Planet game. Full table. I am 2nd in with KK. I try for a limp in early position. One of the main reasons is I have an extremely live player (ELP) to my left who loves to limp with trap hands and then bet it strongly with any pair, going to the river despite raises. He calls as do two other players in late position. Both blinds call. Didn't get a chance to raise but at least this player is in with me.
Flop comes: QJ2 rainbow.
Blinds check to me. I decide to bet it. ELP raises. All fold to big blind who cold calls 40. BB is an unknown player, but I have a feeling he has 10-9 straight draw (K10 or AK unlikely because I am holding KK). I decide to just call the bet here with the intention of raising the turn.
Turn comes 9 of the fourth suit. BB checks, I check, ELP bets. BB calls, I raise, both players call.
River comes a 7. BB checks I bet. ELP calls. BB folds. I win the pot, as ELP mucks upon seeing my KK.
What do you think of the way I played this hand? Would it have been better to have gone to war on the flop, given the presence of the probably BB draw? Was the checkraise on the turn correct given the presence of 3 cards in the straight zone (don't forget I also picked up a gutshot straight draw on the turn)?
I ask about this hand, not because there is anything really special about it, but I have been thinking about checkraising more on the turn as opposed to playing a more "bet it" style. Check raising seems to make more money (generate bigger pots) against clueless players who call turn raises frequently, but can be disastrous against players who are adept at checking the turn when they smell danger. Overall, a checkraising style may give you a slightly bigger EV than just betting it, but I have a feeling it supplies you with more "catastrophic" beats and a larger variance. Comments on this as well as the hand appreciated
In general, you should always raise preflop with KK, but I understand your reasons for mixing it up and having a good read on the player to your left (ELP).
I think you played the hand just fine, but much of that play is dependent upon your read of ELP. If ELP doesn't bet, then you will lose much of your profits here. My only real criticism of your play was your raise on the turn. Because you didn't check-raise the flop, I believe it's generally correct to check-raise the turn with your hand. However, as you noted, the turn card was a dangerous one. It could have made a straight or a very possible two pair (J9).
I agree with you that check-raising does make some extra profit and can be extremely useful against clueless players. However, if it gets checked around and people get to see the next card for free, then arguably, you've played the hand wrong.
I think I would have taken the more straight-forward approach and just raise preflop and bet this hand out. Getting fancy and trying to squeeze out a few extra bets sometimes backfires.
In a 3-way pot I'm not really a huge fan of that sort of check-raise. In 3-way pots I tend to play in a fairly straightforward manner unless I have a specific reason to play otherwise. Playing like that can get you in a tricky situation if you end up facing 2 bets back to you on the turn. You might end up folding a winner or folding a hand that had odds to draw. In other words, playing weakly can make it too easy to be pushed off your hand. The converse is that if you do call 2 cold back to you on the turn, or if you make your check-raise against a better hand, you might end up paying 3 bets when it would have cost you less otherwise. With KK on a QJ9 board there are a fair number of ways you could be behind, but obviously it's better to make that play with KK than it would be to make that play with AA.
Heads up, I like your "different" approach. You could always try both approaches, i.e. 3-bet the flop and go for the check-raise on the turn. I try to do this with both draws and made hands, and since I never seem to get the free card I want when I'm on a draw, I'm fairly liberal about what sorts of made hands I will "3-bet the flop/check the turn" with.
-Sean
I found this hand interesting. This is a 2 part exercise. I'm going to post the action on the hand without revealing the hero's cards. Then I'll include some spoiler space and reveal what the hero had, and ask you to reevaulate your assumptions of the other players' hands, and ask what your plan on the river would be if you were the hero. (Guessing what everyone has before knowing what the hero's cards are isn't really important, I just thought it might be fun to guess before knowing hero's cards.)
5 handed 20-40 game. The 3 players outside the blinds all limp, SB completes, hero in BB raises. UTG limp re-raises, 2nd limper calls, button and sb fold, BB calls. Flop 965 rainbow. (Suits are unimportant in this hand.) BB checks, UTG bets, 2nd limper calls, BB check-raises, UTG re-raises, 2nd limper calls two cold, BB caps, UTG and 2nd limper call. Turn an offsuit deuce. BB bets, UTG and 2nd limper call. What do you put everyone on at this point?
S P O I L E R
S P A C E
S P O I L E R
S P A C E
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hero has AA. What do you put the other two on, and what is your plan of action on the river? (I.e. which cards will you bet, which will you check, which will you check-raise?)
-Sean
nt
I originally put the hero on 99 (not AA since he did'nt cap the preflop) and the UTG on AA and the second limper on some sort of draw (A8s,A7s,etc.
Now since I know hero has AA, I put the UTG on big pocket pair , and the second limper still on a draw.
I don't think anyone has a set.
I would check-K-7 and bet A,6-2 ps.If 2nd limper flopped a str8t, he's good! (and lucky)
I thought that AA or KK were bb's most likely hands.
As for the river, there are no cards that would make me checkcall. Well, maybe if I knew that there is no way UTG would limp-reraise with anything other than AA or KK, perhaps I would checkcall if a King came off.
Therefore, I am either betting or checkraising the river.
I would bet if a 9,8, or 7 came off. This is because UTG will interpret my check not as a sign of weakness but a sign of caution. He too will want to exercise caution and therefore will not bet his KK/QQ etc. for value. This could result in the action just checking through. I don't want that so I would bet.
I may also bet if a 6 or 5 comes off for the same reasons if UTG is a cautious player. If he is somewhat aggressive, I may look for the checkraise.
I think a deuce is good card to look for a checkraise.
If a Jack or Queen comes off, I may just bet it because I can't be very sure that it has not overcarded UTG's overpair in which case he may not bet. However, if I was sure that UTG must have KK, I would try for the checkraise if a Q,J or T came off.
Now, all of these checkraise possibilities are really plays that I would make on this Forum; At the tables, I would probably just bet out no matter what card comes on the river as river checkraises are generally seen as dirty play and results in animosity between players. I will foresake some EV to keep a good game atmosphere.
Since you have AA, UTG should have KK. Where was the second limper (late middle? cutoff?) and how does he or she play? My guess is limper had 98s. Several other hands are possible including any pair with a 7 or 8 (adjusted for player position and tightness pre-flop), a slowplayed set or straight, and the usual lineup of everything else including top pair only.
I would check a 7, 8, 9 or K, bet the rest, and call one raise. If UTG raises and limper reraises, Houston we have a problem.
I guessed aces. Damn, I'm good. :^) UTG has a big pair. I'm going to guess that he has the other pair of aces, although kings is statistically more likely. There is no hand that the other player can have that I'd play the way he did, but it's kinda looking like 98s. Maybe I'm overly fearful of monsters lying under the bed, but I'd check-call if a 9, 8, or 7 hit, and lead if any other card hit. I have a hard time believing that the other player has a made straight at this point.
hero has to be able at least tie A-A which is the logical hoding for UTG. But not knowing the personalities of the players inhibits this exercise. Limper is a crapshoot but I would tentatively put him on 8-9.
11 handed
i have 3-4 suited in BB
UTG raise, cutoff and button cold call and so did I. all others fold.
Flop 5-6-J rainbow
i bet (good or not?) UTG raise cutoff reraise button fold i cold call 2 UTG also call.
Turn... the magic 2!!!!!
i check since im sure the turn will be bet.
Utg check cutoff bet i raise UTG fold showin his AA to everybody cutoff reraise i reraise he reraise i reraise he call.
river a 6
i check call his full of jacks.
I think i played it fine and got very unlucky.
However, 2 good players players at the table stated that i deserved to lose after callin a raise from my BB with 3-4 suited. I have a 7-1 shot and an easy fold if the flop missed me. I think its a call but am I the only one who think that u should call a raise with 3-4s in your BB when theres only 4 other players?
Ty for help and advices
Charlie
ps: i just put 9,5 BB in this hand after all :o)))
i meant when theres only 3 other players already in not 4
Preflop call is marginal, I don't think calling or folding makes a big difference there. I don't see why you would bet the flop, though. You're betting right into the preflop raiser who's very likely to raise your ass, and if he just calls with AK or something, it wouldn't that surprising if someone had a jack and popped you. You have absolutely no chance of winning the pot with a bet, and the idiot end of the straight isn't a premium draw, so you don't really want to jam away with your draw on the flop. It's fairly unlikely that 98 is out there given the preflop action, but you can't absolutely discount it, so I would want to see the turn as cheaply as possible.
-Sean
I echo Sean's comments.
Preflop, I would probably fold although now and then, I might call. I don't think it matters very much so long as you play well postflop.
Now, with respect, you didn't play particularly well postflop here. You should definitely not bet the flop given that the preflop raiser is to your immediate left.
I also think that you should bet out on the turn as if the bet comes from the cut-off (since he was the flop aggressor), you don't gain by knocking out UTG by forcing him to coldcall two bets. Surely, he is drawing dead to your hand given his actions to date. Therefore, you should bet and give him a chance to call and give yourself a chance to 3 bet in case cut-off pops you again.
Betting also avoids having the action check through in case cut-off 3 bet the flop with a draw of his own such as 87.
Charlie,
First of all I count three other players, not four. Note that 4-3 suited makes fewer straights than 5-4 suited since your bottom end is blocked. Give me two more opponents and calling with 43 suited is fine. Give me middle suited connectors and one more opponent and the call is fine. But I agree with your opponents that the call pre flop is incorrect but it is incorrect by a fraction of a bet at most. The problem is that these calls in the blinds add up so over time it is worth making these calls correctly.
On the flop I would check. Leading probably cuts the field and you don't want this. There is no way you win with a bet.
Since you bet the flop I would bet the turn. Your straight is disguised based on your flop play. Betting might trap UTG while checkraising put him out.
You got unlucky on the river but I think you should have been on the sidelines for this pot.
Regards,
Rick
I think your flop call is o.k. I agree with others that it probably doesn't make a big difference one way or the other.
I don't understand your flop bet. This being said I see this all the time. People bet an open ender into a field of three or four. I don't understand the logic. What quite possibly will happen is the original raiser will raise you and everyone else folds now you are only against one other opponent and your pot odds have been reduced dramatically. With a small open ender you want to see the turn as cheaply as possible and you want all of your opponents to stay in.
I think I would bet the turn and hope utg calls and cutoff raises then you could 3 bet. Although I don't think check raising was a bad play so I don't think it is a big deal one way or the other.
Once you and cutoff get into the raising war I think you have to keep popping it. I think you can safely put him on JJ so you know you will lose if the board pairs, however, you are better than a 4-1 favorite so you have the best of it. Unfortunately the river screwed you, not much you can do about it except to check and call.
I have to agree with all of U that my flop bet was too agressive.
At first i tought rammin and jammin in this situation was not bad since i had 3 other players but it definitely is since ill hit my hand about 33% of the time but its not the nuts and its far from a sure thing that the 3 other players will call my flop bet
Im still learnin dammit!!!!
Charlie
i am in middle position with J-9s.utg limp up to me i fold.Is that a right move?
Yes, except in weak loose games with little preflop raising.
Mason has said before that he would limp in early with J9s in the Vegas games. At least that's what I remember him saying but I could be corrected.
I would limp in with J9s here as there has already been a limper. Our two limps can often be the impetus for a calling frenzy.
Right. In a "limping begets limping" game you can go for it, but the usual caveats apply. You don't want to be in the sort of game where someone tries to isolate the 2 limpers with ATo, and it helps when your opponents play poorly postflop, etc. etc.
I'm probably going to start a new thread on this topic when I get around to it in a day or two, but I've been thinking recently that it's probably a good idea to play marginal hands if you haven't been able to play a hand in a while and it'll keep you from getting bored. Getting bored is always bad if you might do something stupid out of boredom, like making a bad 3-bet. I am generally very tilt proof and the whatnot but I do get bored easily, and sometimes I catch myself 3-betting with something like 88 or AJs when I should be limiting myself to TT-AQs, and these sorts of mistakes can be a lot more costly than limping in with J9s after 1 limper, or defending your BB with 43s getting 7:1 odds, etc.
-Sean
Excellent point!
Sklansky,
Maybe calling is wrong except in weak loose games but skp makes a good point about enticing a calling frenzy. The problem with that is that if this poster understood that, he wouldn't have asked the question. But raising is also an option that should be considerd (occaisionally)now isn't it?
vince
Jack-Nine suited is a weak, speculative drawing hand that needs two things to play profitably. It needs an unraised pot and lots of company. In your example, at least you have an unraised pot so far but you do not have any kind of volume on the hand. Furthermore, it could get raised by one of the many players yet to act. I would fold in the games I play in.
glowworm -
That's pretty marginal...I wouldn't call with that unless I had been running pretty well (won the last pot, or something like that) and I had no indication that someone behind me was going to raise (picks up a bunch of chips, etc.) Seems to be one of those marginal small winner/big loser kind of hands when played up front.
Scott
"I wouldn't call with that unless I ....won the last pot, "
Scott,
Is this an addendum to the theory of poker?
Vince
10/20 - very loose, toward the passive side -
I have QQ in the small blind.
Five of them limp in and the button raises; I do not 3-bet because I don't like building monster pots with this hand, and because I'm not that sure I have the best hand. (This particular player does not raise with less than a premium hand; he will raise with any group #1 hand, most of the group #2's, and possibly AQ[off]. 99 is doubtful.) Also, none of the limpers are going to fold for a double raise; to them it's just a chance to play in a bigger pot. BB also calls.
The flop comes Q - 7 - 2 (rainbow) - about as good as you can get. I bet - pot's too big to get cute - four call (who knows what they have), and the button raises.
I don't even hesitate; I 3-bet, and two of them actually fold. Four of us take the turn. Pot= $300
Turn and river are both blanks - other than putting a backdoor flush on board. (9/3 or 9/4, but no posible straight.)
Cut to the finish - I win a huge pot against pocket Aces and a set of 7's, but that's not the point.
My 3-bet on the flop could very well have driven out all but the Aces and the set; there were obviously no "real" draws out there with this board. It didn't chase them all, but it could have.
If we ignore the fact that this particular pot was too big to mess with (i.e., all attempts had to be made to "win it right away"), my question is this.
Had there been a coordinated board - Q T 7 with a flush draw, for example - everyone would agree that raising and charging them the max. would have been correct.
I say that the LACK of a "tight board" made raising even MORE of a necessity.
If there had been legitimate drawing hands out there (and the button was a reliable turn-bettor), I may have very well waited for the turn to [check]raise; those with "real" draws are going to pay 3 bets on the flop to see if they can hit - and they would not be wrong to do so. If they are confronted with a double bet on the turn, it is likely that some of them might fold; if they don't, that's OK too. I do have top set -I don't mind some company as long as they're paying to take the ride.
Does this fly in the face of the theory which says that it is far more dangerous - and wrong - to slowplay a big hand when there are clearly draws out there than it is to slowplay this same hand when the board is a mess ? (HPFAP gives the example of a set of Jacks with a flop of J 6 2[rainbow].)
In general, if I flop a big hand (even an overpair, AA or KK only), and there is a coordinated board, and I think I can only get one raise in, I tend to wait for the turn to do it.
The turn is when (thank you, Jim Brier) they start to "drop like flies". A raise here, or sometimes just a bet with them knowing the pot can be raised behind them, packs alot more punch.
If the above pot had been smaller - no BTF raise from the button, and I chose not to raise from the blind with QQ - I would still have thought it more important to get the 3-bet in on the flop with the Q 7 2 board than I would have if the board had been Q T 7 with a flush draw.
I cannot get a real (but weak) hand like a gutshot draw to fold on the flop for any amount of money; a naked back-door flush draw will probably NOT call 2 bets cold on the flop - and in most cases I want him out (Morten's Theorum).
What am I missing here ?
- Yes, one of the players who folded instead of calling 2 more cold on the flop would have made the flush, but that is NOT why I'm asking.
Any and all comments appreciated.
J-D
Your thoughts have merit when the pot is big preflop and actually do not conflict with HPFAP.
That is not the question. The question is whether or not his flop bet is correct. He bet trying to limit the competition. He did that. But is is the correct play for the reason given? The answer is obviously no.
The reason to bet here with such a poorly coordinated board plus the preflop play is to get more money in the pot with the best hand. It is very likely that if he bets somebody will raise and he will be able to three bet with a few and maybe everyone calling. It may be just as likely that someone will bet and then he can raise but it is not as likely that someone will then three bet the hand. Plus there is a chance that no one will bet since he has two Queens. But there is very little chance that most of the opponents will fold to one bet. Betting is the best play here for those reasons not for thinning the field. One could argue that if he gets raised he should wait for the thurn to try for a check raise instead of 3 betting but that is dependent on how many call the raise. If there are a lot of callers or they all call then 3 betting the flop is best.
Vince
J-D
I'm not sure you are missing anything. I think most would agree it is close between raising and reraising before the flop with queens in that spot. What you can't anticipate is the actual flop. If you were clairvoyant than you would want 500 bets in before the flop if it were allowed. Everyone would have odds to go to the river but you would have way the best of it (although a loss might strain your bankroll).
In all seriousness, once you get that great flop I like leading and hope all call and the button raises. Your hand is very strong. It is doubtful your opponents will have legit draws and you just want to charge as much as possible to pairs and overcards which are drawing dead or near dead and may call one bet. You won't lose the overpairs and sets and they are drawing slim. Meanwhile, anyone going for a backdoor draw will be charged full price due to the probable late raiser. If he raises on the flop I might call the flop and lead again on the turn with this board. I might want to lose some backdoor draws but I don't want to lose those drawing dead or near dead. There should be more of the later.
If you flopped top set with a flush draw and straight draw possible on board I would still lead into the late pre flop raiser. Some of your opponents will still be drawing dead or near dead and will be more likely to call two bets on installments than they would a checkraise. Those with legit draws will call a checkraise anyway.
I don't think you mind if running draws go for it as long as they pay multiple bets to do so. Legit draws you want out but can't get out. Just charge a high price. In the meantime, try to finesse it so that those drawing dead stay in as long as possible. Wining a monster pot is great but taking a small risk (such as not checkraising to drive out the running draws) to win a much bigger monster can be worth it despite conventional wisdom that is often to the contrary.
Regards,
Rick
though i am a devotee of two plus two and have most of their publications, i would like to look at the "rgp" site, just because i have the time. Could someone tell me how to access it? Thanks.
I've only been at the table for about 15 minutes, and I have not seen any of the players before. However, I can tell that it is a very loose, aggressive game. One or two players are decent; the rest are terrible.
UTG raises. Next guy folds. I am next with TT. I thought about calling to get a big field, but decided to reraise to thin the field to 2-3 players. Was this a mistake? Two players call three bets cold, the BB calls two bets cold, and UTG calls. 15.5 SB in the pot, 5 people. The flop comes K73 rainbow. BB bets out, UTG folds. There are no draws possible. I can't imagine what he could possibly be betting into 4 opponents with besides a king. I thought for a second about raising, getting the pot heads up, taking a free card on the turn, and then calling on the river. But then I thought that even if the BB did not have a king, one of the two players behind me could. Then I thought about calling because I am getting 15:1 (rake took out the half a small bet), but decided against it because it could very easily be raised behind me. So I folded. Was this the correct decision? I would have won the pot. The BB was betting into the field with pocket deuces!
About 45 minutes later, I am once again 3rd to act (and the pocket deuces guy is once again the BB). It's folded to me, and I raise with JJ. Folded all the way to the SB, who thinks for literally 20 seconds before he throws in his chips. BB calls. 3 BB and 3 players. Flop is AQx rainbow. SB checks, BB bets. Normally I would probably fold in this situation, but given the BB's play in the hand above, I thought that he could have anything. I raise. Was this correct? The SB and BB call. 5.75 BB (rake takes half a small bet) and 3 players. Turn is a jack. SB and BB check, I bet. SB calls, BB folds. River is a 9 (no flush possible). SB checks, I bet. He checkraises. I call, thinking that there is enough chance that he has two pair or lower trips. He's got KTo. How did I play this hand given the BB's play in the first hand?
palpatine
the first hand you played a bit too aggressively by reraising with pocket 10's. but when the bb bets out to you on the flop i would probably fold too. If you had called you would have left yourself vulnerable to a back raise.
the second hand I don't like the way you played at all. Raising JJ preflop given that everyone has folded to you is fine. But you should have probably folded to the BB's bet on the flop, despite his play. JJ against and A Q on the board is usually an automatic fold. Just my thoughts.
Senator Palpatine -
If you're in a loose-aggressive game where people will bet and raise with just about anything, you really need to be selective about your preflop hands and don't even consider bluffing. Calling with TT up front against an UTG raise is fine, but raising is questionable. You want to see the flop for as little as possible because you need to flop your set or a great draw and have the odds to go with it. When the particular flop you described comes, you HAVE to consider that someone's got a King. You have no backdoor possibilities, and you obviously have to catch another ten...which may or may not give you the best hand. Your fold was correct, even though you would have had the best hand on the river.
As for the second hand, your preflop raise was good...you need to protect your big pairs (Jacks and higher) up front. Since everyone folded out except the blinds, you have position. The flop's a problem....your raise is understandable given the previous action, but you have to figure someone for an Ace or a Queen. I would probably give it up here. The turn probably got you going, but it was obviously the wrong kind of help. The guy playing KTo and looking for a gutshot straight made a lousy preflop call. His flop play was okay (he didn't know it was a two-outer, but I think he was getting pot odds & implied odds to draw to the gutshot straight on the turn....although he probably wasn't thinking in those terms.)
Your first hand was out of line...your second hand was just unlucky, IMO. Even habitual bluffers wind up with legit hands, and you have to account for that. Sounds like usual bad beat stories to me.
Scott
>>His flop play was okay (he didn't know it was a two-outer, but I think he was getting pot odds & implied odds to draw to the gutshot straight on the turn<<
Sorry don't agree with this assessment. This call by the SB on the flop was a big loser.
Tom -
You're right....he has to call 2SB, and there's not enough people in the pot to justify going after a gutshot straight, even if it is the nuts. He just got lucky :S
Scott
Why do you have to flop a set or a great draw? TT is going to flop an overpair or a set about 38% of the time. I'll take TT against 5 players for 3 bets everytime. There are only 4 hands your scared of, and most of the time you will get re-raised by AA and KK with 5 players.
On the first hand I think you played it fine. I would usually 3 bet pocket 10's when an early player raises. Hopefully I can get the pot heads up give myself the best chance to win the pot. With two cold callers behind you and the BB you have to be worried. My thinking at this point is you need a set or a low flop. When there is a K on the flop and BB bets out I agree with your fold. BB is a moron for betting out with 22 (I'm sure he went home broke) and you are right to be worried about the players behind you. What were they possible calling 3 bets with? Thems the breaks though.
I don't think you played the second hand very good. Obviously this is a bad flop for JJ, when the BB bets out I would probably call one bet to see what the small blind did and to see if the BB bet out on the turn. It's hard playing against morons like the BB but you have to realize that they also get good cards so there is so many ways for you to be beat at this point. He could be betting a Q which still beats you. Once the J comes on the river you have to keep betting and you got unlucky that the sb hit his gutshot.
on the second hand you mirrored the bad play of your opponent on the first hand. That is not good. it is very frustrating to get bluffed out or beat by bad players making bad plays. to get your money back it is better to be patient until you actually have a good hand instead of an underpair. you will almost always get paid off. I see players make a similiar mistake by jamming pocket kings against a player who will play any ace. better to muck and wait for a better day as the any ace player will give your chips back soon enough.
Emperor,
TT against a raise? Painful. I'd need one or many callers, but how to get there in this game with six loose aggressive players behind? It could well end up a three-way capped pot preflop, a lousy and expensive start for TT, and THEN there are tough postflop decisions to make if the set doesn't hit. If I were on my game, I'd muck. Next best IMO is reraise; calling is last. If the game were tighter, I'd reraise every time.
I called an identical situation the first time it came up in 20-40 for me and lost on the river to a well-played hand that would've folded to a pre-flop reraise....
Postflop you need a reason not to fold. If you thought there was a good chance BB was bluffing, by all means raise. But you didn't, so you made a solid play. Good hand.
In the second hand, there is nothing wrong with raising the flop some percentage of the time: you have position and you already have momentum, so this is the time to bluff. Again, good hand.
I found your first hand to be quite interesting. There is a big pot if you have the best hand on the flop there is decent chance it will stay good. If you don't have the best hand you a slim chance to draw out. The key question to me is what are your chances of having the best hand? Put another way what chances would you need of having the best hand to put more money in the pot given the pot size etc.? If you decide to put more money in the pot should you raise or call?
If the pot were heads up I think you'd be surprised at the small chance you'd need of having the best hand to make caling your opponent down the right play. The problem is the players behind you seem likely to have you beat or might draw out as well. However, the question still remains as to what are your chances of having the best hand and if you do what are the chances that it will hold up. Since there are players behind you that could draw out it if they don't have you beat it seems to me that this is a raise or fold situation. If you get a lot of action from players behind you, it probably tells you that your hand is not the best on the flop. So the question becomes what chances do you need of having the best hand to make a raise the right play. I'm pretty sure that your chances of having the best hand are surprisingly small to justify a raise in this situation, maybe something like 10% of the time. Could have this one figured wrong though so comments are greatly appreciated.
AC Taj 10-20
A loose, aggressive player raises from early position. I've played with him a few times and know that he loses a lot of money at this game. I saw him raise earlier in the day with a K3o and know that he has loose raising standards. I cold-call with Ah9h. The only other person in the hand is the BB.
Flop: 2 3 4 with 2 hearts. The BB comes out betting, the loose player raises and I decide to 3-bet with my nut-flush draw and gut-shot. What do you think of the 3-bet? BB calls 2 raises and the loose player folds perhaps due to my tight image.
Turn is a black Jack. The BB checks and I check as well. In retrospect, I think this is a mistake but I'm not sure a bet would've won me the pot.
River is a black ten. The BB checks again and I check as well. I have nothing and I'm sure a bet will be called by the BB. The BB shows me a pair of 3's and busted gutshot and therefore takes down the pot.
So, in summary, I think a turn bet would've given me a better chance to win the pot. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on my play.
Thanks,
Rahul
When you checked the turn, was it your intention to call a bet by bb on the river even if you missed?
If so, clearly the better play is to bet the turn and then check the river.
Given that board on the turn, you could easily have as many as 18 outs if he had (say) a medium pocket pair or something.
The only reason why you might check the turn is to avoid being checkraised and therefore costing you even more to make your flush but that fear (for lack of a better term) should not be enough to dissuade you from betting.
playing against the blinds is a pain. IMHO, A-9s is a stellar hand to isolate a loose raiser. If you think you can isolate then maybe a 3 bet pre-flop would have won you the pot.
With the loose raiser already in, why not reraise preflop to isolate him? A9s seems like a very good hand for this play.
As for betting the turn, I agree that this would maximize your chances to win this pot, given the play so far. Playing against the big blind makes the decision less certain, but considering how many outs you have, and the fact that the BB could lay it down, betting here should net you the most money.
Bill
I am in Melbourne, playing in the biggest hold 'em game the casino offers. (With the exchange rate, it translates to about 4-8, but the players are significantly better than you'd see at a 4-8 table.)
I'm on the button with A4s. When the action gets to me only one person has folded (very unusual for the game). So I put in a raise. Everyone calls.
Flop comes 9 7 4 rainbow,one of my suit. It's checked to me. Bet or take the free card?
That's the problem with raising pre-flop with this hand. Now you've got a piece, the pot is huge and you want to drive out the over cards to improve your chances of winning.
It's highly unlikely you have the best. You will not be protecting your hand but someone else's. I don't think it's a terrible play to bet here but it's not wise. Here's a hand that should've cost you one small bet and now if someone check raises it's going to cost you 2 BB.Take the free card.
I think the pre-flop raise was absolutely the correct play. I'm building a big pot which will tie other players on if the flop comes good, and I have a hand that will win more than its fair share. Furthermore, the raise may buy me a free card on the flop.
I would not have raised before the flop but would have called.
On the flop i would bet, then take the free card on the turn if i do not improve my hand.
Thid will be a pretty tough pot to steal so the turn or river you better get some help.
Take the free card on the flop.
What you've done with your pre-flop raise is effectively raised your deviation for this type of hand. A-4s isn't much of a favorite over even a random hand, much less a full table of random hands.
Still, I don't disagree with the play -- but not as a full-time maneuver. It's purely a gamble based upon the table composition. In a bigger game stateside, someone sitting in an early position with A-A or K-K would've reraised and isolated you before the flop.
For one, even if somebody from early position limp-reraises with AA you are going to get plenty of callers after 8 people already paid one bet. Two, A4s makes money against KK with 5 or 6 players in.
This is not a gamble, its high deviation but its +EV. Especially in late position where you can take your free card.
Just because they've called one bet, doesn't mean they will cold-call two more bets. That's the idea behind a limp-reraise.
Niels,
I agree fully with your raise after the entire field (minus one) limps. This is a value raise, and I'd do it with Axs, small pairs, and most suited connectors. As you say, this also functions as a raise to "tie-on" people to the pot when you flop a monster.
Here, you haven't flopped a monster. Betting bottom pair with an overcard and a backdoor flush draw into a 9 player field doesn't seem to have much going for it ... they won't all fold, and someone in early position is likely trying for the checkraise with this quasi-raggy flop.
I'd likely check, take a free card, and hope for an A, 4, or the second of my suit to fall off. In this case, I can keep playing, otherwise, unless there's a bet and a couple of callers (with no raising), I'm not getting the odds to play my 5 outer, and my cards go in the muck.
This is one of the side advantages of these raises ... on fairly passive tables, in the event that you whiff of the flop, your pre-flop raise in essence has acted as a "free card play," one round earlier than conventional. This is why with small pocket pairs it is also a clear raise ... if you flop a set, you've tied them on, and they're drawing thin to beat you. If you miss, you take the free card, and pray for the poker gods to spike the set for you on the turn.
At any rate, hope this helps,
Dave
In a passive game, I would bet it and then take the free card on the turn unless you make two pair or 3 of a kind.
In an aggressive game, I would take the free card on the flop.
Players,
I was playing in my usual 10-20 game, and I got AA under the gun. The BB had just won two hands, and he made it a 15-30 kill pot. The game was typical, fish and sharks, and I decided to raise it because I thought at least someone had a decent hand to call a raise with. Was I surprised...everyone folded out, and I was rewarded with $20 from the blinds. I felt so stupid, but did I make the right play? My reasons for raising preflop are the typical ones, and I was fairly sure that at least one or two players would call the raise. I thought about limping in, but I didn't want the kill player to get a free shot at the flop. Is limping in this situation a better idea, or is it just an occasional variance play? If I had limped in and someone had raised it, would a reraise have been in order? Thoughts please.
Scott
You made the right play IMO. Players tend to tighten up on the kill pots and the right play might depend somewhat on the blinds even though you are UTG. If the blinds are loose or defend liberally you definitely made the right play.
Depending on the game, players may also loosen up for kill pots. I think either way you did the right thing, Scott. In all but the tightest games limp-reraising is just not worth it, IMHO, except perhaps if you play with the same players all the time, and need to vary your game.
I am in the SB with A-9c in a loose 10-20 game which has become quite wild. To my left is a BB who raises approximately 75% of his blinds, small and big alike. Several players call to the buttun, who raises. The button will raise with any pair as well as any two paint cards or better. Now I know that BB will almost surely make it 3 bets, and button will then almost surely cap the betting. So I fold. I would have flopped the nut flush and won a HUGE pot. Friend of mine said I was nuts, that I should have called because suited cards are great in these games.
PS - How many players do I need in the pot preflop to cold-call buttons raise assuming the BB will NOT 3 bet?
How about assuming the BB WILL 3 bet but the button will NOT cap?
Thank you.
The question about the 3-bet vs. the cap isn't really relevant. Paying 3 bets vs 4 bets doesn't make a huge amount of difference.
How many players do you need in? "Several" should suffice against loose-aggressive opponents. The important question in my mind is "How loose-aggressive are these wackos on the flop and on later streets?" If they like to jam away on the flop with very little, like weak pairs and weak overcards, they'll chase on the turn with dead draws (like call 2 cold with a mid pair when the flush card hits), and they'll play weak hands overaggressively, like go several bets on the turn with a straight when the flush card hits, well then, you're gonna have to pry a suited ace out of my hands with a crowbar.
Think of it this way. You would have flopped the nut flush and won a huge pot. Why? What the heck could they have had to jam away on a 3 suited flop? Obviously not very much.
Note that while some people might comment that "you have the worst possible position in the SB," I don't agree. The BB sounds quite loose-aggressive, and will probably bet most flops. Therefore you will be in prime position to check-raise good flops where you want to get a lot of money in the pot. (A9x, 99x, two clubs, or three clubs, for that matter, 876 and a club, etc.)
-Sean
"How many players do you need in? "Several" should suffice against loose-aggressive opponents. The important question in my mind is "How loose-aggressive are these wackos on the flop and on later streets?" If they like to jam away on the flop with very little, like weak pairs and weak overcards, they'll chase on the turn with dead draws (like call 2 cold with a mid pair when the flush card hits), and they'll play weak hands overaggressively, like go several bets on the turn with a straight when the flush card hits, well then, you're gonna have to pry a suited ace out of my hands with a crowbar"
This is EXACTLY the way they play. Not only did they jam the flop but they all put in 2 bets on the turn as well. What is "several" opponents? Would three suffice? Four? What if they were NOT maniacs? What if it was a SMALL suited ace? The reason I folded to begin with was because I thought my implied odds were completely SMUSHED... werent they in fact, despite the fact that my opponents are nuts??
Thank you.
4 opponents sounds like it might be enough, especially since the blinds are likely to play. I'd usually rather have ATs because of the straight possibilities, but A9s isn't so bad. If they weren't maniacs, you would want to fold because 1) they're likely to have your ace dominated, and 2) they won't pay you off enough when you make your hand. If it was a small suited ace, I might want a few more opponents in. You'll run the risk of running into a bigger ace; some crap like A7o dominates A3s.
I don't know that your implied odds were gone. The tons of goofy bets these guys will put in postflop also counts towards implied odds.
-Sean
I posted this to the thread below on K,Q play but it got buried, nobody really mentioned raising so I am reposting it.
10-20 game, limit holdem: u r in middle position with the KQo. five players in front of you limp in. You limp , and only the small blind limps in behind you. $80 in the pot and eight players.
flop is T 7 3r...blinds and two early limpers check. third early limper bets, and both middle limpers fold. Should you raise, call, or fold?
I think that if I am going to continue on with this hand I raise here...
A raise will put pressure on drawing hands as well as weak 10's who may call one bet, but not two increasing my outs or forcing drawing hands that do continue to make a mistake.
It will often buy me a free card on the turn which I will be happy to take if I miss.
It could win me the pot in a showdown if the the bet came from someone with a hand like 8,9 which is not impossible.
I'll gain some information about those who play on..
I could see raising or folding in this spot depending on what I know about my opponents, but calling would not be in my arsenal here.
There are many reasons why a raise is right many times in this situation. In HFAP 21st edition on page 70 the advice is to seriously consider raising anytime you are in late position on the flop and your hand is worth a call.
While there is some merit to raising (as you point out), on balance, I prefer to just call.
Firstly, I don't even have a pair yet. Secondly, the cards that I am trying to hit are unlikely to make 2 pairs for anyone (with the exception of QT or KT which I don't think would fold on the flop to a raise). Thirdly, raising on the flop might deprive me of the opportunity to raise the turn (if your goal is to reduce the field, the turn raise is much more effective than a flop raise in a multiway field like this one).
You wrote:
"[by raising}, I'll gain some information about those who play on."
I am not sure that this reason to raise is going to assist here very much. Unless your raise happens to get you heads-up with the original bettor, you are going to check the turn if you don't hit. And if you do hit, you are going to bet even if 4 guys coldcall your flop raise. Thus, I don't think you are going to learn much by your flop raise. Notice that in the case of 4 guys coldcalling your flop raise, you probably will have wished that you did not raise the flop even in those instances where you go on to pair on the turn as you now stand less of a chance to make it 2 bets on the turn in order to limit the field.
As I say, I hear what you are saying about the ads of raising but on balance, I prefer calling here.
sean, while raising has the advantages you mention, I believe calling is better. I think that when a player bets into a crowd of 7 other players he should be given credit for having top pair at least. By just taking a card off for one bet you are chasing at favorable odds but when you raise you destroy your pot odds plus you run the risk of a re-raise. I agree that you increase your chances of winning the pot by raising but I don't believe the pot is large enough to justify the increased cost. A guy with an Ace overcard may fold anyway for one bet.
Why not fold?
Because the pot is offering you 9:1 on your call and you have 6 outs to top pair. A six outer is a 7:1 shot.
...RAISE! You definitely want to knockout the Q7s and the K3s that could be there, and then you can take a free card if an A, J or 9 comes on the turn(or keep semi-bluffing). Now in the tighter and tougher games Jim plays in, calling is probably better.
Greetings fellow forumers. I think it's time to set aside all the 'should I call a preflop raise with AQo' mumbo jumbo and start focusing on some REALLY important ways to get the money.
I think we have hashed and rehashed pre and post flop play until we all could make the 'correct' play in our sleep.
What we need to focus on is specifics about how to play against particular types of opponents.
See the installments for more info - feel free to add your own.
-SmoothB-
The game has been generally rather tight with the exception of one maniac on your immediate right. He is raising preflop with approximately 3/4 of his hands even if people have limped in.
1) What hands do you reraise with if only the maniac is in the pot so far?
2) What hands do you reraise with if there has been one or 2 limpers to the maniac?
3) What hands do you just call with if only the maniac is in the pot so far?
4) What hands do you just call the raise with if there have been 1 or 2 limpers?
Postflop - the maniac will always bet his weaker hands and some of his stronger hands on the flop if checked to. If called, he will check and fold his weak hands on the turn and check raise his stronger hands, and occasionally a strong draw. If he starts raising and reraising he either has a huge hand or a huge draw, but never a mediocre hand.
He will only bluff the river if he has met no resistance to his betting along the way. When he raises on the river he has anywhere from a good hand to the nuts but will rarely bluff raise on the river. He will bet more hands than he will call with.
1) What kinds of hands are good to call with on the flop?
2) What kinds of hands are good to raise with?
Same with turn and river.
-SmoothB-
Pre Flop:
1) Same hands I would normally open raise with. I might shade slightly if the blinds are too tight.
2) Hands that I would normally open raise with that also are better than both limpers minimum requirements.
3) None.
4) None.
Flop I assume we are heads up and he acts before me.
Draws: Call the flop.
If checked to on the turn: Check if you can beat a weak hand, or do not have pot odds to call if reraised. Otherwise bet.
If bet to, call if you have the pot odds, otherwise fold.
If you hit the draw start shovelling the chips in.
Weak made hands.
Check or call the flop, Check or call the turn and river.
Medium made hands.
Bet or raise the flop once. Bet or Call the turn and river.
Strong made hands.
Keep those chips coming.
I think the biggest factor in making the pre-flop decisions is how likely is it to have players come in behind you for 3 bets. A secondary factor is your playing style and how much respect you want for your raises. Conservative players should be less inclined to battle with the maniac but more inclinded to 3 bet as a 3 bet carries alot of equity. the opposite is true for looser players.
1) early position - re-raise with A-Ko, A-Qo, AA to 10-10 100%, re-raise ~75% of the time with suited aces down to A-10, else just call. If the rest of the table fails to adjust by coming in behind me then I would be more inclined to 3 bet more often with more hands. In late position I will 3 bet with all sorts of crap including any pocket pair, any suited ace, any ace down to an 8 kicker and any king down to a 10 kicker. until the rest of the table starts to adjust I will continue the bully role. If I can't 3 bet the maniac in late position and no else yet to enter, then I will muck.
2)with two limpers already in I tend to get more passive. I would re-raise with A-Ko, A-Ks, A-Qs, and AA-QQ 100% of the time. I would never re-raise with the remaining pocket pairs but I would probably call with any wired pair and suited face cards down to Q-10s. with the maniac in the hand your implied odds for a set are greatly improved. The problem hands here, IMHO, are A-Qo and A-Jo. How to play these hands would depend on the probability of the players behind me calling 3 bets and the limping requirements of the initial two limpers. Basically, if you think there is a very good chance of limiting the field with a raise then by all means go for it. but if you think players will come in behind you then mucking these two hands could save you much grief.
Goofy aggressive pigeon
This player will play nearly every hand. He considers the turn card to be part of the flop and will nearly always chase runner runner flushes or straights.
He will always call with any pair heads up.
He will always call with any ace until the river.
So much for his weak hands.
He plays his mediocre to strong hands aggressively, frequently overplaying them.
Let's say that you raise preflop with AK and get the hand heads up against him. The flop misses you and you bet and he calls. If you check the turn he will often bet any pair, any draw including gutshots, and will often bluff. He may also have the nuts.
On the river, if he raises you he could have anything from one pair to the nuts. IE he could have been calling all the way with AQo, call all the way and catch a Q on then end and raise.
-SmoothB-
The Punisher
There is one maniac that I come across from time to time that actually plays this way:
This maniac is out to get you. (This is not a bad thing!)
He will always move to your left as soon as he possibly can.
He likes to put the table on tilt and he knows that you interfere with this. He knows that you play very tight and he thinks it's his job to 'punish' you. Now, all he is really doing is building a big pot for you. Making money with this guy in the game is no trouble - the real issue is how to maximize profit here.
He plays nearly every hand. If you limp in he will USUALLY raise. If you raise preflop he will always call.
His motto is 'pump it or dump it'. If he doesn't have a hand he can raise with he folds - unless he is trying to suck out on you. IE if you raise preflop on AA KK or QQ and he calls with 36o and then catches a 3 or 6, he will call trying to hit 2 pair or trips.
What hands should you limp-reraise with preflop?
What hands should you limp with preflop?
Postflop?
Etc.
-SmoothB-
I'm at a full $10-20 table at Paradise as I'm dealt 10c9c in button position.
There are SIX limpers (!!), and I decide to raise it to $6 for positive EV value. Then the worst possible thing occurs: SB, next to act, re-raise. We suddenly see the flop just four handed, and my pre-flop raise suddenly doesn't look so nice.
Flop comes: 6h-8c-Jc. An open-ended straight flush draw! SB bets out, one caller before it comes back to me. Is this a clear raise or actually slow-play material, being over 50% to make a full hand before the river? I often raise just flush draws in three-way pots with one overcard. This time I call.
Turn card is a low club. My flush. SB checks, other limper bets, I raise, SB cold-calls two bets and other limper re-raise. Does anyone out there think that a re-raise here represents ANYTHING but a flush? In that case, it's VERY unlikely to be worse than mine. Furthermore, with a probable 17.5BB in the pot do I call anyway, just for my two unbeatable outs, knowing that if I do, it will cost me two big bets (can't fold the river by then)?
Results to follow.
I call, so does SB.
River comes a blank. "Other caller" bets out, me and SB calls. "Other caller" shows down Ac5c for the nut flush.
I can't help thinking this was so obvious that folding may have been a possibility to his turn re-raise.
lars
I haven't looked at the results yet so I'll give my opinion and then see what happened.
Before the flop your raise is ok. With 6 limpers you are getting correct odds and if you don't like the flop you can check and get a free card or simply fold if someone bets. The problem with this raise is the high variance it causes. You also say "I decide to raise it to $6", I assume you meant $20. Your right it is bad that the sb 3 bets and knocks out a couple of players but it is hard to anticipate a 3 bet from the small blind.
I think there are arguments both ways for rasing or smooth calling the flop. I think I would just call as well. You have to love the flop and are going to win this hand close to 50% of the time. I like to raise on the turn or river when the betting doubles. Also if you do not hit you can then just fold on the river.
When the club comes on the turn I would raise the limper's bet. When he 3 bet's you obviously have to be concerned about a bigger flush but there is no way I am folding here. You do have two outs if he has the bigger flush plus there is no guarantee he has the flush. He may have a set but I think it is unlikely with three clubs on the board it would be very agressive on his part to 3 bet a set. Regardless I still call.
I think the sb suffered a classic case of falling in love with a big pair. He probably had AA or KK and couldn't let go of it. He should probably should have folded when you raised the turn.
sb could have had the ace of clubs.
In any event, I agree with you that folding on the turn is not an option except against a LOL.
Here is a question to consider.
Let's say that you could play poker, but after EVERY hand, the memories of your opponents were completely erased and they had absolutely no idea how you play. If this were the case, what hands would it be correct to raise with and in what position and with how many limpers?
I think a lot of the time, people feel that they have to raise preflop with certain hands because raising is not much of a mistake, and they get more action from the REAL hands (AK, AA, KK, QQ etc) later in future hands. IE if you ONLY raised preflop with AA and EVERYONE knew it you would probably never get any action whatsoever from any save complete idiots.
For example - is it REALLY +EV to raise on the button with JT suited after 4 limpers?
I'm not so sure it is. Let's just focus on straight and flush making potential. I'm not going to use exact numbers here because I can't remember them off the top of my head. But you have roughly a 2% chance of flopping a straight or flush and about a 20% chance of flopping either a flush draw or open ender, and you will make one of those roughly 1/3 of the time or about 8%.
So you can expect to end up with a straight or a flush about 10% of the time.
Now, some of the time you will win because you make trips, 2 pair, or a full house. So that gives you a few more percent equity. But you will also have your flush, straight, trips, 2 pair, or full house beaten some of the time. So just for the sake of keeping the numbers simple let's call that a push.
So you stand to win 10% of the time, based on friendly flops. (Don't quote to me the % of the time this hand will win against 4 or 5 random opponents because you aren't up against 4 or 5 random opponents who will never fold. And you will sometimes fold the best hand.) This is obviously a very rough and unprofessional figure, but it is close enough to the ballpark to let me continue.
Thing is, can you expect to PROFIT enough from this hand (10BB) when you do win to justify the times you don't?
I really don't think so. Remember that you will put more money than just your initial 1BB investment when you flop a draw that doesn't get there. What it comes down to is that, with 4 others in the pot each having put in 1BB, you need to make 4 or 5 MORE BB after the flop - AT LEAST. In fact, you really need to make more than this to make up for the missed draws that are going to cost you money.
-SmoothB-
I realize that you necessarily have to fudge a bit here and there to analyze this but I think you also have to consider other things such as:
a. Flopping 1 pair and winning
b. Flopping nothing and wiining with a flop bet because no one else hit anything either.
c. Getting a free card on the flop (if you check) or on the turn (if you bet and everyone checks to you again on the turn) which might allow you to win a pot that you wouldn't have won if you had not raised preflop.
Also, you are going to call preflop in any event. so, the initial cost to you for raising is not 1 big bet - it is 1 small bet. Thus, I don't think (based on your own analysis taken at face value), you need to win 4 or 5 *big* bets postflop to make it a positive EV raise. Maybe...I'll admit that I haven't fully thought it out.
Ok I suppose you could say that you need to make 2-3 more big bets when you raise than when you just call.
To be perfectly honest, I don't like the suited connectors. I think they are overrated. I think a lot of winning players that advocate them would win a lot more if they played them less frequently.
Personally I can remember MANY times when I've lost anywhere from 1/2 BB to as much as 5 or 6 BB playing these hands, but I can remember very very few times dragging pots with them, and seldom have they been big pots (with the exception of one time when I made a straight flush on the turn with 7 way action.)
I really believe that playing even the better suited connectors in early position is a big waste of money.
Now, obviously you should mix these hands into your play from time to time - if people know that you never play a hand with a card lower than J in it (except a few medium pocket pairs) you are going to get robbed blind by those who take notice.
-SmoothB-
I think what happens is that one's like/diskike for these suited connectors is directly related to one's anecdotal recent success/failure with them at the tables.
I tend to play them mainly to add a liitle interest to the game (see Sean Duffy's post in a different thread below) and, as you allude, to keep my opponents guessing a little. I certainly don't think they are huge money makers when viewed at a micro level. Hold 'em is a game of high cards with the emphasis on the plural. Always has been and always will be.
it seems to me your thinking here is empirically biased. you haven't won much in the past with suited connectors, so you don't raise with them, and therefore, when they do win, it's an unsubstantial, unsavory pot which gets edited out of your memory banks.
that said, my bias (when it comes to JTsuited) is in the opposite direction. recently I raised with JTsuited out of the small blind in a family pot, flopped 987 and I'm still counting the chips, EVEN though the TOM to my left split the pot (every street but the river was capped).
straights with JT very rarely get counterfeited (consider boards with AKQ, 987, Q98, KQ9) and get lots of chasers, many who will be raising into your monster. and the made flush beats quite a few junk combos (Tx, 9x, 8x, etc.), additional compensation when duking it out in the low-limit dungeon.
SmoothB -
I agree with the other players...seems that your distaste for suited connectors is based on your recent wins & losses with them. If a player got involved in less hands with suited connectors, he would also have to adjust his play with unsuited connectors, suited one-gaps, and unsuited one-gaps as well (not to mention medium & small pocket pairs.) I'm not saying that a player should raise a lot preflop with suited connectors, especially in early position. I've done just fine with connectors in my games...I remember a scary hand I played a few nights ago.
I had Tc9d in the middle. Six players saw the flop - it came Jd 8d 3s - I called a bet from up front, realizing I probably had six outs instead of eight because of the diamonds, and five of us saw the turn. The turn was the 8h....I doubted that anyone had made a full or quads...the board was wrong, and there wasn't enough action on the flop. The bettor checked, and I bet because I didn't think anyone had anything. I got three callers. The river was the 7d, giving me my straight, but also making a diamond flush possible and a full house a little more likely (but anyone with trip eights on the turn would have bet or raised, IMO.) We checked the river down, and I got the pot with a J high straight. Someone else had a J for two pair, and the other players just mucked their hands...no idea what they were on.
I agree that raising with suited connectors up front is probably a losing proposition, because it drives marginal hands out and leaves the premium hands to reraise against you. As you mentioned, it should be an occasional variance play if your opponents are sharp and are respecting your early raises a bit too much. Raising in late position with a bunch of callers has the effect of inviting callers to just put one more tiny SB in the pot, and they usually do (so you can get pot odds and implied odds when you do flop a draw against top pair, two pair, etc.)
Sometimes I have a bias toward or against a certain hand or type of hand based on my recent sessions. For a while, I had a reputation (still do) for flopping a lot of sets with my pocket pairs and occasionally making quads (five flopped sets in one session, with QQ making quads on the turn....oddly enough, in my next session, one of my QJ's made trip Queens on the flop and quads on the river.) Of course, the players didn't see the pocket pairs I folded that didn't make sets. On the other side of the coin, I remember that one of my ex-favorite hands, AQ, was getting crushed every time I got involved with it. C'est la vie.
Scott
Another way to look at might be to give the four limpers and the blinds typical hands for their actions and try to split the pot up between the hands.
Say the limpers have 77, A5s, K9s, T9o and the blinds will call with 85s and K7o. You have JTs, how do you split up the pot. Do you get at least15%?
Now try a few more sets of hands and get feel for what is happening.
Increase your chance of winning due to position AND the fact you raised.
If you're going to play these cards in late position and if you plan on raising AA and KK from the same position then raise 2/3 times here.
You'll get free cards, sometimes to the river. You'll win by bluffing and semi-bluffing.
You'll push out better hands when the guy in front of you bets his draw and you win with a pair tens.
If you miss, they're easy to get away from. AA and KK aren't.
Even if you miss, when you hit your AK a couple hands later, you'll pick up 2 callers you shouldn't have.
If you play poorly postflop do not raise here. Just call and hope to hit a hand.
Regards
I'll admit that I have never bothered to figure out my SD. Perhaps, I am a little embarassed by not having done so as well. But the fact is that the method of calculating your SD is just way too tedious.
Are there any good short cut methods that anyone has used?
Also, are there any computer programs etc. that can do this with ease. Keep in mind that I barely know how to turn the computer on. My wife had to help me download Planet Poker [she regrets having done so now:)] as I had no clue what the hell I was doing.
Thanks.
Do you have Excel or a similar spreadsheet program? It's fairly simple to put the formula from the "computing your standard deviation" essay into a spreadsheet. I could explain further but if you're not familiar with spreadsheets it mightn't make sense.
Speaking of embarassment, should I be embarassed that I have an SD of about $500/hr at 20-40?
-Sean
Thanks Sean. I will first ask my better half - the real brains of the family - to help me out with this spreadsheet stuff. I think she knows all about that. Paul Talbot has also offered to assist (thanks Paul).
I suspect that my SD at Planet poker 20-40 will be around $400 per hour. I will report back later and maybe you guys can help me interpret the results.
How many hours of play at a certain limit do you need to play before your SD is meaningful?
My standard deviation at $20-$40 was only about $300 per hour. I suspect that this means that your card reading skills still have a way to go, but your higher number can also be impacted by the particular games that you sit in, or other possible errors that you could be making.
Skp mentions Planet Poker. If Skp and Sean are computing Std. Dev. based on online statistics then $500 is pretty low considering they may be seeing 70-80 hands per hour (@ Paradise)
Also I thought a STDDEV of around 12 BB was normal, and that 10 BB was very low variance poker (ie. weak)?
You are right if these numbers are pertaining to online. Expert players, and there are only a small number of these, will have a lower standard deviation than most everyone else.
That figure is for online play, so perhaps the increased hands/hr inflates my SD a bit. I'm usually fairly good at reading hands in multiway pots, but I often play shorthanded, where it's much more difficult to put someone on a hand, and also a lot of the bad opponents I play against are unpredictable. When someone's willing to cap it before the flop with T7s and jam away on an ATx flop with one of their suit against my AK, I suppose that an increased SD is pretty much unavoidable.
-Sean
skp, send me an email and I will send you an excel spreadsheet that computes your standard deviation. All you have to do is enter the number of hours and your results for each session and it does the rest. My standard deviation in $20-$40 is about $370 per hour.
Jim, Paul, Piers, Sean, Kevin...Thanks to all of you guys who offered to assist with the spreadsheet program. I sure appreciate it. I put Jim's program to work and it is now on my desktop. Unbelievable how easy it is to use.
Anyway, my Planet Poker 20-40 hourly standard deviation based on 430 hours of plays since August 15, 2000 is at $380.
Now, I have to go back and read Mason's book to figure out what the hell that means:)
SKP - I recently bought a program to keep track of my wins and losses because my spreadsheet was very cumbersome and I could not easily sort or keep track of the hours played. "Stat King" is excellent and it computes a number of things including SD instantly. This program is well worth the small price that is charged and I think you can get it on this website. My SD for 6-12 thru 15-30 (My regular games) is right at 200 and I am striving to bring this down. Too many starting hands that create bigger winns and bigger losses. PS Anything that you get from Jim B will be excellent. I sure am glad that he is now published. I don't think we will ever get better instruction for the thinking process of the top flight players. Very instructional.
Thanks and I am of course in complete agreement with your comments on Jim.
While I seem to think along the same limes of Rick, John and the sadly missed Dan Hanson, I think I have learned the most from Jim precisely because his views are at various times different than mine (and probably Rick's and John's views). Of course, his views are always supported by sound reasoning (I hope that people find that mine are too:)]. In any event, I sure listen to Jim even when I disagree with him. I then try and assimilate his thinking into my play and that has made me a better player - no doubt about it.
very loose, passive 10-20 game, I'm in BB with 7h2s, UTG raises, 8 players (including SB) call. I felt that since I was getting 19-1 it would be correct to call. Flop missed me completely, and I folded at first opportunity. I am wondering about two things
1. Are the pot odds big enough to justify my call?
2. If the answer to above is yes, then what are the minimum odds I would need to play 72o in this position.
Folding here can really hurt your image at the table. Don't let them know that you play well. Forget the pot odds and call for this reason alone.
Based on pot odds alone, you should fold 72 offsuit but yours is an interesting take and one worthy of consideration.
Can anyone see the error in the above post? John F. please do not reply.
Don't know which post you mean when you talk about an error, but...if there are this number of players loose enough to call a raise, are they likely to notice the BB folding for odds of 17-1?
Yes they will (although whether it matters is still an open question).
Ok...Poor man's Glover...tell me what my error was already!
then it goes something like this:
skp, you said:
"Based on pot odds alone,"
Do you see how this phrase is misleading? Do you often base your poker decisions on pot odds alone, skp? Sigh. I thought better of you.
skp, you said:
"...you should..."
Can you see the inaccuracy in your word choice, skp? First of course, it refers back to the mistaken "based on pot odds alone". (Sigh. I really had thought better of you, skp. :-() But in addition, it suggests that once you've assessed the relavant variables pertaining to your decision you "should" make the correct decision, but may not. However, this in turn indicates that you have not, in fact, weighed all the relevant variables. For if you had, you *would* make the correct decision would you not? Maybe you need to start looking at your decision making process a little more closely, skp. :-)
skp, you said:
"...fold 72 offsuit..."
Nice fold. ;-) But, skp, do you see the misleading implication of this comment? I would think that one of your intellectual honesty would avoid this error. Sigh. By mentioning only 72o, you imply that there are no other hands you would fold here. Are there no other hands worth folding here, skp? Perhaps for you there are not. For others, especially those who think, there are.
skp, you said:
"...but yours is an interesting take..."
skp, do you base your poker decisions on whether or not a "take" is "interesting", or do you assess the relevant variables, including the risks and rewards associated with the decisions available to you, and then choose the option that your analysis indicates will have the highest EV? How long have you been basing your play on "interesting takes", skp? But don't feel alone, skp, many others here, including the revered authors share your methodology.
skp, you said:
"...and one worthy of consideration."
skp, do you merely "consider" ideas that may pertain to poker tactics and strategy? Is this "considering" enough for you. Perhaps so. I'm sure there are others here who share your opinion. skp, free your mind! Go that step beyond considering. Make a decision! Implement! Think for yourself! Don't let the church of 2+2 blind you to acting on the basis of your own analysis... or I may have to talk to David about your place on the list of top 50 posters. ;-)
[Note: I hope it is clear the above is parody only. In reality I, "Glove Marker", very much respect skp and his analyses here. And in fact saw nothing wrong with the post in question.]
x
Not to mention the impression you make at the end of the hand if you win with it. You'll get action all day after showing down 72o. Kind of "implied session odds."
Paul Talbot
If that's a problem, just fold out of turn and go to the bathroom, get the waitress's attention to get a drink, etc.
-Sean
Fold, family-pot tables won't notice you one way or the other. They're too preoccupied with the hopes of flopping a four flush/or straight to their 9-7 suited.
Muck it. It's almost 29-1 against you hitting two pair or a set on the flop. One of the problems with this hand is that in order to mitigate the fundmentally negative expectation from calling before the flop, you'll have to occasionally chase with some hands due to the large size of the pot. So it's not just a negative ev play but a high variance one as well.
I suspect that the worst hand you can play here is 42o.
The odds of 72o winning go down more from each caller than you make up from each additional $40 that goes into the pot. The problem is that you can make no truly strong hands. With this many players even flopping trips may not win, and two low pair is certainly not that great. If you don't care about image fold.
.
Check out the following:
http://www.twoplustwo.com/digests/apr98_main.html
although Q5o is a tad better than 72o the situations are similar.
n/t
.
I was in the BB, so I only have to call the raise. Therefore my pot odds are 19-1.
With what hands do you generally call a raise with when you are posting?
I feel like I'm occasionally too loose in this spot, but its hard to say because people online tend to raise much more liberally if there is a poster (and they almost never limp if there is a poster in the mid limit games).
with a middle position raiser is defending the post (1 off the button) with K2 acceptable?
what are the weakest hands that should be played in this position?
Shawn Keller
I think you'd want to call with slightly stronger hands than you would in the big blind after the small blind calls a steal raise. Although you have position on a loose raiser, you have 3 players that can 3-bet, all of whom will think that neither the raiser nor you are very strong, one of whom will have position on you throughout the hand. I'd call with most suited cards, all pairs and most 2 cards above a nine. I'd reraise with 77/A9s/ATo and drop the unsuited junk.
I'd hate playing K2o for the usual reasons: when you hit a king with another player you're toast and when you miss the flop you end up often folding the best hand.
This is one reason why there is a separate section for Internet Poker -- players online play differently than in casino games.
I will defend a late position post with a lot of hands, but K-2 isn't enough to call an early-to-mid-position raise with. Consider it another way: would you call a middle-position raiser with K-2o on the BB?
Yeah but this instance is clearly different because you have position on the raiser, and the raiser's standards have most likely been lowered because of the your posting.
I dont like to play dominated trash hands (such as K5,K2,J5,Q7) but will defend with Ax, K8 up, Q8 up, all pairs, any two suited, connectors down to 45, one gappers down to 46, two gappers down to 69.
If the open-raise is in middle to late position, and its folded around to me I will re-raise liberally. Most of these hands play better heads up than 3 or 4 way. I will smooth call the big pairs, though.
SB = 1/2 * BB. 5 Players limp in so you are getting 11-1 on your money. Should you call every hand or still play selectively? How about 63s for example?
You wouldn't consider 6-3s to be more selective than just a random hand such as 8-3o?
Mark -
The problem with calling a lot in the SB is your horrible position. Sure, you may get in some checkraises when you do get a playing hand, but you still need cards that are capable of getting good flops (top pair, straight draws, and good flush draws.) Also, the BB may raise if he catches a premium hand or one that he wants to raise for value.
63s, hmmm? Where are you going with that....your only chance is to get 5 4 on the flop for an open-ended straight draw, and you're not drawing to the high end. The suited doesn't really matter...you may make a baby flush and get hammered by a higher flush. I'd fold that one every time.
I typically play as if I was in middle position, considering I'm getting great odds on my hands. However, you need to know when to get away from marginal hands in the SB that may get punished (ex: you have Ac7c, and the flop comes As Jd 4h...your Ace is probably outkicked, you have no flush possibility, and if you do bet you'll probably get raised.) Another thing you need to consider is the player to your right...if he's capable of stealing blinds often, then you should loosen up your calling hands and reraise with some of them just to show him that he can't run you over every time.
On the other hand, calling in the SB gives you great checkraising opportunities when you do hit a hand...one time I had 55 in the SB with four callers. I called, the BB checked his option, and I flopped my set. I checked, because the SB is supposed to check...someone bet because they thought their top pair was good, and I checkraised him. He called, and I bet the turn, a blank. He showed me top pair/decent kicker. I just stacked his chips.
Scott
Maybe I play too loose out of the SB, but in the situation Mark describes I have to call with 3-6 suited every time. with that many limpers and only 1/2 a bet owed, you don't have to flop many winners to make it worthwhile.
My theory? fold that hand for a measly 1/2 bet and watch the flop come up A-3-3 or k-3-6, and see how you feel.
This hand can win by making a straight or a flush. I think that (1) the pot odds and (2) the fact that with that many limpers the deck could be rich with helpful cards makes this a clear call, especially if the big blind is not the overly agressive type. Obviously, you have to play well enough to avoid being trapped, and know when to give it up.
I'd be interested to see responses to this strategy.
Joe
In a 20-40 game, there would be $130 in the pot when it is your turn to act and you have to call $10.
No way I fold 63s here.
But I would fold real crappy hands such as J3 off suit etc.
A marginal hand might be T6 off suit. I probably fold it though.
Uncertainty arises with the play of hands such as K2 offsuit. They could get you in trouble if you don't play well postflop. If you do, you should probably call with them as well.
This hand occured. I thought about calling because of the substantial pot odds and something I read about 15-30 strategy from the small blind. I remember reading that for $5 you should throw it in every time and then fold the trash if the BB raises. I thought about using the same strategy, but alas I did not.
Flop was 663 and there was a ton of action postflop. Really made me regret my choice. One player had limped with AA and another with TT, and they were bad players.
I will have to loosen up in the small blind based on your guys expert advice.
Mark,
My answers were based on getting 13 to 1 odds (five limpers plus the big blind). At 11 to 1 some of the worse suited hands (72s) and offuit connectors (54) probably should be taken off my list. I would play 63 suited in any case since it is suited and has some straight potential.
If the big blind raises it hurts hands that get get dominated more than the drawing hands. For example, I would throw away an ace with offsuit garbage or K-9 and K-7 offsuit if I called for 1/2 a bet and a solid player raised in the big blind. But I would play all of my drawing hands.
Regards,
Rick
If the big blind never raises I put the 1/2 bet in without looking.I never put up a live straddle so this is my little journey into any 2card town(as SPM would say)
Gotta play it, or anything else that can flop a strong hand or draw. Any ace is debatable, and I wouldn't play 2 unrelated cards, but I would play any 2 suited cards, and one-gap 35 or higher, and any 2 cards that resemble a poker hand. One pair will rarely win these pots, so think of hands geared towards straights and flushes.
If the BB raises a lot, be more selective, but not much more.
Good luck, you'll need it with most of these hands :)
Dan Z.
If five limp then you are getting 13 to 1 if the big blind does not raise. So I'll assume you meant 13 to 1 and an un-aggressive big blind
There is no way I play every hand. Pure garbage such as J2 offsuit is just that. It never flops enough good hands to justify seeing the flop for half a bet. An exception might be against a single weak, predictable limper and big blind where you can often steal when they miss.
Here are the minimum hands I would play.
1) All suited hands.
2) Any offsuit connector except 2-3, 3-4.
3) Any one gapper 6-4 and better.
4) Any ace (but this hand is worth less than you think).
5) K-9 and better.
6) Q-9 and better.
Anyway, 3-Bet Brett thinks I'm too loose so I await his critique.
Regards,
Rick
Rick-
For what it's worth, I agree completely with your assessment with the exception of A-anything. With this, you gotta flop two pair, and even if it hits you are in grave danger of a late running pair to out-kick your two pair.
I think Axo is ok there. It can be tricky but you're getting good odds. If you flop an ace, you can always just check and fold if it's two bets back to you; if the flop checks around, the coast is probably clear.
Personally I use Abdul's standards for small blind defense, which can be found on www.posev.com. Versus 5 loose limpers, he recommends any suited cards, any Axo and Kxo, all but the weakest Qxos, connectors down to 54, and one-gappers down to J9.
-Sean
Sean,
If I hold Ax I will often check the flop when an ace flops and decide what to do based on who bets and overcalls (which means I often fold). I might checkraise an aggressive late bettor. Also, A8 offsuit might be a decent ace-kicker against some players.
I wonder why Abdul rates single gappers so far below connectors? The straight it loses is a bad one and the staights you make are more disguised. Perhaps single gap hands flop far fewer double gut shots also. Reading the print on the Petriv Odds book gives me a migraine ;-).
My friend thought I should include hands like K8 and K7 on the list and I admit I might play those too.
Regards,
Rick
No you should not call every hand. Someone else was asking if you should ever call 1/2 bets with 72o, even if 9 others are seeing the flop.
The answer is no. I would not call 1/2 bet with Q2 offsuit with 9 opponents. The reason is that with many of these hands, if you get a flop that you like and there is any action, then you can easily be beaten already and possibly drawing dead or slim.
The other problem is that many of these hands have 'negative implied odds' in the sense that you will be forced to put in bets later, because of the pot odds. IE you have 63 of spades and the flop is 75A with one spade. If there is a bet and 5 callers, with 8 people seeing the flop, you are getting 14:1 odds on your call - you have the odds to call here. But your gutshot is not to the nuts. You make money on this call, but in the long run you will go broke playing like this. How can this be? Because your big mistake was calling preflop in the 1st place. You have trapped yourself for more bets on later rounds.
-SmoothB-
SmoothB,
I agree with your reasoning regarding playing offsuit garbage out of the small blind, even (or should I say especially) with nine opponents.
Then you wrote regarding calling a bet getting 14 to 1 with 63 suited when the flop comes 7-5-A with one in your suit: ” You make money on this call, but in the long run you will go broke playing like this. How can this be? Because your big mistake was calling preflop in the 1st place. You have trapped yourself for more bets on later rounds.”
If the call is correct before the flop, it is correct assuming you play at least reasonably well post flop. If you make money on this flop call, then you make money on this flop call when you play well to the river. No one forces us to trap ourselves post flop. The key to playing marginal hands before the flop is superior post flop play. That is why a studious novice (or any novice, of course if they are not studious they generally don't play tight) should play tighter before the flop than someone who is near expert.
Regards,
Rick
Maybe it isn't as true for most people here (I play 5-10 and 10-20), but I'm still at a point where these hands can cost much more than the initial half-bet. If you flop 6-6-3, great. If it flops A-Q-K, great. If you're going to play hands like 63s out of the small blind, you've got to be very confident in your ability to play post-flop when you see things like 9-6-2 or 4-4-3. Also, if two of your suit flop and no obvious straight draw, how do you play when there's 3-5 players waiting around?
I agree with the notion of playing 95% of hands out of the small blind with a 2/3 structure, like a $10/$15 blind structure in a $15/$30 game, but I like the lower variance with potentially slightly lower EV of folding some of the more questionable hands out of the small blind. Maybe I just need to improve my post flop play.
From reading Jim's CP article and a couple of recent threads here, my decision to play only O8 in Vegas from now on looks better and better.
Just for example, where I play, if you cap with AA against someone and another player's calling along on a 965r flop, you have two outs(at best) 98% of the time, no matter what happened pre-flop.
Yes, this is a 10-20 or 15-30 game, and yes, I've given up any ideas of becoming a fulltime Vegas pro, no matter how much the SHOE event at the WSOP pays for first :)
Too bad my game only runs on weekends and is 120 miles from where I live, though.....
10-20 hold'em: I have Ts Tc on the button. A loose player who bluffs a lot (LB) limps in early position, a loose player limps in mid-late position, I raise, the big blind and limpers call, everyone else folds. There are 4 players and 8.5 small bets in the pot.
The flop is Ac Kc Jc.
The big blind checks, LB bets, the next player folds, it is up to me. Do I call, raise, or fold?
Hmmm. Straight, Flush and Royal draws?
I think I would peel a card without a second thought.
~stephen
Raise to try and get it heads up with the loose bluffer.
Mike,
There are arguments against raising a bluffer but in this case I would raise the flop since you raised before the flop and he will tend to put you on a made hand including the ace or king. I would also want the blind out early in order to get head up with the bluffer. If you get head up, aggressive flop play may stop LB from continuing with the bluff (if he is bluffing or half bluffing – e.g., he could have a jack with a club) on the turn. This is fine since you may want to draw to the club, queen or ten cheaply and induce a bluff on the river, which you must call in most cases.
Regards,
Rick
n/t
In a thread below, a hand was discussed where an UTG player raised, our hero reraised with TT, 2 late position players called, and the big blind called the 2 bets. We have 15.5 small bets in the pot preflop.
The flop comes K 7 3 and the big blind leads at us. As it turns out, our hero folded and would have won a nice pot (of course, not important to our thinking). Our hero was wondering what he should have done in this spot.
In a follow-up post, Tom Haley mentioned that he did some calculations and found that you only need to be winning a very small percentage of the time here on the flop in order to call your opponent down.
I did these calculations and the results were a little surprising. Please note that these calculations are conservative. i.e. I erred on the side of winning less bets than you actually might and your hand holding up less than it probably would in real life. They are as follows:
1. If you are guaranteed that the players behind will fold, it costs you 5 small bets to call down your opponent and you will win 20. It turns out that you only need the best hand on the flop about 13% of the time in order to make this play correct. This includes you hitting your set AND your opponent drawing out on you if you currently have the best hand. This means that if you have any doubt that your opponent has a king here, you should call him down.
2. In real life, we don't know about the players behind. I did some calculations assuming different percentages of a player raising behind us. If we call, and a player raises behind, we take a card off on the flop and then fold on the turn to a bet.
Here's the results: The first column is the chance of a player raising behind us. The second column is the % chance we need of having a better hand than the BETTOR.
30 14
50 17
80 31
The reason that the 2nd column is % chance we have a better hand than the bettor is that if there is a flop raiser, we won't play past the turn unless we have a set.
So even if a player will raise behind us 50% of the time, if we think that we beat the ORIGINAL BETTOR 17% of the time, calling is +EV. The reason for this is that we are getting 16:1 immediate odds which is almost enough to try and hit our set on the turn, so we don't have to have the better hand all that often.
3. A third possibility is a raise. This one is much tougher to calculate but in general I don't think it's the right play here. If we raise, we could easily pay 3 small bets to see the turn. If we call, and it's gets raised and reraised behind us we fold saving 2 small bets. One reason to raise would be to knock out all the hands behind us which could beat us assuming we have the bettor beat now, and maybe this is enough in this big pot. Not sure about this.
I think these calculations are correct. I thought these results were interesting and wanted to share them...
Comments?
Puggy
You and I are "playing from the same sheet of music" on this hand. I did some rough calculations and I was surprised myself at the results. The positive reasons that you mention for raising are the ones I was thinking of and I concede that raising may not be right. The one advantage that might be obtained from raising is that more information (thus saving you some bets on the expensive streets) about the strength of TT might be garnered. Of course calling can have it's advantages. The thing that is surprising to me is how big of an underdog you can be for having the best going with TT to make playing on (call or raise) the right play. I definitely believe that folding TT was wrong in this spot but I wouldn't have thought so without doing the math. Thank you for posting your data on this hand.
Another situation that I think calling down is inferior to raising... If you raise the flop heads up into this highly uncordinated board you will almost always get checked to on the turn If you improve or really think you have the best hand you can bet the turn... if not you can check saving yourself half a bet over just calling on the flop and the turn.
Sean
Go to LA this weekend for my first time. Where should i go for the best 30-60 (40-80) games ?? thx for any info
Knut,
For 40/80, Hollywood Park and Commerce both have good games. Commerce has 30/60 also, and Hawaiian Gardens is getting a 30/60 in the evenings.
If you are at Hollywood Park on Saturday, I should be there from about noon to early evening playing 15/30 and 20/40. I go on the board as RJN. Ask the boardperson and they should be able to point me out.
Regards,
Rick
PS: In honor of Mason and Wrong Forum Man, I should say this sort of post belongs on the Exchange/Other Topics Forum ;-).
There is also a 40-80 at the Bike. It is real loose-aggressive. Commerce games are tighter, The HP game is my favorite, more loose-passive.
BTW, whatever happened to WFM?
I would try Commerce they will have 2 30/60 games 2 40/80 games and higher games 80/160 etc. Hollywood Park would be good to but me 2nd choice. Good Luck
I would try Commerce they will have 2 30/60 games 2 40/80 games and higher games 80/160 etc. Hollywood Park would be good to but me 2nd choice. Good Luck.
I am in a 40/80 game...slightly on the loose side for 40/80, but pretty normal. UTG is a pretty decent player ... she limps. next is an awful player, she limps as well, I am next, and I limp with KJo. two other limpers behind me come in, SB calls, and BB checks. 7 players in this pot.
The flop comes Js9c3h
SB & BB checks. UTG bets out...next limper folds, I just flat call...everyone else folds.
I am pretty sure UTG has one of these hands, in order of probability : QJ, JT, KJ, 33, AJ, 99. I can almost discount AJ and 99, because I am pretty sure she would have raised with them (even AJo). So the only hand I am scared of is 33. Should I raise on the flop? There is no flush draw, but there is a straight draw...and anyone playing QT, KQ, T8 will have odds to call a raise (but notice that I don't think anyone behind me will raise with one of those drawing hands because there are two players in front of them, and straight draw typically don't raise for the free card as much as flush draws do)...however, I am hoping to raise it on the turn if a none threatenng card its....lucky for me, no one behind me holds AJ or J9, or raises with a straight draw (a raise with a straight draw here would really hurt my action, as I want to get rid of the straight draws behind me on the turn by raising the UTG's bet...but if a straight draw does raise behind me, then I lose the chance of raising the turn, as UTG would then check with QJ, KJ, JT - which is what I think she has). comments on waiting for the turn to raise is appreciated.
turn is a 6s.
UTG bets. I raise, she calls. The fact that she does not reraise completely signfies that 33 is out of the question....since she did not reraise preflop, AJ and 99 are low probability hands, and KJ, QJ, and JT are the most probable hands she has. If a Q or T hits, I am going to check behind her check, or fold to her bet (since I raised on the turn, if she actually bets out on the river, I would have to think the chances are very high that she hit two pair). There is also a chance she holds QTs, but I would doubt she would bet out on the flop & turn as well with that holding (maybe on the flop, but not on the turn).
river is a 3c.
UTG checks, I bet, she calls.
KJo beats QJs.
which leads me to another question - is QJs a reasonable hand to limp with UTG? notice how a decent player (me in this case) could read her hand almost perfectly based on her action....which leads me to believe that QJs is a very dangerous hand to have UTG.
I think that you ought to raise the flop. Waiting to raise on the turn has more merit if the pot had been raised preflop i.e. with the 7 small bets in the pot, your raise should get rid of middle pairs, gutshots etc. If the pot had been raised preflop, you may want to wait until the turn to pull the trigger.
Good read on your opponet but I think you should bet the river even if a Jack or a Ten comes off because if the ten comes off, it is more likely that she holds QJ and if the Jack comres off, it is more likely that she has QT. It is unlikely that she would checkraise even with 2 pair as your play on the hand smells like you have a set.
BTW, you cannot fold if she bets the river. The pot is too big at this point.
Lastly, I like her preflop limp with QJs more than your limp with KJ offsuit. While you put a good read on her hand, the fact is that her hand will generally play better than yours in a multiway pot. I particularly don't like your limp because you have limped in after 2 limpers. This has all the makings of a multiway pot in which I cringe when I hold a hand like KJ off.
skp wrote : "BTW, you cannot fold if she bets the river. The pot is too big at this point. "
Against a typical player, I can see calling being correct...against this specific player, I can't call if a Q hits - mainly because I believe my read is very correct and she's probably afraid of me checking it with KJ or AJ when an overcard hits. I agree that if she bets out on any other card (even a T), I should call because of the size of the pot.
skp wrote : "Lastly, I like her preflop limp with QJs more than your limp with KJ offsuit. While you put a good read on her hand, the fact is that her hand will generally play better than yours in a multiway pot. I particularly don't like your limp because you have limped in after 2 limpers. This has all the makings of a multiway pot in which I cringe when I hold a hand like KJ off. "
I'm not all that excited with KJo with two limpers in front of me either. But I like it better than QJs UTG with out knowing if it is going to be headsup on the flop or a multiway pot. The KJo call was based on two limpers, otherwise it is muck or raise (especially if I get a read one or two players behind me is ready to muck) with no callers ahead of me. Although it is not a great multi way pot, it is a hand that can see a flop, and maybe have it heads up after the flop (which actually argues against my flat call on the flop - it argues for raising the flop if the flop is a good one for KJ).
You caught the flop but are really drawing with five outs (ignore the runner-runner straight) to win if 5 players stay in. Raising dramatically improves your expectation here.
SB & BB checked, UTG bet, and the next guy folded. there's a good chance SB & BB will both fold, given they checked an unraised preflop pot....I would have guessed this hand would have been 3 or 4 players (me included) seeing the turn. At the same time, I do also see the merits of raising preflop...don't get me wrong...it does seem to me know that is better than flat calling...but not by too much. if it was a raised flop by someone behind me, I would be more inclined to raise and try to get AQ to fold.
I am in the cutoff seat....losing my ass all night long. A fairly new player is in the small blind (he doesn't know I've been running bad tonight). everyone folds to me, I have AdAs. I raise, button folds, small blind thinks, thinks, then calls...big blind folds.
Flop is QdTd9h.
He checks, I bet, he raises, I call.
Turn is a 4d (3 diamonds on the board, I have Ad).
He bets, I can either raise or call. I decide to just call, although I think raising with the intention of checking on the river, or betting out on the river is fine too.
River is a 8h.
He bets, i call.
He turns over Jh8d - hit a straight on the flop.
Just a typical bad beat? If I played better, should I have lost one more bet (by raising the turn)?
Typical bad beat. Raising on the turn is an option but so is calling.
I am in the cutoff with A4s. The guy next to me (LAP) two bets. He has raised about half the pots, with hands like KTo, Q8s, etc.....I'm not sure if calling, raising or folding is correct. I call though.
The button calls as well, as do the blinds.
The flop comes Ad4d7s.
SB & BB checks, LAP bets, I raise, button 3 bets, SB calls, LAP caps...should I call? I do call.
Turn is a T. SB checks, LAP bets....against my better judgement (especially in hindsight - no, not hindsight after seeing the player's hands, but after thinking about the action up to this point)....I call. To me, this is pretty dumb...I've gotta think that someone has a flush draw, someone has a AK/AQ/AJ, and the other guy probably has AT or trip 4s or trip 7s. I put LAP on the AK/AQ/AJ, but one of the guys behind me, or both probably has me beat. A fold here, or maybe on the flop is better than calling.
Button raises, SB calls, LAP calls...I fold.
River is a Js (no flush). All three check.
SB turns over 44 for a set of 4s.....LAP turns over AQ, and button turns over A7o.
Where should I have folded? On the flop (when it got capped back to me) or on the turn (when it got bet by LAP to me or when it got raised by the button)?
There's no way I fold on the flop. And I probably raise LAP's bet on the turn.
But I think the problems were caused by your play preflop. In that particular situation with LAP raising, I think you ought to 3 bet or muck. You don't want to just call as you are not going to have a multiway pot in any event. If you are going to play, 3 bet it and try and get it heads-up and be prepared to go to the river against the LAP.
On balanec, I think mucking preflop is still the better play over-all.
Does it bother anyone else when the sb (1st dealt) wins holding an improbable hand after calling 1.5 or 2.5 bets and everyone else involved gets a good piece of the flop or has a big pair as well ? This just seems awfully strange to me, especially when the sb is suppose to know better than call with his cheese ! Just another day at the office huh ?
If one is playing in say 10-20 limit game and a player raises who you know with 100 percent certainty will only raise with AA (And yes we have more than one like that here), what do you need to have to call out of the big blind assuming all others have folded?
Hope to hear from you soon.
I would call if I was holding the other two aces.
You are getting 3.5-1 odds to call here. AA beats most hands by more than 4-1. However, assuming 100% accurate read, you can probably induce incorrect plays from your opponent postflop, but will never make an incorrect play yourself (incorrect in the FTOP sense). Thus I might consider calling with hands like suited connectors which do not need an ace to make a straight, such as T9s down to 65s, if your opponent is very likely to make a mistake postflop (either is bluffed easily or will always pay off).
But really the best play is probably just to fold, unless their are other benefits to calling. If the player is likely to go on tilt if their aces are cracked, that might be an ok reason to call.
David
Since you know exactly what the other player holds I'll sometimes call with more hands because it plays so easily post-flop. Especially if I know he'll play them hard and I can crack him. However, theoretically, you're better off folding all holdings as no hand plays particularly well heads up against AA.
If you are 100% certain that he has AA then I think you can call with any two cards except an unsuited ace. According to my computer simulation, the only hands that are significantly worse than 9:1 heads up against an ace are offsuit aces. Because he has aces then unless a four-flush appears you should know exactly where you are at all times. I think implied are more than enough to call, especially because if you do this then you could have any two cards and he has no choice but to play his aces hard. However, I could also be totally wrong here; I'm not very good at limit play heads up, only no-limit.
A ten handed $20-$40 game at the Mirage. I am in middle position with the KdQd. Two early limpers and I limp. The cutoff, the button, and small blind limp. There is $140 in the pot and 7 players.
The flop is: QsTh3s
Checked to me and I bet. The cutoff, a solid player, raises. The button, a decent player, re-raises. All fold back to me. Do I 4 bet, call, or fold? Results later in the day.
I would call, and see what happens on the turn. It is possible the combination of hands out there may be something like KJ, 2 spades, J9, QJ, something along those lines. If that's the case, and a blank hits the turn, I'd bet out, and then muck if it gets raised...but if a danger card hits the turn (any spade, any A, K, J, 9), then watch out....of course with a K and a J (non spade), you will have outs to call if you are behind, and may also be ahead (assuming it is not 2 bet to you on the turn).
hehe ...another character posting and playing Planet Poker at the same time...get back to your game Doc and concentrate:)
you know I have problems at live casinos when I am playing in the 5 handed 20/40 game at Planet poker, posting on twoplustwo, answering emails, watching TV, and still feel a bit bored!
While I don't think you have to fear that the King of spades will make someone a flush or str8, I think you probably have to fold here as you are likely playing a 3 outer or drawing extremely slim to TT or 33. Make the button a loose aggressive player and you probably have to ride this one out (at least on the flop) as the cut-off likely has KQ/QJ/QT as opposed to AQ (although some solid players may limp in late position with AQ after several players have already limped in).
Jim,
I would fold. My reasons are based on the following. You are getting pot odds of 5-to-1 to call on the flop, but you need 8.4-to-1 not counting runner-runner straight.
Futhermore, according to your post, your opponents are a solid and decent player. They most likely could have you beat already, or a better draw like KJ or J9 to beat you.
If I'm wrong with my judgement, please prove otherwise.
If the players are really decent, it is unlikely that they are raising with draws. Both would reason that raising would greatly reduce the chance of more callers, while they would rather keep players in.
Given this, the three bettor almost certainly has you beat. You could have from 5 to 0 outs, none of which would be to the nuts. I think folding is fine.
Clearfold in my opinion. Why wuld they thin the field with draws? If they did, well too bad youll know next time :O))))
!
Jim,
As an aside, I like raising with KQs in middle position after a couple limpers but calling isn't bad.
This flop could easily hit someone for a set or two pair and a strong draw could also be out. One of the draws could easily be a J-9 making hitting your king useless. In fact, most straight draws will contain cards you need. There is also a two flush not in your suit, which would be very scary (mostly to you) if it hits. You also could be facing another raise if you just call.
I would fold this hand given the description of the opponents and I think it isn't that close. OTOH, If I was against one opponent who raised me I would probably go to the river, since you can keep it cheap, you may be leading or not far behind, and there is a lot of dead money in the pot.
Regards,
Rick
I think the prudent play is to fold in this situation, as unfortunately you are out of position and probably going uphill even if you have the best hand at the moment.
Blood pressure and variances will surely rise if you continue on here, as even if you raise, both your opponents have easy calls to flush and open end str8t draws.(if you're not already way behind)
I like Rick's suggestion of a preflop raise here a good bit of the time in a tight game, and it might have really helped here.
Assuming the solid play of the opponents behind you who are going to use their positional advantage most of the time does anyone think this situation might have called for a check-raise rather than a bet out on the flop? (If you decided you were going to make a stand and not get pushed off top pair with likely best kicker, on the flop anyways)
i would call, and, if it raised and reraised again, now you fold.
Probably one of the players is on a draw, and the other has a queen, of which, your kicker is definitely better. I would call all the way unless a spade hits.
My guess is you folded, which is probably the best move considering the information given.
A tough spot and one which I would think is very player dependent. I suppose my main focus would be on the button. Would he 3-bet a draw here? If the button would not 3-bet QJ,Q9, etc., there are multiple problems for you as KQ is likely behind to someone or playing to chop with possibly some negated outs. I don't like your position here, since you are vulnerable to a). getting outplayed later and b). getting trapped on the turn. I would probably fold.
If you do play on, I suppose calling 2 cold and getting cutoff's response would be one way to go. I see problems with betting out on the turn though, since it becomes more difficult to call a raise given the play on the flop. If you check the turn, and it got checked to the button who bet, I would consider check raising.
Great post!
Kevin
Since its hard to tell where you are here, I would let this go. The chance that you will be ahead on the end is not profitable given this hand will be costly to see through.
A preflop raise by ANYONE would have helped here, but given you chose to play a volume pot, ( although I assume you would have 3 bet had the cut off or button raised preflop) neither the flop nor the opponents are cooperating.
This was a good post...very simple situation, with layers of complexity.
BTW, how often would you raise preflop, versus just call as you did, in this specific situation?
A9
See what playing crap out of position will get you Jim. :). It's close either way. I think it depends on your read of the first player. Would he limp with A-Q or Q-10? Would he raise you with Q-J (this seems unlikely)? One of them probably has a good draw to beat you (my guess would be the button) and the other may have you beat. I would probably lay it down and take a walk to avoid seeing the turn and river.
I folded. I figured between the cutoff and the button someone had AQ, QT, or maybe a set. Against AQ or QT I am playing 3 outs which is a 15:1 shot. Against a set I am dead to perfect-perfect. The two flush was also a concern since the Ks may not be an out. Finally, in Las Vegas the cap is a bet and four raises, so I could call now and it could get 4 bet and capped back to me. The cutoff made it 4 bets and the button just called.
The turn is: Kh
The cutoff bet and the button called.
The river is: Qh
The cutoff bet and the button folded.
I never saw what anyone had. In retrospect my guess is that the button had something like JsTs and the cutoff had AQ or KQ or QT.
Thanks for your comments.
with a Group 2 hand which KQ suited is.
10/20 Holdem. I am in mid position with AK and raise. SB who plays probably 80% of the hands and almost always goes to the river calls. The BB also calls. BB is new to the table, but has not taken the flop in the one round he has played since he entered the game.
Flop comes K 8 3 rainbow. Both check, I bet and both call. Turn is another 8 putting two diamonds on board. Both check and I bet SB calls and BB checkraises. Two questions: 1) should I have bet the turn given this board and 2) should I call the checkraise?
Result: another diamond came on the river and SB's flush beat BB's three eights.
Yes you bet the turn. With no str8s or flushes on board kings with an ace kicker is a great hand. If there was more players in the hand a check is not a terrible play simply because there are so few free cards that can hurt you. But I would always bet this hand.
I would call the raise unless it was a very predictable player. Some players I would re-raise. Many players will try this move when they have top pair and turn a flush draw.
Of course you should bet this board. If you routinely fail to bet your hands for value every time a scary care comes you will be leaving a lot of money on the table, and letting people draw against you for free.
For example, in that hand, a check on the turn would give the flush draw a free card.
As for calling the checkraise, that depends on the person who checkraised. Against your average player, a fold is in order. Some players are trickier and will wait to the turn to checkraise with a hand like KQ.
-SmoothB-
I was called to the must move 10-20 HE game. Lots of new faces there. The regular who I was replacing in the game and had over 3 racks he was about to cash in pulled me off the table and whispered, "These guys are action junkies..don't get run off a hand..they are capping every round with total garbage." I nodded and thanked him for the advice, a bit bewildered. As I took my seat and exchanged the usual pleasantries with the two faces I knew, I had a chance to check out the others. They were not only new to me, but they had mounds of chips and were very very young. I was just in time to see a showdown. A regular had bet all the way with pocket kings and had flopped a set. The newbie scooped the pot with runner runner flush, 2 5 h. I suddenly had a vision of the robot in "Lost in Space" flash in my head..his vacuum cleaner hose legs swirling frantically as he blurted "DANGER DANGER". I was UTG when I drew red nines. Normally I would just call here, but I had to try and knock out some face cards because the game was so loose I knew they'd call a single bet with anything. It was raised, re-raised and capped before it got to the blinds, which also called. Seven callers scared the hell out of me. The flop comes Jh 9s 3h, flopping me a set. I bet out and again was capped before it hit the blinds. Six callers now. the turn comes a 3d, making me full. I check, figuring one of these guys has pocket jacks. Capped before it hits me again. Now I am totally befuddled. I can understand the possible pocket jacks raising but what the hell are these other guys raising with? I call the capped bet. The river is a 6c. I check, two of the callers drop leaving four of us. The sb checks, the bb bets out and I come over the top. Two guys fold and he reraises. I call and he turns over a 3 4 os for trips. I was totally dumbfounded..this was a usually tight, but aggressive regular. I dropped my pocket nines to the felt and scooped a massive pot. The regular was totally bewitched by the action junkies and figured his set was good on the turn, stating, "I knew they were on heart draws." I laughed and both kids nodded in agreement arguing amongst themselves about who was drawing to the higher flush. Any advice would be appreciated. Can I not read cards at all or what???
Of course, I am no one to be advising you how to play pocket nines, but I think limping with them can at least be considered given this type of game. Chances are you're gonna need to flop a set, and want the implied odds of other players. In tighter (but not necessarily tougher) games, your reasoning might make sense in order to knock out other hands and improve 99's chances of winning on it's own merit. But here, why not let 'em in for when you flop a set? No matter, it turned out well for you anyway.
If someone has pocket jacks, oh well. You're just gonna have to lose some money. I'm not sure this is a valid reason to check the turn though. It doesn't sound like this was the case anyway, since you raised the river?
Nice hand! Wow! Where and when was this game?
Kevin
Hollywood, Kevin, on thursday evening. Where the hell were you? You would have cleaned up, trust me. Arnie was the BB with the 34 os.
And you are absolutely correct in your advice that I should have just checked in a wildfire game like this. I truly was amazed at Arnie though. He was running very badly .. I guess a bit on tilt. Hope to see you soon. :)
Desire-
I didn't even mention this because I didn't think it fit your style of play, but you could also make a case for simply folding 99 here ~wince~ ;|
The reason is that you can often afford to play super tight in this type of rammin jammin game. Now when you do get a hand to hold up, it should more than make up for the blinds you've paid, with a decent profit left over. (another *wince* ;|) Like I said, maybe not your style. : )
Kevin
Not my style? Sheesh, Kevin, YA THINK?
ROFLMAO!!
I'd rather stick needles in my eyes than play super tight. Hell darlin', like I say at the table, I didn't drive all that way to check.
See ya soon :)
Raising pre-flop in a loose/maaniacal game is a mistake. Frequently a raise sets off a feeding frenzy and actually attracts players in the pot. While from a odds perspective view the play is fine, all it effectively does is raise your variance.
Having said that everything else worked out fine. I hope you were planning on raising if they ever gave you the opportunity. I don't understand the river action when you say that you check and the BB bets out? If you mean the button, I would have bet the river and possibly re-raise with the 3rd nuts.
Wild players change the demeanor of the table so even rocks start showing strange hands.
"Wild players change the demeanor of the table so even rocks start showing strange hands."
It depends on what kinds of rock. Granite holds together well, while composite rocks will crack under heat and pressure.
Tommy
I was bored and hadn't played any hands for awhile. I'm 5 off the button and pick up Kh 10s all fold to me so I decided to steal (yes, I know I'm in early position and it's a bad play - but I'm bored) I raise and get 5 cold callers (so much for my tough image). Last 3 to act and both blinds call. (20/40 game) Pot is now $240 - six way.
The flop is: Qh 9d 7c
Blinds check to me and I check; 1 off & 2 off check, button bets. LB & BB call. I have a gutshot with one overcard to the board. I called, others fold. Pot is now $320 - four way
The turn is: 6d
LB bets, BB raises ($440 in the pot) The 6 now gives me a double middle buster straight draw. My thinking is (1) They don't really have a hand yet (2) Even if they do, I may have eight outs unless they picked up a flush draw on the turn. I did the Roy Cooke huddle and decided to 3 bet. The button and LB fold. BB studies for awhile and calls. Pot is now $560 - Headsup.
The river is: Ad (possible flush)
BB checks and I bet - BB studies for a long time and throws 9c8c face up in the muck. I win the pot without a pair.
Some people play poker for entertainment - this hand was fun :-)
The old 3-bet semi-bluff. There are places for it and this might have been one. Nice hand/post!
Kevin
.
Bob, you are dangerous when you get bored. Like I have always stated, you are a "problematic" player.
I have been in this situation a few times recently. I hold JT or QJ or QT and flop two pair with a rag. The turn pairs the rag. I have been betting or raising aggresively all the way. The river comes with an A or K. What should I do if I am first to act? Bet it? Check and call? Check and fold? What if I am last to act and bet into? Call or fold (I would assume raising is out of the question)?
Comments appreciated
I would suspect that if one or more players has been calling you all the way along with you holding one of those hands, they hold first or second pair with a big kicker, or an open straight draw which the big card makes. You're probably beat, but not automatically--like if caller holds k-q and u have q-j, and the river comes an ace. I would not bet into that person, but if you have built a decent pot, it's worth a call.
Assuming you still have the best on the turn (i.e. no one hit trips and no one has an overpair) you call. Someone has to have a K or an A to beat you.I don't throw away this hand unless I'm sure I'm beat or the pot is small.
Well, if you have been betting the flop and turn aggressively, the Ace or King should not give them a bigger two pairs i.e. they wouldn't be calling your aggressive betting with overcards. But it could give them a str8.
I think your decision is player and situation dependant. Betting is not out of the question if you are fairly sure that the other players also has top pair on the flop with a weaker kicker i.e. QJ3/3/A board and you think that your opponent is on a Queen. But there will be many times that you have to checkcall. Checkfold is not likely to come into play very often.
All comments are welcome on the following:
10-20 game on Paradise Poker last night. A middle postion player calls, 2 off the button calls, I call on the button with 66. SB calls and BB checks. 5 handed, $50 pot.
Flop comes 5 7 8 with two spades. SB bets, next player raises, next player 3 bets. I muck my under pair and open end straight draw.
Of course the turn was the 4h making my straight and the river was a 7 making the board 5 7 8 4 7.
Big blind wins with 73c.
At the time I made the fold the pot had $110 in it and I was facing three bets cold with an under pair and an open end straight draw.
Comments?
Clear and easy fold. There are 3 problems with making this draw.
1. There is a two flush on board limiting your outs. This also means that if someone holds 10-Js you may only have 3 outs (the 4).
2. It's been raised (and re-raised).
3. Your drawing to a 1 card str8. Your going to have to split with anyone else holding a 6 and, again ,if someone holds 10-Jo you'll be paying him off half the time.
Is it correct to call two bets before the flop...with UTG raising....with A9 suited?
Not usually. IMO.
Matt
I agree with Kevin but let me eleborate. If the utg raiser is a solid player he is raising with AA-TT,AK-AQ and you have A9. You are dominated with every single hand that he raises with. I define dominated as three outs.The only situation A9s would call that raise with if there are 4 or more players in an you anticipate a big pot if you hit the nut flush.You might make the case that if you play better after the flop you could call the raise an outplay him but you said he was solid and if he is coming in with those good cards he ain't gonna muck easily.Remember one of the biggest mistakes in limit holdem is calling raises with dominated hands if you don't believe me watch in your games the number of times someone does this and precedes to pay off all the way with their AJ after calling an utg raise.Good luck.Lar
I want 5 or more callers in the hand, or I fold.
First off, if this hand history doesn't stay aligned when I post it, don't bother it's not that exciting. If you see something that I should have done, let me know. The outcome, of course, isn't important. Thanks.
Seat 1: tonytsi1818 ($161 in chips) Seat 2: Rylough ($740 in chips) Seat 3: Greatwall ($187 in chips) Seat 5: thecub ($1,724.50 in chips) Seat 8: ME ($607 in chips) Seat 9: BRubin ($563 in chips) Seat 10: ZHOAG ($607 in chips) Akacat : Post Small Blind ($10) BRubin : Post Big Blind ($15) tonytsi1818: Sit out Dealt to ME [ Qd ] Dealt to ME [ Ks ] ZHOAG : Fold Rylough : Raise ($30) Greatwall: Fold thecub : Fold ME : Call ($20) BRubin : Call ($15) *** FLOP *** : [ Kc Jd 7h ] ME : Check BRubin : Bet ($15) Rylough : Raise ($30) Akacat : Call ($30) BRubin : Call ($15) *** TURN *** : [ Kc Jd 7h ] [ Td ] ME : Check BRubin : Check Rylough : Check *** RIVER *** : [ Kc Jd 7h Td ] [ 3c ] ME : Bet ($30) BRubin : Call ($30) Rylough : Fold *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $237 | Rake: $3 Board: [ Kc Jd 7h Td 3c ] tonytsi1818 didn't bet Rylough lost $60 (folded) Greatwall didn't bet (folded) super blocky didn't bet thecub didn't bet (folded) ME bet $90, collected $237, net +$147 (showed hand) [ Qd Ks ] (a pair of kings) BRubin lost $90 [ Kd 9d ] (a pair of kings) ZHOAG didn't bet (folded)
I wish to whine about a bad beat I took tonight at 10-20.
I have 33.
Flop is 3-6-7 all hearts
Turn is a 6
River is a 5 of hearts
Three players at showdown on the river. First guy has A-10 of hearts for nut flush. I have full house. Last guy has 4-8 of hearts for a six card straight flush.
As you can imagine, there was considerable action on the way to the river, but not on the river.
Anyways, thats the whole story, no question, just felt like venting a bit. Sorry to waste everyone's time. After a beat like that, I start to understand that guy who used to post about flopping the nut cup touch.
David
tough to lose with a full house but think about it for a minute.
33 is a lousy hand that sometimes gets good. for you it got good-trips-. but the flop was kind of bad. you were beat on the flop. then you made the bottom full. this one gets beat alot as the over cards are close together and easily make bigger fulls when you get alot of action. but you had them almost dead with one to come. but the luck of the last card got you. better luck next time.
Did I mention this was a 6 handed table, too?
I can remember only one time when I had a full house that I lost to a straight flush. I had pocket queens and made a full house on the turn when a Q fell that also completed a straight flush. Fortunately my opponent was all in after one turn bet.
.
i am on the button with Q-1o offsuit 2 Limpers I fold here i dont like to call with this hand.when i play this hand i like to raise or fold. Is this right?
I Think i need 4 caller to play this Drawing Hand
if its ace queen you are talking about its a clear raise on the button and certainly not a fold. you need some brushup on the basics. if its queen ten you are talking about then you get a little closer but no cigar.
Hi all,
A question from 15-30 Holdem. I've been doing well and am up about $600. I'm on the Button with pocket Kings. The player three to my right raises. He is a good player but has been raising a lot, I think with some questionable hands, but has not been called down very often. I haven't had cards when he raises. I three bet to isolate. However, the SB calls. She has been losing steadily all night and hasn't called very often and has usually shown down decent cards. Everyone else folds to the first raiser who calls.
Flop: QJ6 rainbow.
The SB bets out. She has never bet unless she has something. Call, Call by me. I could have raised, but her cold call preflop made me think she had aset of Qs or Js.
Turn 3 offsuit
SB bets again and Preflop raiser raises. I think for a while and fold given what I perceive as a two outer.
River: lo and behold a K
Check, Check
SB shows QJ off, and Raiser shows a set of Qs.
I would have won a large pot, but I don't see a way to get to the river without calling two big bets.
Thanks in advance.
Ken
$60 cold with a probable 2 outs (5 if it's qj, 2 if a set)--since you had to figure one of them for q-j or a set--easy lay down.
I would have raised on the flop with my overpair. How do you know the bettor doesn't have AQ or KQ?
Good fold on the turn. Between the bettor and the raiser who raised pre-flop you are almost always looking at two outs and the pot odds are not there.
Good fold on the turn, but I think a better play would have been to raise on the flop. You can not play poker always worried about being up against a set. Also, you note that the SB has been losing all night. Well now you know why...she called 2 1/2 bets with QJo!
This was one of the few hands of hers that she showed. But you're right. Any sympathy for her losses went down the toilet right there.
Ken
I think the raiser would have three bet the flop if I had raised. Then calling that and calling a single bet on the turn would have cost the same as calling the double bet on the turn.
It's funny how some hands bother you even when you do the right thing. I did end up $1400 for the night so I don't miss this pot that much.
Thanks for the advice.
Ken
5 limpers to me in the sb w/AQs, and I limp as well. BB checks. 7-way.
Flop comes Q96r
I bet out, BB (very good player) raises, folded to weakish player who calls two cold, I re-raise, BB caps, again player calls two cold, I call. 3-way.
The turn is an off 3.
I bet, BB folds, lone opponent calls.
River pairs the 6.
I bet, lone opponent folds.
I'm questioning:
1). My bet on the turn. What do I do if raised? I realize the BB can have any two cards, but I'm not going to fold for a bet and I hated the prospect of having it checked around. However, I probably could fold to a raise (by either player), which further makes me think my bet was poor. I'd have put myself in a very tough spot. This brings up the question of should the third player have raised the turn (after the BB folded) with JT or 98? And if so, what's my play now?
2). My bet on the river. Since no likely pair to go with a draw got there, what hand is gonna call me that doesn't have me beat? Also, what if I'm bluff raised by JT or 98? Of course I'd call, but this was not the type of player you could likely induce a bluff raise from, which I'm thinking makes a bet even more wrong. I'd appreciate any comments on my errors. Thanks.
Kevin
nt
I think you made some errors but not the ones you think you made.
Error No. 1 is limping preflop. I think you should raise.
Error No. 2 is not really an error...but you may want to consider checkraising the flop (you wouldn't if you raised preflop but given your limp, a checkraise can be attempted on the flop particularly if the late position players are known to bet if everyone checks).
As for what you consider to be errors, you wrote:
"My bet on the turn. What do I do if raised? I realize the BB can have any two cards, but I'm not going to fold for a bet and I hated the prospect of having it checked around. However, I probably could *not* fold to a raise (by either player), which further makes me think my bet was poor. I'd have put myself in a very tough spot. This brings up the question of should the third player have raised the turn (after the BB folded) with JT or 98? And if so, what's my play now?"
You see, you are not looking at this right. You have bet and 3 bet the flop. You come out swinging again on the turn. It is going to take an intrepid player to raise you here with a hand that you beat. If you are raised, you are almost certainly beat and likely drawing dead (as no rational player could have flopped two pairs here). You can (and probably should) fold. Now, that certainly beats checkcalling twice. But the fact of the matter is that you are unlikely to be raised by a hand that you beat so the worry you have is one I wouldn't have.
You further wrote:
"My bet on the river. Since no likely pair to go with a draw got there, what hand is gonna call me that doesn't have me beat?"
The pot is big. There are lots of worse hands that could call you.
And you wrote...
"Also, what if I'm bluff raised by JT or 98? Of course I'd call, but this was not the type of player you could likely induce a bluff raise from, which I'm thinking makes a bet even more wrong. I'd appreciate any comments on my errors. Thanks."
Yes, of course you call if raised but the prospects of being bluff raised are slim (but enough to make the crying call). But what makes the river bet correct is that the chances of inducing a bluff are also almost nil. Many times you will bet and he will fold (at least you don't have to show down your hand). But there will be lots of times when you will collect a call from a lesser hand. Here, given that the bb folded on the turn, there is a greater chance that the other guy has a Queen and will call but not necessarily bet if you check.
Thanks skp for an excellent response an straightening me out. I do have a couple of follow ups:
With respect to raising pre-flop. I know you can (and I often do) raise AQs from the sb after many limpers, but is it really an "error" NOT to? I've always assumed that this play (while not incorrect), was a sure fire way to increase variance. I sometimes like the option of limping and then check/raising just such a flop, although here it didn't make sense, since all the aggressive players in this hand were on my left.
Obviously, I was/am still confused about the turn. At the time, I felt I could fold to a raise. Sometimes when I post a hand, I sense Abdul lurking somewhere and snickering "By ALLAH! You can't fold top pair/best kicker! There are 12.5 big bets in this pot and you have outs to beat two pair! You'd get creamed in a tough game!" Well, maybe he wouldn't have said that here, but still... Any two pair is not out of the question for the BB and Q9s is fairly reasonable for the 3rd player in later position. My play could easily mean a set and should prevent this type of raise, but this only begs the question, did I overplayed AQ?
Kevin
Strange. Pre-flop, I would raise with Ace-Queen suited from your small blind after many players limp in. When the big blind raises your flop bet and then caps it on a rainbow, raggedly board, I would assume he has at least two pair and maybe a set. I would also be concerned about what the third player is taking all this heat with unless he has specifically Jack-Ten or Eight-Seven. I think you should check the turn and not lead having just top pair/top kicker when a blank comes on the expensive street. Betting out was overplaying your hand. If raised, I think you should fold since you are drawing dead to a set and you have only 3 outs if the big blind has Queens-up. The fold by the big blind at this point is totally bizarre. What was he capping the flop with that he would now suddenly fold when a blank comes on the turn? Your bet on the river will get crying calls from worse Queens.
Thanks Jim. So you do feel betting out on the turn after a cap by the BB (4 bets) was overplaying AQ. I suspected that it might be. You don't mention what you would do if you check the turn and the BB bets and gets called by the 3rd player. Would you fold or call the hand down? When he capped the flop, I also assumed I was beat by two-pair or a set. I'm trying to determine if my possible outs against two-pair is what made this bet wrong.
btw- BB had KQs with a runner-runner flush and straight draw. When no help came on 4th street and I bet out, he knew his queen was no good and simply folded.
Kevin
"5 limpers to me in the sb w/AQs, and I limp as well. BB checks. 7-way."
Just calling here is forfeiting some preflop equity. Let's not belabor this.
" 1). My bet on the turn. What do I do if raised? I realize the BB can have any two cards, but I'm not going to fold for a bet and I hated the prospect of having it checked around. However, I probably could fold to a raise (by either player), which further makes me think my bet was poor. I'd have put myself in a very tough spot. This brings up the question of should the third player have raised the turn (after the BB folded) with JT or 98? And if so, what's my play now?"
Should the third player have raised on the turn? Well, I don't think he should have been on the turn for starters, but let's look at the raise question. There are seven small bets preflop, twelve on the flop, and he is now facing a big bet. This adds up to 10.5-1 on the call and 11.5-1 on the semi bluff raise. If he assumes he is against only a pair(which is a dubious assumption based on the hand play), his call has 5 outs, requiring about 8.5-1, excluding implied. In order for the semi bluff to be correct he must be correct only about once in eleven times. I have excluded reraises, and implied and reverse implied. I have also excluded the possibility that your hand is best and is benefiting from this raise as a value bet. i am also excluding check the river down benefits.
So who folds to semi bluff raises on the turn? Typical opponents tend to call too much, and they are not likely to meet this criteria. Very strong players are also not likely to fold either, liable to read your play, not ready to surrender in a big pot. So the bulk of your semi-bluff victims will be thinking players. But even these players must hold the required cards to drop. REPEAT, even your potential victims must hold the correct cards to make such fold. .
Let's look at the cards the small blind could hold and also play the way he did: AQ, KQ, sets, Two pairs. There are of course others. But notice that flopped sets and two pairs are highly unlikely to be folded by even those players capable of folding. I also think that the single pairs are typically not played this strongly. Very important point: Single pairs ARE PARTICULARLY not likely to be played this strongly by those players who are also likely to fold to a semi bluff on the turn. Think about it.
So the semi bluff raise on the turn is unlikely to be correct given that the bulk of opponnets will call anyway and among those players who are capable of folding I think it is much more likely than not they have a hand that they must call or reraise with anyway.
"2). My bet on the river. Since no likely pair to go with a draw got there, what hand is gonna call me that doesn't have me beat? Also, what if I'm bluff raised by JT or 98? Of course I'd call, but this was not the type of player you could likely induce a bluff raise from, which I'm thinking makes a bet even more wrong. I'd appreciate any comments on my errors. Thanks. "
This is a good place to demonstrate the importance of hand reading. A good read here will lead to the correct move. If you put your opponent on a made hand, bet. If a draw, check. My read says check check check. The reason being the middle opponent has not made a move all hand, just sitting calling away. Unless he is typically a weak caller type, then this looks like draw material. He aint calling with a busted draw, and may very well bluff bet with the bust (not likely but more likely than the reverse).
Yes, a hand that calls you here could have you beat, you are right. But this hand will often bet behind you anyway.
Overall, back to your basic play, I think you did overplay your hand unless you have you have enormous control over the players at the table. It is possible you got the big blind to fold a better hand like two pairs, in fear of the enormous strength you had shown. I think, however, it is easier to teach an overplayer to be more passive than a passive to be more aggressive. So in that sense your play is not that bad.
Regards.
i enjoyed your analysis...gl
.
Planet Poker 20-40.
I am 3 to the left of the bb with 5d5h. First two players limp in and I follow suit. 2 others limp in behind and both blinds limp. 7 way action.
Flop: KsQc5c
I bet. The next guy raises and the button 3 bets. Others fold. Both of my opponents are essentially unreadable as they both play terrible poker.
I call as does the other chap. 3 way action.
Turn: Kh
I bet. First guy calls. Button hits it again. We both call.
River: 7c
I bet again. First guy folds (?). Button calls.
Comments?
Pre-flop, why are you limping in from early position with pocket Fives? The pot odds are not there to try and flop a set plus with most of the table yet to be heard from, it could easily get raised costing you two bets to see the flop. I like your flop bet having bottom set with a two flush and two touching cards in the playing zone but I think you should make it 4 bets when it is raised and re-raised back to you. You might as well take the gloves off right now and play it fast. On the turn, you should 3 bet when raised unless you are worried about specifically King-Queen, pocket Queens, or pocket Kings. If that is the case, then why would you lead at the river instead of just checking and calling?
Jim,
I think limping with 5s in the given position is correct. Here are some reasons.
1) With the first three players all limping, a "limping frenzy" is likely to ensue.
2) With three early position players limping, it is far less likely to get raised behind (both because of the number and position of the limpers)
-Anon
Jim and Anon,
I agree with Anon. In addition, even if I knew it was going to be raised behind, I would probably end up with four opponents for two bets (a blind would call most of the time). And that is just about worse case most of the time. IMO, a pair makes money here played mostly for the set.
BTW (to Jim), would you call with KJ offsuit after two limpers with several yet to act? I think you would (based on previous posts if I am not mistaken). Yet this hand is far more vulnerable to getting squeezed post flop then the 55's, which tend to hit the flop hard, albeit less often.
Regards,
Rick
The preflop limp with 55 is fine, IF(!) you are in the right game conditions. 7 players seeing the flop seems awfully loose passive (at least preflop). Plus, there was a lot of heavy action on the flop, which the small pairs like. Unless this hand was an aberration, I'd say limping with a small pocket pair is a no brainer.
Bill
Jim,
You wrote:
"Pre-flop, why are you limping in from early position with pocket Fives? The pot odds are not there to try and flop a set plus with most of the table yet to be heard from, it could easily get raised costing you two bets to see the flop."
This to me is an easy call preflop. Not only am I not folding this hand here, I am in fact excited about playing the hand. In other words, I don't think the decision is close. Given the other 2 early limpers, I am virtually guaranteed 4 opponents on the hand even if everyone behind me folds. That by itself is enough to make 55 a profitable hand here. But the fact is that in most cases, you will get 1 or 2 players (maybe even more if the stars are aligned right) calling behind leading to 5 or 6 opponents which gives you a comfortable overlay. I also disagree that the pot could "easily" get raised from someone in behind. The chances of being raised are actually quite small given the number of players already in the hand. Besides, even if the pot is raised, 55 is still a profitable hand here. I am not going past the flop without a set (usually) and if I flop a set, the raiser is likely to give me some pretty good action given that he most likely has a big pocket pair to make the raise in the first place against multiple opponents.
You wrote:
"I like your flop bet having bottom set with a two flush and two touching cards in the playing zone but I think you should make it 4 bets when it is raised and re-raised back to you."
I wouldn't argue with this. Had the button not 3 bet, I would have 3 bet. But since he did 3 bet, I thought I would do a stop 'n go to increase my chances of inducing another raise on the turn. Notice that I am only giving up 2 small bets at most and could easily recoup that on later streets by adding a little deception. Also, if a broadway club came off, I could perhaps proceed a little more carefully on the turn.
You wrote:
"On the turn, you should 3 bet when raised unless you are worried about specifically King-Queen, pocket Queens, or pocket Kings. If that is the case, then why would you lead at the river instead of just checking and calling?"
The turn play is the most interesting part of this hand. Firstly, I don't want to check here in case button is on a draw and takes the free card. So, I make the obvious bet. When the chap in the middle does not raise, I have to think that he is on a draw (likely a flush draw). The button raises as I expected he would. Now, I am pretty sure that I have the button beat but I am not positive. He could have KQ or even K5 although the latter is unlikely as I hold 55. But I am also pretty sure that the middle guy is on a draw. The decision I had to make was whether the middle player was terrible enough to call more 2 bets cold with a flush draw. I am still not sure about that actually but I decided that he would probably fold if I reraised. I also thought that this guy was bad enough to have a hand like AJ here which he would definitely fold if I reraised.
Accordingly, I felt that if I was ahead, I would likely make the same amount of money by just calling i.e. instead of getting another bet from the button, I would get another bet from the middle guy with the possibility of trapping him for more bets on the river should he make his draw. On the other hand, if the button did have KQ or K5, I save money by just calling.
The one danger of not 3 betting the turn is that the middle guy could have something as little as 77 and I could give him a chance to outdraw me. If the button has Kx, he would have 7 outs and if middle guy has 77, he would have 2 outs. Given the size of the pot, it may be important for me to get the 2 outer out and improve my cahnces of winning by 25% (One would have to do the math to figure that out).
The river card brings a club. I am still not very sure where I stand vis a vis the button. My hand is clearly not strong enough to checkraise the button but it is probably strong enough to checkraise the middle guy if he bets and the button just calls. But if I check, I thought the the middle chap was bad enough to try a checkraise of the button with a flush and I wasn't sure that the button would bet Kx in that event. So, I came out betting. Had either of them raised, I probably would have just called.
Anyway, middle guy folded. I assume that he had JT or AJ or something.
Button called and showed K9 offsuit.
JB wrote : "Pre-flop, why are you limping in from early position with pocket Fives? "
becaause there are two limpers, and if someone raises behind, its likely to be a good multi-way pot (4-7 players)...thus pocket 5s are getting good implied odds to limp here...even if it gets raised, its not so horrible...
I don't think its that great to call, but it is still slighly pos. ev.
when he called Jim Brier unimaginative. You say the same bloody thing over and over again, and act like external factors are unimportant. I can't wait to come to Vegas and bend you over. I vow never to read another Jim Brier post again.
I agree with Jim's comments except I wouldn't think you have to worry about KK or QQ since there were no raises preflop.
I agree that you should fold the 5's preflop.
I think once you decide to call and flop a set you have to cap flop and hit it again on the turn.
Just curious, what did the button have? KJo?
~stephen
Preflop- If you read your opponents for passive limpers I don't mind your early limp with pocket fives. (occasionally)As it happened your read was good. (as you got in cheap 7-handed)
Post flop I agree with Jim, pound the pot and play it fast.
Just a hunch, I guess the guy who folded had JTo, and the button showed down Kx of clubs or maybe JT of clubs.
skp,
I strongly agree with the limp with 55's. Yes you are “early”, but as Anon mentioned (as you have before), there were two limpers in front of you and with three limpers you are likely to get a lot of callers behind you. And 55's can stand a raise behind so long as you are getting five-way action or so.
I like the bet on the flop. You won't give away your hand and you are likely to get raised. This is preferable to being the raiser with a hand as strong as a set. I also like the smooth call of the double raise. There is a good enough chance that the middle player might cap it for you anyway (Doesn't Planet Poker have a three raise cap?).
Given the middle player slowed down on the flop, I would also lead on the turn. However, once raised by the button, I would make it three bets here. If the middle player plays badly, he will call with a draw (my guess is JT after the fact).
Given the turn action, your river play was fine.
Regards,
Rick
n/t
See my response to Jim. I think we are on the same page.
Looks like the First Guy had a straight draw. I'm not sure what the other guy could have if he just calls you on the river. Probably just a lone king with a bad kicker and was afraid of the flush.
I like the way you played this hand. My typical plan against terrible opponents is to hammer them just about all the way, and force them to pay. So many times these guys flip over unbelievably bad hands that punishing them is a lot of fun.
But then again, if this guy is really that bad, he might just have flipped over a winner...
Bill
I play in several private $10-20 games in Houston. The games are played with a 10% rake to a max of $6 and a $1 drop for a jackpot. There is no silver on the table, so you are expected to tip at least $1 every time you win a pot. There is another interesting feature of these games that I doubt many of you are familiar with. It is called "Pinging." Here is how it works: Usually 2, but sometimes 3 people will enter into a partnership in which a predetermined fraction of any pot won by one of the partners is removed, set aside, and then divided equally among the partners at the end of the night, or as needed during the game. Usually, ping partners take $5 out for every $25 in a pot. For example, if two people are ping partners, and one of the partners wins a $100 pot, it is a "4 pinger", and $20 is placed in the ping rack. The pings are then divided equally as needed. I have seen the pings reach $1000 and above. This obviously leads to a lot of softplaying between ping partners. Ping partners will often check hands down if they are head-up. As you can imagine, an ideal ping partner is someone who plays every hand, winning as many pots as possible. I play in one game in which I am often the only person at the table who does not have a ping partner. Are these games beatable with such high rakes? What effect does pinging have on the profitability of a game?
You are talking about a situation where players are essentially trading fairly large pieces with each other. This changes strategy and if they do it right it should give them an advantage that you might not be able to overcome.
For example, in poker there are many times that you should bet because you want the other players to fold, but it is close. If one of these other players is someone that you have a large piece of, then correct strategy may switch from a bet to a check. It looks like to me that you are right at that threshold.
Mason,
Could you elaborate on how this practice could make the game unbeatable? There are several terrible players in the game who play too many hands and go too far with them. Pinging seems to allow them to stay afloat longer before they lose all of their money. I only know of one player who is beating this game consistently, and he is an excellent player. He plays very few hands before the flop and he reads hands extremely well. However, he also admitted to me that one of the reasons he rairly loses at the game is that he always pings with one of the looser players.
I don't wish to go into this here. Suffice it to say that cetain longshot draws now become correct to play due to adjusted probability distributions. I would be hesitant on playing in this game, and I suppose that you are not getting the results that you think you should since you are asking this quetion.
$15-30 hand.
I raise 2 off the button with Qc Js. The button calls and big blind calls. I don't know anything about these players.
The flop comes Ts 7s 2d.
BB checks, I bet, the button calls, the big blind folds.
The turn comes the 5c.
I bet, the button raises, and I fold.
Comments?
Puggy
I would want more high card strength to open two off the button.
-Anon
Anon,
I probably was being generous when I wrote below that open raising with QJ offsuit is marginal against typical players two off the button. To raise I would want either the cutoff (with tight button and blinds and a tight image) or about KJo or ATo. Suited I would drop only one notch at most.
Regards,
Rick
Puggy,
When you don't know anything about the players tighten up on your raising and playing standards until you get a better line on their play. A raise with QJ offsuit two off the button is marginal against typical players when you know the players. Against unknowns it is sub-marginal since you are likely to make mistakes post flop.
Given you were in there, you probably made a good fold on the turn.
Regards,
Rick
You guys are right, of course. It's a funny thing because I've been concentrating on my post-flop play so much lately, that maybe I need to re-review some preflop opening standards.
I was actually more curious of what you guys thought of the flop and turn bets.
Puggy
-The only time the world beats a path to your door is if you're in the bathroom.
-If God wanted me to touch my toes, he would have put them on my knees.
-Never knock on Death's door; ring the doorbell and run (he hates that).
-When you're finally holding all the cards, why does everyone else decide to play chess?
-If you're living on the edge, make sure you wear your seat belt.
-The mind is like a parachute; it works much better when it's open.
-Smiling faces are either real or fake it is your job to get them to smile and then decide whether it is real or fake. Watch the corner of the outside of their eyes. Rarely can a bluffer make them turn up like a real smile. Be carefull if the guy acts goofy to try to make you smile. This tell is deadly.
Over heard at the table this week.
- Jackie where is Henry tonight? You silly boys tonight is valentines day and I gave Henry the natural sleeping pill he will not be up for hours.
-A police officer pulls over this guy who's been weaving in and out of the lanes. He goes up to the guy's window and says, "Sir, I need you to blow into this breathalyzer tube." The man says, "Sorry, officer, I can't do that. I am an asthmatic. If I do that, I'll have a really bad asthma attack." "Okay, fine. I need you to come down to the station to give a blood sample." "I can't do that either. I am a hemophiliac. If I do that, I'll bleed to death." "Well, then, we need a urine sample." "I'm sorry, officer, I can't do that either. I am also a diabetic. If I do that, I'll get really low blood sugar." "All right, then I need you to come out here and walk this white line." "I can't do that, officer." "Why not?" "Because I'm drunk."
Play well sleep in a nice hotel. Play bad and you sleep under a bridge.(Papa Nick)
Its Sampras verses Agassi in center court today. What makes one tennis player better then another top tennis player?. Not much. Like you who have all the skills required to play the game of poker. What keeps you at the levels that you are right now? Sampras and Agassi hit the ball back and forth. Waiting for that critical moment. They try to outplay each other to no avail. They hit the ball to the back of the court only to be retrieved by their opponent. They hit it to the side of the court only for the ball to be returned. Now a drop shot only to be dug out and returned. They hit the ball with deception but still the ball keeps coming back. Then comes the critical moment. The mistake. Mistakes can cost you a point, a set and a match it depends on how many are made and when they are made. As in poker a mistake can cost you a half bet a whole bet and the pot. Losing half bets will hurt, whole bets make you play hours on end while not making money and mistakes in big pots make you play days for nothing. Take a look at these mistakes made by you or your opponents. Look for their weaknesses as well a yours. Roll them around in your mind. Memorize them. Try not to make them. Think deep and hard the way David Sklansky did when he thought of them and maybe tonight you may not sleep under a bridge.
Checking when you should bet. Betting when you should check. Calling when you should fold. Calling when you should raise. Folding when you should call. Folding when you should raise. Raising when you should call. Raising when you should fold.
I still require funny stories or other poker information please e-mail me at the top this article.
Remember Play well and have fun. (Hosh)
I'm 2 off the button in a loose 20/40 game and pick up AJs. 4 limpers, and I raise. All fold to BB, who calls. All 4 limpers also call (12.5 SBs). Flop comes AKT rainbow. All check to me, I bet, BB raises. One of the limpers calls and I call (18.5 SBs). Turn brings a 5 and the BB bets out. limper calls, and I raise. BB calls, and limper calls (15.25 BBs). River brings a 6 and all check to me. Do I bet it?
Results later.
Joe
You could well be up against the BB's 2 pair. If the BB is a player who could recognize you might call the flop raise, and then pop him on the turn with the straight, then that could account for the slowdown on the river. In this case, I might hesitate to bet, and just show it down.
On the other hand, if BB is not too good, then you should bet it for value. I could see being called here by an Ax from the BB and a lower pair with a straight draw (JT, KJ, KQ) from the limper.
Bill
possible hands out there : QJ, KT, AT, AQ - i would not have raised the turn, nor bet the river.
Raising the turn is a no-brainer.
(1) Its obvious the limper is on some kind of draw. I am guessing KQ, but I dont know since I never saw his hand. So, You want to punish him on the turn because he isnt going to call the river unless he hits.
(2) Your going to the river with this hand anyway (paying a full 2 bets), so why not get an extra bet in on the turn where you know the draw will call. This way you pay the same two bets as calling all the way but you gain an extra bet from the draw. You then have the chance to check down the river if you think your behind. If the BB re-raises obviously your done with this hand. But since you raised pre-flop the only hand the BB can re-raise is QJ or a set of Tens. This player would have re-raised AA or KK, so those two hands never entered my mind.
Also, you still have the 4 outs to the nuts.
The only negative is that a good player would pull a stop and go on you, forcing you to pay a river bet (plus the two turn bets) also. Neither of these were that good of players, so I never had to worry about that.
I checked the river, and turned over my AJ. BB shows one of his cards (an ace) and the limper mucks. I missed at least one bet, maybe two. I think it was unlikely the limper would have over-called, but it was a possibility.
The turn raise here is not a no-brainer IMO. It is questionable because of 2 factors:
1. You are up against 2 opponents - not one. The middle guy called 2 bets cold on the flop. The flop has no open-ended straight draw and no flush draw. 2 pairs for him is a likely holding.
2. You have a chance to make the nuts on the river and therefore do not want to be reraised by bb on the turn. Besides, given that the middle guy is already in for one bet, he likely will not fold to your raise if he has 2 pairs. Change the positions of the players around such that you act before the middle guy, then a raise of the bb's bet may make more sense.
As for the river play, I would probably check it given that you have 2 opponents. If the middle guy had folded on the turn, then I would value bet against the bb with AJ.
Even if the middle guy has two pair, you have tons of outs. If he has KT, you have 6 solid outs (2 aces, 4 queens) and 3 maybe outs (3 jacks). If he has AT, you have 7 solid outs (3 kings, 4 queens) and 3 maybe outs (3 jacks). If he had AK, he would have raised pre-flop. And even if he does have two pair, you still are going to the river with this hand. It costs you 2 big bets either way. And if you improve, you get two extra big bets out of it.
The only negative is having it 3 bet and losing your 4 out draw when you fold. Or somebody pulling a stop and go on you, which was very unlikely.
The 3 bet is also very unlikely, because there aren't many hands the BB can 3 bet. QJ and a set of Tens is about it. If he has QJ, you only have a 3 outer to split the pot anyway, so having to fold to a 3 bet is not a bad thing. If he has a set of Tens, then of course you would like to to draw to your 4 outer, but this is the only situation where having to fold to a 3 bet has cost you.
Joe,
I have time for one quibble. I don't think most big blinds would make it three bets pre flop when there is a large field and a button raise (not that it is a bad play - I like it).
Regards,
Rick
Joe,
That was a brave raise on the turn. If I’m in the big blind I could easily play AT, AK, KTs and even AQ the same way as this one did. I won’t fold any of these on the river, nor would most players.
The turn raise accomplished the purpose of getting them to check to you on the river and giving you a chance to make a straight or maybe two pair. The risk was looking at three bets and being almost certain you had to hit your queen or jack to call on the river.
I can’t see too many hands that the BB would play that are worse than yours that he could call with now. The limper probably has a queen or jack with a pair. Now that you get to show down for free, do it.
Regards,
Rick
PS: Noticed you posted results. I didn't peek :-).
In two posts, we have had discussions about limping in with 55 and KJo after UTG and 4th position limp. Skp mentions in one post that he would rather have QJs in this position instead of KJo. And in another post Rick N. hints that he would rather have 55 than KJo in this position.
Your limp with KJo just invites more limpers. Next thing you know your playing KJo against 7 opponents with lousy position. This is not a situation I like. Even though KJo is hard to play in this situation (at least for me), I tend to think its a +EV play.
Now, with QJs I would not hesitate to call. I would love to have QJs against 7 limpers.
55 is also a hand I would love to play in this situation.
But my question is does QJs and 55 really have more EV than KJo in this situation? Even though I think QJs and 55 are easier for me to play, I wonder if a good player could not make more money out of KJo.
Any thoughts appreciated.
Joe
I don't know that "ease of play" and EV are necessarily mutually exclusive. I think that they are related and as such, I think 55 is probably the best hand in this situation from an EV point of view, followed by QJs and KJ off. Frankly, I routinely fold KJ off in this situation. Maybe I shouldn't be folding so easily.
I'm sure that QJs makes more money, especially in this situation, because the greater number of draws it generates allows you to raise and call more often, allowing it to win more large pots. KJo and QJs win virtually the same amount of the time head-up in a cold sim head-up against random cards. If you add more players and money to the mix to allow QJs to run a bit after the flop, it has to be the more profitable hand. I think turbo sims also support this.
Joe,
Let’s forget about 55 for a moment, which I love in a multi-way pot and look at KJo versus QJs. If I were attacking the blinds or defending versus an attack then KJo is quite a bit better than QJs. But with a lot of opponents being suited helps in two ways. The obvious is the occasional big pot you win by making flushes (along with the extra straight in the case of QJ). But even when you flop top pair with a jack, multi-way I would rather have a three flush (which you will often get) than the slightly better kicker. Multi-way pots are rarely determined by a kicker one notch better, unless it is AK. Being suited often allows you to take a bit more heat and maybe surprise them with a big hand by the river.
Regards,
Rick
"Being suited often allows you to take a bit more heat and maybe surprise them with a big hand by the river."
agree completely. if you call a raise on the turn with KJo in this situation you are, as they say 'round here, one Jack off.
i am Big Blind with Kc Qs Utg limp middelpositon raised small Blind and i and the Utg calls,
The Flop Kh 10c 2c I Bet Utg call next raised we all call TURN 10h small Blind Bet I fold? Utg fold River 5c Bet call small blind show 10s 8s Orginal raiser shows As Ah
any comments was my fold correct?
Glowworm,
Your call pre-flop is routine as is your bet on the flop. When the pre-flop raiser makes it 2 bets you have a tougher decision to make. If the pre-flop raiser is tight and predictable then his action suggests that he is playing a premium hand (most likely AK but possibly AA) and you should fold. Otherwise I would call since the pot is offering 14:1. The turn is an easy fold. It didn't help you and it is highly likely that you are beat by either the SB or the pre-flop raiser (if not both).
-- Manzanita
I have a fairly tight image at the table, typical 10-20 game, 4 good player, 4 loose players,3 loose agressive.
i raise with jj in the early position and the guy next to me reraises(loose player who like to be agressive with any facecards and a third player calls(he could have anything from pocket acec to K2 suited)
flop Ah,6s,9h I bet (is that the right move)the guy next to me folds and the third player calls.
(now im scared, If he was on any kind of draw he would have raised me for sure)
the turn is a 3 i bet out again and he raises me and i fold and he turns over a pocket aces
Now what do you guys think of my play here, On the flop, should i have bet out. What about the turn
Im fairly sure that he would not have bet the flop so i would probably bet the turn anyways. youre opinions are welcome
Despite the looseness of the players, when someone 3 bets you and someone else calls 3 bets cold, I have to think there is either a bigger pair out against me or at least someone has an Ace. I would probably check-fold the flop. I would definitely check the turn if I bet the flop and called by the guy who called 3 bets cold.
Here's a hand that I recently played in a loose $10-20 game.
UTG limps, all fold to the SB who completes the bet, and I raise with QQ in the BB. Both UTG and the SB call. UTG is a reasonably good, predictable player. However, the SB appears to be a beginner and very weak.
The flop is T 8 3 rainbow. The SB checks, I decide to risk a slow-play and also check, and UTG bets out. SB surprises me with a check-raise. I call as does UTG.
The turn is an A (no flush draw possible). The SB checks, I check, and UTG bets out. The SB calls, I check-raise, and both UTG and the SB call. When the SB check-called I was no longer concerned that I was looking at a better hand from her; I put her on an open-ended straight draw. UTG was more of a worry. I was sure he had a Ten and the only question was what his kicker could be. The possibilities were most likely a A or J kicker but a K, Q, or 9 could be there, too. Since I only needed to worry about the A the odds were that I was ahead. Hence my check-raise. When UTG failed to make it 3-bets I thought that my bet was good.
The river was a blank. I bet, UTG called, and the SB folded. UTG took the pot with his AT offsuit.
Were there any obvious flaws in my thought process in this hand?
-- Manzanita
Based on the actual layout you were doomed to lose this hand. Pre-flop, I like your raise especially against limpers. As you well know, my style is to bet out in these situations especially after raising pre-flop. I do not want to give a free card and/or miss collecting a round of bets when I have the best hand. Your check-raise move on the expensive street when the Ace comes off is very imaginative but it looks like you are check-raising with two outs. Is the UTG the type to fold top pair? If he is then your play is good but I doubt most players are that solid. You are representing AA based on your pre-flop and flop play. The UTG must have feared AA on your part since he failed to 3 bet with the top two pair.
P.S.: The UTG played bad poker limping in with Ace-Ten offsuit unless the game was shorthanded.
Had I had your hand I would have raised pre-flop and bet the flop. If I get raised then I would re-raise. When the Ace comes off on the turn, I would bet. If I got raised I would fold otherwise I would check the river when a blank comes. I believe that on the flop, the UTG would raise with top pair/top kicker and call when I re-raise. If I bet the turn, I don't know if the UTG would raise having made the top two or just call. It is better for me if he raises since I can get away from the hand.
I think it is very important that you reraise on the flop because your opposition almost certainly has a decent shot at drawing out on you. Also with a hand as vulnerable as yours you can't take a gamble on a check raise on the turn because your opponent could have raised the turn for a "freecard." I also think that you overplayed your hand and your opponent was far closer to folding his top pair than showing any more aggression on the turn or river. In loose games overplaying your hand is the quickest way to loose money in an otherwise easy game imho. -Ben
I agree that the checkraise on the turn is a weak play, I would tend to just bet the flop and hopefully re-raise, but if you checkraise in that spot it might be a good play to threebet it when the small blind raises, I definitely would not checkraise the turn because I think the utg likely won't bet a hand that you have beat, especially sincey you cold called 2 bets on the flop.
Shawn
I watched a friend of mine play a hand that I thought was interesting. So I'm posting it here with two quick questions.
She raised after the first two players passed with a pair of jacks. A player in the middle called, and a player in late position reraised. No one else played and the three of them saw the flop for three bets each.
The flop was three tens. My friend checked, the player in the middle checked, and the original three bettor bet. First question, should my friend had led, gone for the check raise, or just checked and called?
Anyway, my friend called and the player in the middle called.
On fourth street a four hit. My friend bet, the player in the middle called, and the last player called.
On the river a deuce came. My friend checked, the player in the middle bet, and the player on the end (who had made it three bets before the flop) called. Second question. Should my friend over call?
Normally, a pre-flop three bettor in this sequence is supposed to have a big overpair like AA,KK,QQ. Once in awhile they will fool you and have AK. She is a little worse than even money to be beat assuming the 3 bettor has one of these hands. Since she did not 4 bet, it is known that she does not have AA or KK. My approach would be to just check and call. If the 3 bettor bets the flop but dogs it on the turn, I would bet the river assuming no overcards show up.
When no one raised your friend's turn bet we can rule out quad Tens most likely as well as AA. I would overcall at the river because of the pot size coupled with the fact that the middle player did not re-raise pre-flop plus the 3 bettor could have been doing something funky from late position.
Jim,
My answer turned out to be as different as, well, Las Vegas and Los Angeles are different.
You wrote: ”Normally, a pre-flop three bettor in this sequence is supposed to have a big overpair like AA,KK,QQ. Once in awhile they will fool you and have AK. She is a little worse than even money to be beat assuming the 3 bettor has one of these hands.”
In California a typical three better in this sequence will hold the big overpair only a third of the time, if that.
”Since she did not 4 bet, it is known that she does not have AA or KK.”
In California, early raisers with AA or KK (less with KK) often stop at three bets and try to trap on later betting rounds.
”My approach would be to just check and call. If the 3 bettor bets the flop but dogs it on the turn, I would bet the river assuming no overcards show up.”
In that sequence I like your approach, especially in Nevada.
”When no one raised your friend's turn bet we can rule out quad Tens most likely as well as AA.”
Sneaky Los Angeles players love to wait till the river to pull the trigger.
”I would overcall at the river because of the pot size coupled with the fact that the middle player did not re-raise pre-flop plus the 3 bettor could have been doing something funky from late position.”
“Something funky” - that sounds like your California experience has taught you something. I like the overcall also.
Regards (and good luck with your book),
Rick
First, most players who aren't very timid would raise everytime with AK.
Second, when the first player bets on the turn, the player in the middle wouldn't want to raise out something like AK if he has four of a kind.
Mason,
Whom was the above post addressed to? It doesn't seem related to my response to Jim.
Regards,
Rick
Here's my take. JJ is either best or it's not. If not, I'm most concerned about the 3-bettor having me beat. This means I want to get the middle position player's money in the pot. The best way to do this is to bet out. While it's possible for the middle position player to have a ten, it's not something to be overly concerned with. This is also an instance where I would make a rare overcall on the river.
Kevin J
.
"When no one raised your friend's turn bet we can rule out quad Tens most likely as well as AA"
I am not so sure about this. If I were the button and held AA, I certainly would not raise the turn. I probably have the middle guy drawing dead and have Mason's friend drawing to a 2 outer (at most) or perhaps she too could be drawing dead.
The button's play preflop, flop and turn are completely consistent with either AA or AK. His river call is somewhat inconsistent with AK as he has to fear that Mason's friend might overcall..unless he was sophisticated enough to think that by merely calling, he would stop Mason's friend from overcalling with a pair like JJ as she would then put him on an overpair.
The player in the middle had quad tens and player on the end had AA.
For your overcall to be correct you essentially have to catch both players bluffing. That is you need a parlay to occur of both players having weaker hands than a pair of jacks. This could happen if the player in the middle bet something like a pair of eights and the preflop reraiser called with two overcards such as AK. But the chances of both of these events happening together have to be very small. Thus I would fold.
Assuming a $30-$60 game, at the river there would be $710 in the pot ($320 pre-flop + $90 on flop + $180 on turn + $120 at river). It costs your friend another $60. If her chances of winning are greater than 8.5% she has a positive expectation by calling. If each player has a 30% chance of having a worse hand than the likelihood of both of them having a worse hand is 9%.
When your friend did not bet the river, the middle player might just figure his pocket pair of Nines or Eights could be good. He might figure the 3 bettor just had two big cards since he did not raise on the turn. The three bettor might have re-raised from late position on some funky holding like a suited Ace or even a medium pocket pair and is calling because the pot is large. Who knows?
Re-raised pots have their own rules.
what if they were colluding...?
So Mason, what we have here is a "good laydown". Huh? How may time do you have to be wrong to make this a "bad laydown" given the size of the pot? Not a whole lot, I bet.
Vince
You don't need to be wrong very often, but because of the previous action and the parlay nature of the hand it will be extremely rare for you to have the best hand.
Of course you are correct, Mason. In fact the times you would call would be agianst very unpredictable opponents. One that is very loose aggressive and prone to bluffing and the other one the type that hasn't a clue. Guess what I've been there. But I still agree with you.
vince
In addition, even if the two appropriate hands are out, it doesn't meant that the first person would bet and the second person will call. So in a sense you need a three team parlay to come home. The person in the middle has something like a pair of eights, the person on the end has something like ace-king, and they both put their money in.
Mason,
Since I'm up late I'll be among the first ones to embarrass myself with an attempt to answer. You don't say anything about the other players but I assume they are typical, which to me means somewhere between average but far less than expert. I'll assume your friend plays well. All bets are off if the other players are live-ones, maniacs, or experts.
On the flop I think your friend should go for the checkraise. The three-bettor is almost sure to bet and how he reacts to the checkraise will usually be an indication as to whether your friend is up against a bigger overpair or big overcards. Even more important is the reaction of the player in the middle. If he cold calls a checkraise, then quad tens is something to worry about. I don't think a medium pair (e.g., 88 or 99) or mediocre overcards (e.g., KQ) could cold call a checkraise.
The actual pre-flop, flop and fourth-street action seem to indicate that the late position three-bettor probably had overcards such as AK, but a bigger overpair is about a 33% chance IMO. The middle players call of the turn bet should set off an alarm with the lack of draws on board. Quad tens has to be a concern; however, a mediocre player holding a medium pair such as 88 or 99 would often call the raise before the flop, overcall the flop, and perhaps call the turn. A better quality player would not just call with 88 or 99 on earlier betting rounds. In addition, quality players do not usually cold call early raises with ten-anything. A mediocre player could easily cold call with ATs or a similar hand.
On the river I would be very concerned about the middle player springing to life with a bet. If the middle position player were mediocre, I would strongly consider a fold. But if the middle player were decent, I would discount a ten in his hand and overcall. Your friend is probably beat by one of the two hands but the pot is big enough to call down and a call closes the betting.
Regards,
Rick
PS: Did you stipulate that you wanted a quick answer? ;-).
Personally, I would lead into this flop. If the 3-bettor has AK, he might think twice about chasing it. Or, he might decide to take a free card if it is checked to him. A bet lets him know you have a pair, and you can reraise if he raises.
I agree that a check-raise would better define the MP's hand, but not necessarily. Lots of players would call here with smaller pairs, in hopes that the other two players have big aces. I would just hope for the best.
I would bet the turn also, but would consider a check raise if the 3-bettor put up a fight on the flop, and I was sure he would bet. And I wouldn't give up on the river, either. Bet out, and call a raise if there is one. There is no way I would fold this hand considering the lack of raising up until now.
Of course quads are possible. Lots of players wait till the river to pull the trigger when they have the nuts. Just the other night, I saw two players slow play when theyboth flopped three aces. One of them filled up on the turn, but didn't raise when bet into. He only bet the river because it was checked to him. Who knows why the player who was first to act, and had flopped trips while holding AJ, never bet into the pot.
3 Bet Brett,
You wrote: ”Just the other night, I saw two players slow play when they both flopped three aces. One of them filled up on the turn, but didn't raise when bet into. He only bet the river because it was checked to him. Who knows why the player who was first to act, and had flopped trips while holding AJ, never bet into the pot.”
I saw that hand also. My take was different but the action was furious that night so facts could be confused with other hands. The player holding AJ (let's call him Good Guy Hero “GGH”) was in the big blind and there were only two other players, one of which I will call Treacherous Hero “TH”. TH was of high repute – yet called from the middle first in with A9 in an aggressive game. One additional weak player “WP” also called on the button or small blind. When the flop came A-A-baby rainbow, GGH decided to check hoping he would get some action. It was checked through. When the turn came a nine, I think I remember GGH checking again, as surely TH would now try to steal. But it was checked through. (Note: It was possible that GGH bet the turn and got called by TH with WP bailing). On the river, which came a blank, the GGH bet the river and was just called by the TH with the full house. If WP had bailed on the turn, I believe TH just called in order to torment GGH.
OTOH, I could be confusing the facts on the turn above with another confrontation between TH and GGH. In this one TH held AA and smooth called pre flop, checked the flop of A-Q-J (which was checked through), called the turn bet by GGH when a blank fell, and smooth called the river when it came a five. The GGH in the blind had A5 and checked the flop, bet the turn (getting it head up with TH) and bet the river when he made two pair. I am sure TH just called the river to torment GGH, who was counting the pot down.
BTW, what did TH hold when it was 3-bet to him, TH 4-bets, and gets cold called almost all in by the off-duty dealer to his left? The flop comes K-J-x and TH bales to a bet on the flop.
Regards,
Rick
PS: GGH played much tighter that night then TH.
I understand that as you get older, your memory is one of the things that gets weaker. In the AJ hand, TH called after week MP called. MP had been three bet by TH so many times he openly whined about it. TH was giving him a break. But there is no explanation as to why GGH never bet with three Aces and a Jack kicker.
In the AA hand, a flush card came on the river, making it risky for TH to raise at that point. To raise before that sould have killed the action, and the pots had been kind of small up till then.
In the 4-bet hand, we'll never know for sure, but I suspect suited connectors. (Just a guess).
Call it a hunch, but I think THINK... that theres a decent chance that the middle position has him beat. He's doing all the calling but none of the betting until the river. The reraiser most likely has AKs or AQs because of the fact that she did not pop your friend on the turn. THe middle position has just been calling all the way. Its a hunch but I think he has a 10. If not he probably has a decent sized pocket pair. Your friend should just call...the pot is pretty big already.
"theres a decent chance that the middle position has him beat. He's doing all the calling but none of the betting until the river."
That's a very good point.
Yes. Yes. Yes.
The stars shine, the fog lifts, and
Reverend Bayes smiles tonight.
Bet or check raise the flop.The bet on the river from the MIDDLE player is an indication of not wanting to miss a bet with a monster.If the LATE position player is a knucklehead I overcall,if he/she (late position player)is a sharp player my chances of mucking increase.
Here's my take. JJ is either best or it's not. If not, I'm most concerned about the 3-bettor having me beat. This means I want to get the middle position player's money in the pot. The best way to do this is to bet out. While it's possible for the middle position player to have a ten, it's not something to be overly concerned with. This is also an instance where I would make a rare overcall on the river.
Kevin J
Why not have a little fun and raise. The other players may fold KK, QQ and you will only get raised by a 10 so you can throw it away then.
Middle position might think his pocket pair is good and that is why he bet or he just may be on a steal. If 3 bettor had As, he probably would raise the river and not go for the overcall from you as you may call 2 cld with the strength you had been showing.
It's granted that you should probably call and if you are beat you lose that bet, but if an opponent had KK or QQ, they would have an extremely difficult time calling your raise in this spot, giving you an extra opportunity to win the pot.
I was thinking the same thing, checkraise the river. I think this is a much stronger play than an overcall.
Good play, but only if you are in the lead. Folding KK or QQ at this point would be a terrible play, and one that most players would never make. We both know that the only way you would release KK in this situation is when they pried you cold, dead fingers from the cards. Unless the right person did the CR of course.
What are you going to do when MP reraises your CR on the river?
Raise him again! Maybe he'll think you have 4 tens with a better kicker than him.
Seriously, I think it's an easy fold against anyone who is not extremely tricky, and if this player is extremely tricky I don't think I would have checkraised the river in the first place.
Poker is alot easier if you force other people to make the tough decisions instead of having to make them yourself.
I don't know where you play, but I couldn't imagine a typical player throwing away KKs full or QQs full in this spot. Typical players simply don't fold big full houses (some weaker players would call in this spot with any full house) even if there full house is made by a set on the board.
Shawn Keller
Fold
The button and the early raiser have both shown strength during the play of the hand with the middle player calling all bets and finally betting out on the end. The overcall of the middle positons bet on the end by the button would conclude a pocket pair by the button most likely higher than JJ's. I think she is beat in 2 places.
I'm thinking about what hand the middle player would have to call an early raise. Certainly a medium pocket pair is a possibility since this is common in most games today. And if the middle player is a poor enough player to cold call a raise with 10-9s, the situation seems to be player specific.
I haven't read the other answers yet, but I'll throw in my $0.02. I think some information about the other two players are essential in making a good decision here. Against most opponents, I would probably go ahead and lead on the flop, since nobody will believe that you came in for a raise up front with a hand that contains a T (excepting the impossible TT). I would definitely lead, if the middle player was of an aggressive nature, to try to force out the button. However, if the button is very aggressive, I might go ahead and try for a checkraise if I thought that the middle player would fold a hand they would call 2-bets cold with before the flop (e.g. - AK, AQ or maybe even QQ). In general, I'm not too fond of check-calling in 3-way pots.
To make matters worse, your friend is out of position, and if the 3-bettor on the button is a solid player, then he is quite likely to have an overpair to your friends J's.
The play of the middle player is suspect. Is this person bad enough to call 2-bets cold from an early raiser with something like AT? They have certainly played the hand like they have the case T.
I think your friend played this one too weakly on the flop. She could have gotten more information about the relative strength of her opponents hands by applying more pressure early, and gotten away from the hand without paying off if it became apparent that she was beat. The way this one played out, I would probably overcall getting 11-1 on the end, but I don't think your friend probably drug this one.
Just MHO, all dissenting views welcome,
Steve
Check Raise the flop.
If middle caller calls two bets on the flop cold (after a check raise) then the river play may be a check and fold. But the way the hand played a call on the river is o.k.
Vince
I think your friend played it fine on the flop and turn.
Checkraising serves little purpose here. The cards you don't want to see come off on the turn are A,K,Q. If the preflop 3 bettor does not have an overpair, he is sure to have Ak/AQ which menas that allowing the middle guy to stick around is no biggie because at most that can only add 3 more bad crads from your perspective (that can come off on the turn or river). Besides, if the middle player coldcalled a raise rather than 3 betting it (and assuming he is a decent player), he probably has a hand like KQs, a medium pocket pair or perhaps AJs. In other words, he and the 3 bettor probably share an overcard which collectively reduces the number of bad cards that can come off on the turn and river for your friend.
So, bottom line is that as between your friend's two oppponents, they probably only have 9 outs and may only have 6 outs.
If your friend bets out on the flop, she may squeeze out the middle player but she is not going to get the 3 bettor out. He may very well raise with AK and then either take the free card on the turn or bet again and put your friend in a guessing mode in any event. Betting out will also make the 3 bettor correctly think that there is no way your friend has a Ten.
Now, the turn bet by your friend makes a lot of sense because (she being the initial raiser) is more likely to have a Ten than the other two players (and she should know that they both know that). Her flop check/call and turn bet are consistent with her having a ten...well, at least it's not inconsistent as betting out on the flop would be.
On the river, the sophistication of the 3 bettor has to be taken into account. Would he think that by just calling with Ak/AQ, he could stop an overcall from your friend if she has JJ. If so, then I would probably overcall. But if she somehow knew that there is no way that the 3 bettor would call the river with Ak/AQ (i.e. he would either fold or raise), then folding would be right. In any event, in the vast majority of cases, I would just ditch the psychoanalysis, go ahead and overcall and sleep well at night.
1) Bet-raise or check-raise the flop.
2) Always showdown this hand in light action. The river call is an easy call.
- Andrew
On the flop, I would call. I dont mind the MP staying in mainly because if he has an underpair he is drawing dead, and if he has overcards he is probably dominated by the late player. If either of the players has an overpair or a ten, then obviously you dont want to raise.
On the river I think at least one, probably both have her beat, but I would call anyway. Pot is to big. She is getting 11.5-1 odds, and I think that is sufficient for an over-call.
1.) I would check raise the flop and lead on the turn then go from there.
2.) As the hand developed, It sure lookes like the middle player has a T or AA. He got action on every street and kept 3 players till the end. If he is the passive type I would think I had no more than a 1% chance of winning and would like to fold. The button could have JJ,QQ,KK,AA,AKs.(however in limit, in the real world, I know I would call)
It's sort of automatic against the 3-bettor because he won't be folding until the river with AK and won't be folding at all with any better. Your friend shouldn't fold either if it were head-up.
The guy to worry about is the one in the middle: he almost can't call two bets on the flop unless he has quads. So if I were her I'd check-raise the 3-bettor on the flop and take it from there. Having failed to smoke him out earlier I think she has to pay him off on the end, especially since there aren't many cold calling hands one ten in them.
I would call on the river despite the thin odds of showing the winner, for two reasons:
First, as Jim Briar reasons, the call is only marginally incorrect, and long term costs perhaps $5 or $10. However, observant (read 'good') players are less likely to bluff at me this session. This offsets somewhat the cost.
Second, and more importantly, I personally play much better when I am having a winning session, and the times I win this pot my improved play will more then cover the costs of the times I am loser. And if I fold the winner, I have the tendency to dwell on this, which will negatively affect the rest of the session.
Which means I am not a disciplined as the best players, but knowing the limitations at least allows me to minimize the cost of this flaw in my game.
A9
Here are two $10-20 hands I played on Paradise Poker tonight:
1.) I am in the bb with Ad Kh. Two players limp in middle position, the button raises, sb folds, I reraise, one limper folds, other limper calls, button calls. There are 3 players and 10.5 small bets in the pot.
The flop is Qc 8c 7d.
I check, the limper checks, the button bets, we both call. There are 3 players and 6.75 big bets in the pot.
The turn is the Kd.
I check, the limper checks, the button bets. Should I call or raise?
2.) I open raise with Ah Ac in early-middle position, a late position player reraises, the bb calls, I cap it, they both call. There are 3 players and 12.5 small bets in the pot.
The flop is Th 8c 7h.
BB checks, I bet, late position raises, bb calls, I call. There are 3 players and 9.25 big bets in the pot.
The turn is the 4s.
BB checks. Should I check or bet?
I check, late position bets, bb raises. Now what?
Thanks, Mike Watson
1. Because of your position in the BB I would tend to call. If I was on the button I would probably raise. Thats a toughy though.. Many people would raise in that spot.
2. With garbage like that on the board many people will say call. But what you have to ask yourself is what is the BB doing calling all those bets cold on the flop. Its very possible the BB has 56, or flopped a straight. The button is representing trips i think. You're a huge dog imo at this point so I would toss it.
Hand 1:
I would have called from my BB if the raise came on the button from a tight playe who dont raise too often but i would have reraise if it was a loose agressive player. Since u prolly didnt knew him (thats the problem with internet poker), i would have just called).
Since u are only 3 handed, i might have led a bet on the flop to see where i am. i just hate check call unless im on a draw.
Even with your check call, i would have fire a bet on the turn. With all those draws possible (str8, flush), u cant take the chance of givin a free card to your opponents in my opinion. Since u check, a raise is definitively in order since the limper is obviously on a draw and u want him to pay the maximum price. If he call, watxh out if a dangerous card if the river.
Hand 2:
U must reraise on the flop. Ya the LP player could have trips or 9J but he must likely hold AT KT QT or JT. with a reraise youll know where u stand.
Since the turn is a blank, i would fire a bet on the turn too.
As u can see i hate passive poker...
But im still learning so i might be wrong!
Charlie
Of course since u checked the turn and its now 2 big bet to u, u have a fold here, youre facin trips or a straight and you have only 2 maybe outs and possibly are drawin dead
Mike,
In the first hand, your decision on whether to raise or just call is a close decision. I would lean towards raising because you probably have the best hand and can extract another bet from the limper who appears to be on a draw. Since you 3-bet pre-flop the button would be hard-pressed to re-raise; if the button does make it 3-bets then I would have to fold (assuming that the button is not too tricky of a player). However, if you chose to just call the bet on the turn, then I think that you should bet out on the river assuming that a scare card (like a third club) does not hit.
On the second hand, my action would be predicated on how I read the BB. I don't think that the late position player is a big concern; he probably is playing a big pair like KK or QQ. The BB most likely has either 2-pair or a set, but he could also have flopped a straight. The pot odds justify your continuing only if you are against 2-pair. So if you think that the BB would call 2 bets cold with T8s or 87s pre-flop then I would call. In the games I play in a typical BB player would not be this loose pre-flop and so I would fold.
-- Manzanita
On the first hand I might bet out on the turn. A checkraise risks someone 3-betting, and also risks the free card.
On the second hand, I think you have to call, even thought it might be expensive. In the games I often play in, there is too great a chance that you are still ahead. The late player seems to have an overpair, though there is a chance of TT. Usually a set would not be played fast on the flop vs. a capper, although with the draws out a good player probably would play it fast.
The BB's most likely hand is two pair, but you have odds to call vs. this hand and there are a lot of semi-bluffing opportunities on the board. A hand like Q9h wouldn't hesitate to put a raise in on the turn, or even T9 or a heart draw depending on how aggressive the player is.
SK
1. fold
2. raise
3. check, fold
Suited King,
Here's how I would play the 3 hands:
(1) I would fold. A typical hand raised UTG is much better than your K9s. The second player probably has you beat as well. Save your money for a better hand to play.
(2) If you think that it's likely there will be 2 more callers behind you and that the pot will not be raised then it's safe to call your K9s this time. If you are not sure that these 2 criteria will be met, though, I would fold. IMHO a hand like K9s is not that good and can easily get you into trouble unless you play well post-flop.
(3) I don't like my bottom pair hand in this situation, even with a good kicker. There are both straight draws and a flush draw out there. You have very few chances to improve while your opponents, if they don't have you already beat, probably have outs. This looks like a clear fold to me.
-- Manzanita
#1 - easy fold
#2 - call
#3 - first mistake was not leading on the flop. now you must fold.
>> 1.You are at a fairly loose table and doing pretty well. There are 2 players in the game that you don?t know at all. The first player is UTG and he raises. The second player is on UTG?s immediate left and he calls. Everyone folds to you, in the cutoff, and you look at Ks 9s. You know the SB to be a terrible player that plays too many hands and goes too far with them. You know the BB is a solid player who looks like he might want to call. The button looks to fold. Would you call this hand knowing the SB will call and the BB intends to call?
Nope, easy fold to a UTG raise. To many ways to be dominated.
>> 2.Same table, same players, same position. A new player posts on you immediate right. Everyone folds to the player next to the post?s immediate right who limps. Post checks and you see the same Ks 9s hand. Call or fold?
Its close between raising and folding. Calling is by far the worst option. Me personally, I would raise here 100% of the time.
>> 3.Same table, same players, you are in the BB. There is an early limper and the cutoff limps. Everyone folds to you. You see Ks 8s and check. The flops is Td 8c Qc. Do you bet or check? Right or wrong you check. The early limper bets and the cutoff calls. Do you call or fold?
Easy fold. Why in the world would you call with bottom pair with a two flush and a made straight out there?
I folded every hand, but I did consider raising in hand #2. It was funny because I would have won all 3 hands. So playing correctly sometimes stings. Ha.
I limp in second position with KdQs, person behind me calls, cut-off calls, SB raises, BB fold, we all call. Flop comes JdTs8d. I call, next person calls, cut-off raises, SB cold calls, I call and person behind me calls. Turn is 5d. SB bets, all call. River is 9d. SB bets, I call, next person folds, cut-off calls. Results below:
Cut-off shows QhJc. SB shows ATd. Did I play this right or should I have thrown it away to the SB's river bet, or earlier?
-Thanks
mk -
Interesting hand. I think that you just had the wrong cards out against you (namely the Ad.) I think you played it okay....no amount of raising on the flop will drive out a nut flush draw. You have to consider that you effectively have six straight outs instead of eight, but you also have a runner-runner flush out. Some players I know would have folded their straight draw on the flop...the odds of making a "good" straight by the river are about 4:1. Since the action's four-way, I think you can stay in. After the turn, you have nine outs to make a high flush and six others to make your straight (which may not be good...interesting that the river made your straight and your flush.) I think you have to call on the turn and see the river. On the river, you have the second nut flush (disregarding straight flushes,) and you have to call...wouldn't it have been easier if the Ad was there instead? Seems like a case of getting the wrong kind of help.
Scott
mk
First of all, I do not like your call with KQo in early position. KQ off is a common trap hand that will make second best hand alot of times. If it was suited, I would call.
As I indicated above, with poor position, you are effectively trapped between the pre-flop raiser and 2 callers behind you. You paid 2 small bets on the flop with your open-ender facing a flush draw and possible re-draws to beat your hand should you hit your straight on the turn.
Once the diamond hits on the turn and the SB leads after being shown strength by the cutoff, I would fold. You may be drawing dead to the A diamonds and it turns out you were.
WOW. Would you really fold the second nut flush on the river for 1 bet.(or were you just result oriented.) You sure must get pushed off a ton of hands.
Tony
I would never get that far.
Dugie,
I knew as soon my chips hit the felt that I should not have opened with KQ, but the game was tight and I talked myself into it. If the SB would have check-raised the turn with his nut flush I wouldn't have hesitated to throw the hand away when he bet out on the river. But when he just bet the turn, I think I had to call the river. But you are right, the problem was playing KQ in the first place.
Fairly loose-aggressive 15-30 HE home game. I am in the small blind. Six limpers to a loose player who raises. I call with K8d. Flop comes Qd-7d-9c. All check to the raiser who bets. I call as does the rest of the field, with no raises. Turn brings a 6h. Again, all check to the raiser who bets and I check-raise my flush and open ended straight draw, hoping he might lay it down with jacks or worse. Everyone else folds and he calls. River is a three of diamonds. I bet, he calls and I win with my flush. He throws his aces across the table and mumbles to himself.
Is this to strong of a play for the hand? Should I have even called the flop? I felt pretty good about my play but what are your opinions on how I played this hand?
"Rook"
Pre-flop your call of a raise even from your small blind with King-shit suited is marginal. You do have lots of players and it is unlikely to get re-raised so the call is not bad. It is just that I would feel more comfortable if your hand were King-Nine suited or King-Ten suited so that you had some additional straight making possibilities.
Once you flop a flush draw, you are in this until the river usually. On the turn you have a monster draw with 9 outs to a big flush, 6 more outs to a straight, and even your King overcard may represent 3 more outs. This is 15-18 outs. However, the straight draw is a one card straight draw so there is a possibility you could hit a straight and be splitting the pot with someone else who had an Eight. I am unclear about raising here. Do you want players out when you are drawing? Your raise does not figure to win the pot outright and it is unlikely that the bettor who has been showing all this strength cannot at least beat a top pair of Queens. I see the raise as a high variance play that may or may not add to your expectation. The key is that you ended up with the best hand which is what full tabled limit hold'em is all about.
I think this is a highly negative EV play. See my post.
I think the great and powerful Oz would cringe if he read this post.
-SmoothB-
It's not that it is too aggressive a play it's just that you lost all your customers. If this is the loose game you describe you may have gotten 4-5 callers without a raise. An agressive play would be a check raise after UTG bet, all call, then you check raise.
My thinking on the flop would be, "Please let me see some cheap streets."
I'd be delighted to see the turn and river for one bet each. The idea of willfully putting extra chips in while simultaneously knocking players out and reopening the betting for the raiser makes me cringe. Outs shmouts. It's a showdown-type game and you've got nothing to show.
Tommy
Why on earth would you checkraise to knock out all of the other potential customers? That is just plain silly. Checkraising the turn with a powerful draw like this is only worthwhile if the bettor is on your immediate left. That way, you check, he bets, and when the others have called one bet, you raise. Hopefully they will call one more bet.
Checkraising the turn was silly for another reason. This was a hand that you would fold if you missed one of your draws. Right? The only reason you might want to checkraise is if you had a great draw and maybe also a pair. In other words, you were going to call on the river anyway no matter what card fell, on the off chance that he had AK and missed. So you get that extra bet in on the turn. Now, if you miss, it will get checked through. It still cost you 2 bets to see the river card.
But if you do improve, now you can get an extra bet out of him on the river. In this scenario it costs you just as much if you miss your flush, and you get an extra bet if you make it.
Note that, after you checkraise him, and you check and he bets, you can safely throw away your hand if you miss your flush.
In the hand you played, you made a terrible mistake. You made yourself pay more for your draw than you had to. You made a -EV raise that cost you money. You cleared out a whole bunch of potential callers who could have paid you off on the river.
I think you lost a few hours pay on this play.
-SmoothB-
While I agree that check-raising is not the right play for the reasons that everyone has stated (namely not wanting to chase away customers when you are drawing) it cannot be a "terrible play" for the following reasons:
1. His opponents might have folded anyway whether he raised or not.
2. His raise may drive out a hand that has an Eight and if he makes a straight at the river he wins the whole pot instead of half of it.
3. His raise may drive out a better King and if a King arrives at the river his top pair of Kings could win the pot.
4. He gets an extra double bet from the bettor when he successfully draws out.
Some authorities have argued that when pots get large you should do everything possible to increase your chances of winning the pot and not worry about costing yourself a fraction of a bet. It is a fraction of a bet type of mistake not a mistake that will cost him an entire pot.
I disagree that this a "fraction of a bet" type of mistake. the guy will make his monster more often than he hits a questionable over card. The bets you lose when you do hit your monster make this a very costly play. Furthermore, you have a situation that could offer a really great overlay for the money you put in on the turn. why would you want to destroy that?
But how do you know you will lose any bets when he hits his monster? How do you know that the other players would not have folded for one bet anyway? The point is there will be a certain percentage of the time when the raise makes no difference as far as how many bets go into the pot and you do collect one extra bet from the bettor when you hit. However, there will be a percentage of the time when the raise will drive out a player who would have called for one bet but not for two and who catches a river card that splits the pot with you or keeps you from winning the entire pot. Raising when pots get big to increase your chances of winning the pot does have some merit.
if you want to bet for value here you should lead on the turn, not check-raise. This is an ill advised spot for a check-raise semi-bluff as you have lots of opponents and loose, calling station type player showing aggression.
Rook,
I think your pre flop call is close as long as you play well post flop. Some may disagree here. Note that in a 20/40 game structure I would fold. Of course you at least call on the flop with a flush draw.
The problem with the turn checkraise is that you had seven opponents who called the flop. Your checkraise will rarely drive out all of them with this board, even though on this occasion all but the original raiser did in fact fold. If anything, you might want at least four to cold call, since you are getting odds. But four cold callers would often indicate an ace high flush draw so maybe that would not be too comfortable for you.
With so many outs (although the straight may be for half the pot) I might lead into the flop bettor on the turn or just check and call letting in other players. You need to make your draw to win and you might as well have as many callers as possible.
Regards,
Rick
All,
Thanks for the responses. It seems that the general concensus is that I should have lead into the field on the turn as to not lose extra bets. That is a great observation and I agree. Thinking back I'm sure at least half the field would call the turn for a single bet. As always I look for advice to better my game.
Thanks. "Rook"
Let's see now. You check raise with nothing, causing a bunch of people who might call to fold?
You lost how many bets on this hand?
Maybe you should bet the turn or just call the bet and people behind you will call too.
Think again son.
1) I got 99 in late position. 3 limpers to me, I limp, bb checks. Flop comes Q 9 x, with 2 clubs. Everyone checks I bet. Everyone folds. 95% of the time I usually get calelrs, but anyone think i shoulda slow played here?
2) Very next hand i get dealt Ad7d in late position. 3 limpers, I limp bb checks. Flop comes J 7 7 rainbow. Everyone checks I bet, everyone folds. Should I have slow played this given it was a rainbow flop? It just kinda made me mad that when I flopped two sets i got no action. Oh well thats poker...but any thoughts are appreciated.
(1) With a Q-9 and two clubs on the board? Are you nuts?
(2) You could, but I tend not to. Usually the tables are loose enough to call virtually any two there.
Chris
Hand 1) No. With 4 opponents, a 2 flush, a 2 broadway-ish cards, I think checking is far too risky (and betting does not really give away anything about your hand).
Hand 2) With 5.5 SBs in the pot, a case could be made for slowplaying. I think that the answer to whether to bet here or not has a lot to do with balance in your own style of play. In other words, how often would you bet a hand like 109 here? If try to steal the pot in those circumstances, you're going to need to bet with the goods here to cover. If people think you always have the goods when you bet and that you don't have the goods when you don't, you may be able to make your opponents badly misplay their hands on the expensive streets with a check here on the flop.
1) anyone think i shoulda slow played here?
no! not with two clubs on board. make them pay ot draw out on you.
2) Very next hand i get dealt Ad7d in late position. 3 limpers, I limp bb checks. Flop comes J 7 7 rainbow. Everyone checks I bet, everyone folds. Should I have slow played this given it was a rainbow flop?
YES. you could get runner runnered by something weird by giving a free turn card, but more often than not youll put someone at ease enough to bet into you when the turn card pairs them and you can then raise them with your trips.
Post-flop your play was fine on both hands but why no raise pre-flop with 99 on the first hand?
It's one of those tricky situations given the number of callers, but were you trying to get people to call behind you? I normally would rather raise here, get the blinds out and buy the button giving me a chance to steal on the flop or legitimately bet top pair or better. I think it's better in general to take command of the hand by raising. Also notice had you raised the pot might have been large enough to entice someone to chase a back door.
I think this play is very game dependent.
Paul Talbot
I can't see the wisdom here in raising pre-flop, at least in the games that I regularly play in (Northern CA). Here's what's gonna happen if you raise at least 90% of the time in games of 15-30 or less: 1.) You get called be everyone (most likely). This just makes it correct for people to draw out on you - giving you NO CHANCE of winning without flopping a set. Even if the board is 3 rags, they are all getting a good price to call with 2 over cards or something like a suited ace on the back-door draw.
2.) One of the blinds folds (invariably the small blind). This accomplishes little, if anything.
3.) You get checkraised by some crazy moron with any 2 cards and then it manages to get capped by the maniac who's in between the two of you. Now you need to fold you 9's.
4.) Rarely, you get the blinds to fold but nobody else. I'm not sure that mathematically this situation is very good, because you basically need to flop a set to win (see 1 above).
Really, by raising this hand in this situation, I think that you increase your variance more than it's worth, since the only benefits that I see are if you flop your set, which you already have odds to do, and to maybe induce everybody to check it around to you on the flop, allowing you to take a free turn. Note that I would NEVER bet in this rare situation, because in my experience, somebody will always call you, usually with something like 2nd pair & overcard or better, and this causes others to hang in there.
Hand# 1> Pocket nines and three limpers, I raise, and to get rid of the blinds, then bet the flop.
Hand# 2> Your play was fine.
SPM,...make them pay to see the flop...
After 3 limpers, a raise with pocket 9s is like throwing money away. Unless you flop a set you are beat if any A, K, Q, J, or 10 hits the flop (15) or if it is rags and someone has slow played previous to you with a big pair. If they have limped with pocket 5, 6, 7, or 8 and one of these hits the flop you are also screwed. Forget it. Raising with pocket 9s after 3 limpers is no good, either you hit a set on the flop or you are gone, a raise is -EV. Your raise will not drive anyone out. Not raising pre-flop after 3 limpers is correct. Why raise looking for what amounts to a 2 outer. This would be a classic mistake.
Want some good advice, don't listen to Suburban Poker Man.
On the last hand, you must remember that people will almost expect a bet from the button. Usually you are right to bet from the button with anything near-playable if it's checked to you and the board isn't looking to scary. You will take down you fair share right here and often get just one caller on overcards who will frequently lay down on the turn.
What I'm saying is that if you don't bet on the button, and then for excample raise the turn, people should smell something fishy. Also, people who don't call a bet from the button on the flop will have very bad hands too. The most interesting thing they could possibly hold, and fold here, is a gutshot straight or a runner-runner-flush in which case you are WRONG not to charge them.
You could get a lot of action from pretty average hands too. If I was in SB here with AJ, I would often go for the check raise to try isolate if the betting was opened from a late position.
You play on this hand was fine, just unlucky. In low-limit, you are usually right to charge people regardless of the strength of you hand (unless you are the one in need for a free card). Slowplaying very rarely gets you a much better result and it sometimes winds up in tragedy.
lars
Haven't been to the local casino for awhile. I just started a new job that is close to the casino. I'm taking some evening classes so I have some time to kill between school and class. I decide to go over to the casino and have a sandwich at the Subway and pick up a Cardplayer. No Cardplayer but I did observe the $10-20 game for about 1/2 hour. Here a four hands that stick out in my mind.
1) Everyone folds to the button who calls, SB calls, and BB check. Flop is Q, Q, 2 rainbow. SB checks, BB bets, button folds and SB folds. BB turns over Q,2.
2) Two middle position players limp, SB calls, and BB checks. Flop is K, 3, 2 rainbow. It's checked around. Turn brings a K so the board is K, 3, 2, K. SB bets, BB folds, first middle limper raises, second middle limper folds and SB calls. River is a blank. SB checks, middle limper bets, SB calls, the middle limper throws his hand in the muck stating he was bluffing. I don't see the SB's hand.
3) One player limps in the middle, cutoff raises, button folds, SB three bets, BB folds, middle limper folds, cutoff calls. Flop is Kc, 8h, 5d. SB bets, cutoff calls. Turn is a 9c. SB bets, cutoff calls. River is a 7c. SB checks and cutoff checks. Cutoff turns over QQ as SB kind of slow rolls AA.
4) Two middle limpers call, SB calls, and BB checks. Flop is K 7 5 rainbow. It is checked around. Turn is a 4. SB checks, BB bets, two middle limpers call. and SB folds. River is a 9. BB bets both limpers fold. BB turns over 9,4o.
Yes they were showing their hands when they didn't need to. Any comments on how these hands were played?
Hand 1. BB shoudl have slow played but he probably figured that his opponents would percieve him as bluffing and call. Kind of dumb in my opinion because if neither has a Q or pocket pair what can they call with? No raise so no one has two overcards.
Hand 2. MP player picked a bad time for a bluff. First, why would he not have bet in mid position on the flop with a K? Secondly, SB bet looks natural it looks like a failed flop check-raise or a weak king. He could be bluffing it, but most times probably not. Not a horrible bluff attempt but not a great one.
Hand 3. SB should have bet on the end. It is unlikely his sole oppoennt has a set or two pair given the action and perhaps even more unlikely he has a 6. What could he come in with with a 6 after a limper and raised with? Maybe 66 but then why would he have lasted to the river?
Hand 4. BB made a good play at the pot. It is unlikely that someone has a K given that it checked around. His bet on the turn is nice. 1) it looks like he may have missed check-raise with the king or had a weak K, and 2) the 4 almost certainly didn't help the players who checked. It doesn't work and he gets caleld but then when he makes two pair his bet is probably good and he might get called by a 7. There is no way K9 checked called to this point.
Paul Talbot
Hand 1. The open limp by the button is a nonsensical play. If there was ever a raise or fold situation, opening on the button is it. The big blind should have slow played his flopped full house but it probably didn't matter. Based on this hand, I would say the button is not a very sophisticated player.
Hand 2. The middle limper does not understand bluffing very well. When he checks the flop he denies a King. When another King turns up, it makes it even less likely someone has a King and his bluff raise is bad poker.
Hand 3. The cutoff has a clear fold on fourth when facing a 3 bettor who keeps firing on a King-high flop when he has an underpair. I guess the small blind dogged it at the river because he was worried that his opponent might have a Six for a straight or two Clubs for a runner-runner Club flush. But I would bet the river anyway.
Hand 4. The big blind got a free turn card that he was not supposed to. He bet because he thought his hand might be good or he felt he might get someone with bottom pair or middle pair/bad kicker to fold.
This sounds like a good passive game to play in.
No doubt you two would destroy this game. I found many of the same mistakes that you all found in these hands. What blew me away in hand 4 and maybe I'm missing something, is what the heck were the two guys in the middle calling with on the turn and folding the river with. The pot was very small on the turn in hand 4. This was another example of what Mason says about the games remaining good for a long time.
"The open limp by the button is a nonsensical play. If there was ever a raise or fold situation, opening on the button is it."
Jim, what if you're up against weak opps, you feel there's very little chance of stealing the blinds, and your hand is too weak to raise for value, but good enough that you think you can profit with it on the basis of those times you hit something combined with the mistakes your opps will likely make?
I remember a thread we had awhile back where you brought up this point and even Bob Ciaffone agreed with you that there could be opponents and situations where open limping on the button might be right given the conditions you have outlined. I guess if you had a couple of LOLs (Little Old Ladies) in the blinds who will always defend but never attack and who will faithfully pay you off all the way to the river when you make a hand just to see what you have, then limping might be right.
I am wondering what specific hand holding the button would have that might make open limping correct. When I have seen open limping from the button in a live game, the button usually has AA or KK but I don't believe this kind of hand is what you have in mind.
I disagree with those who say you should never open limp on the button. I agree that you wouldn't go too far wrong by never doing so, but I think there are some profitable opportunities you are missing if you don't.
To be more specific, QJs is an example of a hand I might consider limping with if the game conditions dictate it. Furthermore, if you are known to limp with hands such as this, you may also be able to profitably limp with your AA and KK (because you won't be giving away your holding).
I have to run, but I would just like to point out one reason that I like open limping in certain situations. Sometimes if you limp and then bet the flop, the blinds are highly reluctant to call you down unless they have a good piece of the flop. But if you raise pre-flop, they will call you down just becuase they think your bet is automatic. Against certain types of players, I think it may be profitable to limp on the button and bet on the flop no matter what hits (because they don't realize that this is a pretty auto bet). Anyway, gotta go, but just some thoughts.
-Anon
You make some very good points here. But the effectiveness of the play is inversely related to the number of times you make it.
I think you can do it more often that just against little old ladies. (I refuse to write that incredibly hackneyed acronym that usually means "laughing out loud", though the writer never is.) Against the right opps, occasional open-limps on the button can be integrated with your other open-raises on the button in a way that I think increases profits. It's difficult to prove that, I suppose, but as DS once pointed here, the gist of it is that it's just a special case of the general rule that against opps who are loose/passive all through the hand you open for a raise less often, but limp more often.
Now, my own experience suggests that you might even take it beyond that, using this tactic sometimes against even pretty good (but typically still pretty loose in the blinds) players, exploiting what they are thinking about your play and the hand you likely have. This may be what Anon is getting at above. It is also just a case of not playing *too one-dimensionally. (as in *always open raising). There are a few angles to it, but it boils down to the question:
Are there ever hands on the button (and this includes short handed play) which you want to play, but which, in light of the inherent features of the hand and/or your recent history/image with your current opps, you do not want to open-raise? For me the answer is "yes, sometimes".
This is also discussed in the short handed section of HPFAP.
The additional criteria is that the blinds players also play way too loose when they miss the flop. Since they are about 2.5:1 against hitting the flop, a raise here increases expectation even if they call the blinds every time as long as the raise buys you the pot most of the times that they both miss the flop.
Alternatively, you can just raise and change seats.
On hand No. 3, if there had not been an early limper, I wouldn't fault the cut-off from calling all the way to the river with his QQ despite the King on the flop. The presence of the limper makes it way more likely that the sb has the traditional 3 betting hands i.e. AA, KK, QQ, AK.
If cut-off was the first in with a raise by QQ, many in the sb would 3 bet with Ax, 99 etc. figuring that the cut-off is on a steal. In that case, QQ can (and probably should) call him down all the way.
10/20 Hold'em. Everybody folds around to Jim, who is on the button. He smooth calls, SB folds and BB checks. Flop comes rags, BB checks, button checks. Another rag comes on the turn, BB checks, button bets. BB flips over pocket Jacks and says, "I aint bettin your pocket rockets for you Jim!".
I was laughing my ass off because knowing this player, I would have bet a lot of money he had pocket aces because I had never seen him not open raise from late position.
So of course Jim sheepishly shows his AA and takes down the pot.
i GOT JTs in the small blind, every folds to the button who tries to steal a lot. He raises. Should I fold or call.
2. I got 95s in the bb and the button tries to steal everytime hes alone. Call or fold. thanx it advance
If you are going to defend from the SB you should usually raise to drive the BB out and take control of the hand.
Paul Talbot
Let him steal. It's his turn to.
Would you limp in and attempt to see a cheap flop with 95s, and then be willing to play that cheese out of position?
I didn't think so. Dump that crap. The blind is not your money once it goes in the pot. It's just part of the pot. If every single player in the game didn't have to post a blind equally, you'd be allowed to be more protective of it.
The thing about playing this situation is that you need to put the button on 2 random cards if he tries to steal every time (which I think is a great idea - see HEFAP for some on this). Thus I would reraise with J-10, suited or otherwise, every time. This is an easy raise to make. Your hand isn't strong enough to limp in with a call here (I would say any medium pocket pair is, as well as any A with a 10 or better and KQ). You have two pretty big cards. Then bet out, regardless of what comes on the flop - unless you flop a monster. If you are raised, then decide to call (if there's any kind of draw, including 2 overcards) or dump it. You can't dump this hand preflop and give somebody an automatic profit. As far as 9-5s, I think that you have a closer decision, but from the BB I would always call the raise, especially in a 15-30 game because of the money in the pot due to the blinds. Note the structure of the game really makes a difference here. He's risking 30 bucks to gain 45 - he can be wrong here quite often and still be killing your bankroll. However, your situation is even more dramatic - you are risking 30 bucks on a call with 9-5s to win the $75. That's pretty good immediate odds, and your implied odds are good if you will only play if you flop a pair (I would feel that I'm WAY in the lead if I flop another 9, where I would bet out, and would still feel pretty good about a 5, possible check-raise opportunity, especially if I had some other draws). You will be wrong a lot, but even if you're right 50% of the time, you're bankroll will be much happier about you not rolling over here. That's just my opinion - I'd love to hear what others think.
Quick correction: my #'s above are all screwed up. It should read "he's risking $30 to win 25 and you're risking 15 for your call to get a shot at 55." Sorry about that - it must be my crack habit, but the reasoning still applies.
1. Im 1 from the cutoff with AQo. UTG raises, and another early position has called. UTG has been on a nice lil roll in this 10-20 HE game we've been playing and the other player I don't know much about. Call or dump. I played it tight so i dumped, and the flop came Q J x. My queens woulda won it as UTG raised with AJs and caller had JTo. ANy comments?
AQo is the borderline hand vs an earlier raisor for me. AQs is a clear call against 95% of early pre-flop raisors in mid-limit hold'em IMHO. AQo is dump-able against players who won't raise with worse than AJ or a pair. Yes you will beat AJ, even dominate it, but that's the ONE hand. AQs is better, so is any pocket pair, while QQ, KK, AA or AK are major favourites against your hand.
It depends a little too, on how many callers you are likely to get behind you, and what hands these will call with. But as I say, it's borderline, and if you still think that the worst hand UTG will raise with from early position is AJ, then it was a good fold in hindsight too. However, see him raise with AT or KQ, in which case he is also likely to raise KJ, and maybe A9 and KTs too. Then AQo might be worthy of a re-raise against this guy.
lars
10-20 HE...3 limpers, I raise, everyone but the limpers fold...I got pocket k's if yall didnt see.
flop comes A x x rainbow. It's checked to me I bet and get raised 1 caller. I call, turn blank one of the limper bets and I fold. Should i have called the raise, should I have bet the flop, should I have smooth called pre-flop to see the flop, or should i have checked and caleld the whole way down. Because If I was dealt this hand again with the same flop I would play it like this...critique away at my play.
When checkraised on the turn, you can be pretty damn sure you are playing 2 outs, and you must fold because you don't have the correct odds to chase (and you can be damn sure that a flop check-raiser will follow up with a turn bet).
-Anon
It is very close between checking on the flop, betting and calling a raise and betting followed by folding. It depends on how your opponnents play. I'll let others elaborate.
You're right. I didn't notice the caller. I was kind of drunk when I wrote that (am sobering quickly though :( ).
Against "normal" players, whatever that is, I'd bet the flop and fold to the raise after a third player calls two bets cold. If you called the raise specifically to draw to a king, that's better than calling out of reflex. I don't think it's a good idea to draw to the king even though you are getting close to proper (pot+implied) odds. In the long run, folding here looks better, feels better, and helps overall discipline stay intact.
Tommy
Would you ever check the flop?
Regards.
Checking the flop is normally very player dependent. If I know any of the early players will play any Ace then I would check the flop 95% of the time.
~stephen
Last to act, checked to me, in a four handed pot? Never. The flop bet is retroactively a value bet if I have the best hand, and a probing bet if I don't.
If two players are BEHIND me, meaning they both cold-called two bets preflop, I might check the flop, planning to fold, depending on who the players are. If this fold is "wrong," meaning that noone has an ace, it ain't wrong by much in that I don't have much invested, there are cards to come that might beat me, and I'm in a bluffable, tenuous situation.
Tommy
10-20 holdem... Average player raises in early position, I call with JJ. BB calls. Flop comes 5 4 9 rainbow, bb bets, raiser raises, i call. Turn a 3. BB checks Raiser bets, I call, bb calls. River 2, raiser bets and i fold bb calls and he raiser turns over AK. I put the raiser on this hand, but i wasn't that certain. Should I have reraised on the flop, and raised the turn? Im not quite sure he would have folded but should I have played this more aggressively. I think in retrospect I would have raised both the flop and turn to see where he stood. I just feared someting like queens or kings in the hole. Thanks in advance.
I literaly winced when I read, "River 2, raiser bets and i fold" . I think cases can be made for 3-betting the flop OR raising the turn. But one thing's for sure. If you call the turn, you HAVE to call the river!
Kevin
I wouldn't call the river. Any ace beats you. And if he doesnt have an ace, then he most likely has pocket Qs or Ks. There aren't many hands he can raise with that don't beat you at this point.
Of course, I would have made him pay alot more than yellow boy did to draw to his wheel.
I read this late at night and misread the river. I thought it paired the board and missed the deuce putting the wheel out there. I agree and am very sorry for posting hastily and giving dumb advice!
Kevin
River fold was the only good play here...the only reasonable hand you beat is TT. Any Ace and QQ, KK you lose. You should raise this one on the flop or turn...the call was probably the worst of your 3 options.
Personally, I fold the flop if I believe the average player, but if he will raise on flop with overcards (based on previous play), I reraise so I can figure out where I stand. Further, the third player likely has a underpair with mystery kicker, leading to a 5-outer...he has odds to call one bet, but what about two???? BB likely folds here unless he has 2 pair IF you raise the flop.
But, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong. ;-)
I just don't understand why you would call on the flop AND turn just to fold on the river even though a blank fell.
They explain how to play this kind of hand in HPFAP. I won't quote here but in general it says to check and call. If the player has a lot of tells you can always raise on the flop and see how they take it. If they have a look like 'Oh crap the flop missed my AK what should I do now' then keep betting, and check the river down if an AK or Q falls along the way.
If his expression is 'Oh really? That's interesting. I don't mind calling.' or if he reraises then you know that you should proceed very carefully.
SmoothB-
Every once in a while I'll hear someone make the declaration on the river, "The pot's big enough for me", and proceed to check. Quite often it is fairly obvious that this hand was best and would have garnered at least one call from a second best hand. I usually get a chuckle out of it, except tonight, when I was the one who slipped into this "The pot's big enough for me", syndrome. At least I didn't say it out loud, but I hated myself for it just the same.
It was a loose, action filled 10-20 game. 2 limpers and the next guy raised. For this player to make a raise in this spot, I could be fairly sure he must've been dealt two cards, not just one. The next loose player called, and I called two cold 3 off the button with Ah,Kh. I could've made it 3 bets, but I am currently enjoying a low variance. Besides, it wouldn't have surprised me if it got capped back to me anyway. The next player folded, and a very solid player also called two cold on the button. The sb folded. The bb and the other limpers called. 7-way for 2 bets.
The flop came Th,6s,4d.
It was checked to the initial raiser who bet. This further confirmed my suspiscion of two cards and not just one. He was called by the next player who I was sure would not make this call without a minimum of more cards to come. I decided to raise my nut overcards and runner-runner nut flush and straight draw in order to thin the field some. The solid player on the button made it 3 bets. At last, an action which held some significance for me! He must have a). A set, b). ATs, or c). An overpair, most likely JJ but maybe QQ. I can't explain why, but I put him on JJ or similar overpair. The other limpers (including the initial raiser) folded to the guy on my left who called. I HATE situations where I'm unclear of my outs, but even if I'm up against AT and one of my kings are blocked, I still might have two kings and there are 23 bets this pot. I can't be entirely sure I don't have six outs. I called.
The turn was 4c.
Check, I checked, the button bet, call, I called hoping I was drawing live.
The river was the As.
Checked to me. I wanted to bet in the worst way, but I fell into "the pot's big enough for me" syndrome. If he had the hand I put him on (JJ or QQ), he most likely calls my bet given the size of the pot. But I didn't want to get raised and have to pay off AT or a full house. I also thought the ace might have given the first player some kind of two pair, which might be really silly thinking. I checked, and sure enough, the button checked JJ behind me. My AK won.
Can someone please rip into me with some valid reasons on why I should have bet? If so, I'll hang this skirt back in my wife's closet, and promise never to wear it in public again! (just trying to make a point. No offense meant to any female players). Thanks.
Kevin
I know you're looking for someone to yell at you for not betting the river. If that's the case, stop reading now. I think checking the river was the smart play for one reason only: The player on the button looming behind you. Although you had him read for JJ, which he had, if he was holding your second guess of AT, you're most likely going to be raised, and then it'll cost you $40 to show down your losing hand. Had you been the last player to act and it was checked around to you, I think you're in the clear to chuck 20 more bucks into the pot. Of course, had the button turned over AT, your post would have been "I had him read for AT, but thought he might have had JJ or QQ, so I had to make the crying call because of the pot size". Anyway, nice hand. I agree with your play, for what it's worth.
By the way, you had me cracking up with the line about having 2 cards, not 1, as a raising criterion. If you don't mind, I'll be using that one in my local ram'n'jam game chatter.
It just seems to be the epitome of weak play to draw at a hand only to check it when you hit. But maybe a big pot does alter things a bit. Thanks for your response.
Kevin
Kevin,
His actions preflop,flop, and turn make it look like he has pocket TT. While JJ is about equal in probability I think the river check is best. You should be at least 55% sure to bet. I rate your hand at 50/50.
:-)
Kevin:
I would think a 3 bet pre-flop would clear out the field behind you most of the time and give you position on all subsequent betting rounds. This may have resulted in a free card for you on the flop.
Your raise on the flop ended up costing you 3 bets with a marginal hand being played against several opponents. I would just call and see the turn card and see the action in front of you.
Your call on the turn is marginal. You are in never never land because you are not sure if any of your cards are alive. You could have gotten away from this hand on the turn with a cost of $30 but instead it ended up costing you $70 to hit your one pair river card in a multi-way pot.
Thanks dugie. The problem with the 3-bet pre-flop, is that it would have zero effect towards eliminating anyone who would play for one bet in this type of game. Even though I believe the button might fold JJ for 3-bets under more appropiate circumstances, he'd realize here, that the implied odds are there to play. He might now even cap the betting with position. Since I can get away from AKs on many flops, I thought it best to just call two cold, rather than make it 3 bets myself.
On this flop, there is no way I can fold two nut overcards, and two nut runner-runner draws with 16 bets in the pot. If I'm not going to fold, I can't see how raising is too far wrong. There are 4 players after me and I want to pressure them out in order to improve my chances of winning. btw- the initial raiser (as loose as he is), wound up folding AK for my raise and the button's re-raise. So it turned out my raise on the flop saved me the whole pot. If I just call and the button raises, he no doubt would call this one extra bet and go on to chop the pot with me.
I agree I am in never never land for the rest of the hand, but I felt the pot was giving me enough of an overlay to continue and hope I was still drawing live. btw- It cost me another $50 not $70 ($30 on the flop and $20 on the turn). These big pots sometimes get confusing to me. It was nice to get lucky and hit. Thanks again.
Kevin
Thanks for your input Tony. Wouldn't JJ be slightly MORE likely than TT given the ten on the board? Also, do you think it was incorrect to chase in the first place? If you rate my chances at 50/50 when I make my ace, does that mean I should cut my outs (or odds) in half when deciding whether or not to continue? Thanks again.
Kevin
TT or JJ are the only two hands he can logically have (if you think he would 3 bet pre-flop with QQ and would not call a raise with AT.) He is twice as likely(6 vs 3)to have JJ since a T is on board.This lowers your outs from 6 to 4 but with 13.5 big bets in the pot you still have an easy call on the turn.On the non-math side don't you hate to draw, hit, bet and get raised only to lose. thats why I check the river.
My biggest problem is the no raise preflop. You have premium cards. What are the other fools in the hand playing with? Punish them harshly for playing w/ crap especially unsuited crap.
Check out the article on Izmet's homepage where he shows his simulations/thoughts about this very idea.
To sum up what he says, since you've got a monster hand, the original raiser could show you KK and you'd still make money. You say the 3 bet wouldn't thin the field at all, so raise it up and charge them.
You might get a bit higher variance, but the reward is much higher EV.
Kevin,
Not three betting with AKs before the flop was not a bad idea under the circumstances. When it was your turn to act, already several people were in, so why make it more expensive for youself to call? You might as well welcome all the limpers to make the pot big incase you hit your cards. I don't know about enjoying a low varience though.
Raising with A high on the flop turned out to be right. But let's say I was holding AKs and you were behind me, I would've just called, afraid to get raised from you. I don't want to pay three bets for A high. Plus, I tend to be passibe with A high with three flush when pot is multi-way, since raising on the flop will just cost money but not knock out people. But it is different if I can three bet, like I did with JJ, or I can raise on the turn when the betting is doubled. I'm not saying you did wrong though. It's just my opinion.
You were right that you put me on JJ, not because I was holding it, but because I would've three bet with QQ or higher. What a predictable player I am! Call me PUP.
The check on the end was... Well, it turned out that you were wrong, but you can't be result oriented, you know that. You knew that I did not have AA. Chnaces were I either had JJ or TT. Betting or checking was extremely close, I think.
The last question is whether I called your bet on the river or not. Since I'm playing with you tomorrow, I should say "Of course" and put you on week-long tilt. Well, just like checking just because the pot is big is wrong, calling just because the pot is big is wrong. There was no straight or flush out there. Whatelse can I put you on? You don't bluff in a case like that either.
Yesterday, you saw me mucking set of 5s on the river with three flush on board, didn't you?
by Soh Tilt
Once it was 3 bet on the turn an overpair, AT or KT are clearly possible hands you have to put the 3 bettor on. If it was either AT or KT then you are drawing to a 3 outer.In light of the fact it will likely cost you 2 big bets to finish the hand coupled with the fact that there is only 11.5 big bets in the pot once the turn does not help your hand I think you have to fold once there is a bet on the turn.
"Once it was 3 bet on the turn an overpair, AT or KT are clearly possible hands you have to put the 3 bettor on."
I assume you meant "3 bet on the flop". I couldn't agree with you more. I guess I just don't know how to account for the fact that if he DID have an overpair, and the 3rd player had a pair without an ace or king, then I had enough outs to call. Trust me. I don't like chasing when I'm this unclear about my outs. Had the pot not been so huge, it would've been a much easier fold on the turn. I'm certainly open to the fact that my turn call may have been bad, I just don't know how to properly evaluate it. Thanks.
Kevin
I am the button with 2-5s. I am playing really tight aggressive, making good reads, but I am stuck about $800. If these players weren't so bad, I would be down more, but I have managed to stay afloat.
Here goes. Horrible fish raises UTG. Weak-tight pisser cold calls. Big-time flounder cold calls. Loose Aggressive Guppy ponders forever and throws his chips in. Absolute maniac reraises in the cut-off. I call because of pot odds. Flop comes 3-4-6 rainbow
Fish bets out, Pisser folds, the flounder raises, the maniac folds, I slowplay.
Turn A still rainbow. UTG checks flounder raises, I three bet. Flounder caps. All call
River 3.
UTG checks out. Flounder bets, I raise, he re-raises, I call.
He shows AA, I quietly muck, after saying "nice runner runner."
Comments appreciated. Personally I think I mistake on the river.
you made a mistake by calling in the first place. pot odds or no pot odds 25s is a laydown everytime. dont come crying about a bad beat when u shouldnt have been there in the first place.
Personally, I think you made a mistake playing the hand in the first place. JV, I read your posts and respect your opinion, but there is no way you could say that your pre-flop call was anything but steam. I called b/c of the pot odds is BS; you should muck that crap every single time. And you wonder why you were stuck in that game? Sometimes "reads" should be ignored in the name of common sense. You did not take a bad beat, the pocket rockets had a hell of a lot more right to play than you, and your comment to him was classless. What would you expect him to say if you showed down that straight which you had horribly misplayed pre-flop? Well, since you called, I would say you should have raised on the flop; you did not have the nuts, the game was wild and there could have been a multitude of draws. In the capped pre-flop pot, you had to assume that ace probably made someone trips; why waste the bets on the river?
Jeff
sorry guys, I just felt like calling everyone at my table a loose flounder and than make up some ridiculous hand.
2-5 suited cracked by Aces will wonders never cease...
I'm tempted not to reply because this is probably a joke but just in case...
God I hate it when a great hand like 2-5 suited gets cracked by AA!
I can just imagine if the roles were reversed and the board did not pair on the end you would be complaining about how your set of Aces got cracked by some nit wit playing 2-5 suited...
By the way here are the mistakes you made.
Calling preflop
Slowplaying the flop
Raising the river
Making your snotty runner runner comment.
Thinking you can call anyone a fish after saying you are really tight aggresive and calling three bets cold with 2-5s... You are the fish, they don't get much bigger then that!
Sean
With all the respects, i wonder if its really JV who posted this hand...
I am still getting a kick out of "I'm play tight aggressive" and "I called with 2-5s because of the pot odds." I mean come on, isn't even the right use of the term.
I like the nice runner runner comment at the end too.
15-30 N. Cali game. game was unusually tight at times which made for a bunch of steal raises and heads up competitions.
I am on the button with A-9o. Cutoff raises. Cutoff is a slightly overagressive player, but one who knows where he's at. He recently sat down, but long enough ago that he's aware of the tightness of the game. I three bet, and we take the flop heads up.
Flop: A-K-rag rainbow. Cutoff bets, I raise, he calls. Turn: rag, no flush draw. Checked to me, I check. River: rag. Cutoff bets, I call.
Please tell me how I did on each street. I'm mostly interested in pre-flop and the turn, but all comments are appreciated. Results will follow.
I flashed my A when I called, and cutoff flashed a king and mucked. He was right where I put him, on a marginal hand, but think I may have gotten lucky on this read.
2d
If you think your read is correct and the cutoff is on a steal, why not bet the turn. There is no reason to give a free card here if you think you have the cutoff beat. If check-raised, then I would consider dropping depending on the turn card.
I figured the free card would get me an extra bet on the river if I was ahead, and save me a bet (turn) if not. When he bet out on the river, I went to about 50-50 that I was ahead. I figure cutoff probably would have layed down an underpair or even a weak king on the turn, an raised with a better ace than I had. Either way, there was no value in betting other than preventing a suck out. Valid, though this is, the other considerations won out, and I checked through.
2d:
I guess my point is; what is more valuable, an extra bet or you giving a free card and not giving your opponent a chance to drop.
I really dont like your 3 bet preflop.... Wait for better gamblin opportunities as Mr Brier would say!...
As u see your hand is very difficult to play after the flop... u always scared to be outkiked.
You won but i think u were overagressive
Charlie
Cosmic. I played a hand exactly like this one two days ago. I had A-9 (suited, but irrelevant) on the button and reraised the cutoff raiser. Flop was A-K-x. He bet, I raised, he called.
On the turn when he checks, I think this is a classic case of bet-the-turn-and-check-the-river. So I bet. He barely called. And we checked the river. He had A-10.
Results aside, I like your preflop raise, but I think you should have bet the turn. If he check-raises, you fold and lose one bet on the turn-river combo with the worst hand. If he has you outkicked and calls the turn, you still lose one bet with the worst hand.
If you have him beat, you win one bet.
By betting the turn, you make him pay to draw when you have the best hand, and who knows, he might fold A-10 or A-J depending on how he plays and how your raises and bets are perceived.
Tommy
A hand was folded to the cutoff at LC? in a limit game?
Even more spectacular, it was at the 15-30 at AJ's.
Wow, did the dealer know the correct procedures for heads up play?=) Your whole table should have gotten jackets to commemorate the occasion.
Tommy,
You and 2-D seem to be assuming that the flop raise is automatic. I don't think it is at all. I think a strong case could be made for just calling on the flop.
-Anon
Anon, can you elaborate on your thoughts here? I thought this was my easiest decision (other than calling the river). I know I won't get played back at unless I'm chasing. The flop raise also gave me the option of taking a free card on the turn.
I DUNNO A9O is a very weak hand, group 8 if that in my opinion. U got no busienss 3 betting here. i would fold. but if you're aggressive and think the cutoff is raising with trash then and only then would i even consider 3 betting.
Lets say u are dealt AKo on the button.
6 limpers ALL LOOSE, the 3 other good players in this game already folded.
U raise
Sb 3 bet
Sb is a millionaire maniac who 3 bet everytime he can!!!!!! he just like big pots and hes probably sad he cant lose his money in a 20-40 game since no 20-40 game is going on...
BB call (im surprise here he dont cap. hes also a maniac and prolly have unsuited crap to dont cap it!!!)
ALL limpers call...
Should i cap it to punish the limpers and the maniacs?
Izmet Fekali stated that in loose game, u should punish the weak limpers by raising even if its possible u only have the 2nd best startin hand. Does it apply here?
As a matter of fact, i had the best starting hand, maniac had 3-4s.
Sadly, the flop came 6-7-9 spades and i had no spades.... and the betting was capped when it was my turn to act rofl
Oh well like jim said, thats y they call poker gambling i guess!!
I've recently stumbled upon a 15-25 omaha high game at new sonny's casino in seattle. I have little experience in this game, but was lured by the excessive action. It seems to me that there are so many players that cannot possibly win at the end of the year due to their bad play, that this would be a good game for me. However I have been getting absolutely crushed in the first couple of weeks that I have played. I would like to hear anyones advice about starting hands, play after the flop, and expected swings in a wild high only omaha game
No advice from me but you might want to get Bob Ciaffone's Omaha-Hi book, I believe it is titled "Omaha Hold 'Em: the action Game." I think you can order it from conjelco (link in the frame to your left).
Good Luck,
Paul Talbot
Wingovich,
On a recent trip (not to Seattle), I played a bit in a similar extremely loose, wild Omaha hi game. I did okay, but not as well as I had hoped considering how bad the other players were. I was literally the only person at the table who didn't play at least 70% of my hands. Pots were always multiway before the flop - 4-handed was the minimum, 6 or 7-way the average.
As for strategy, I stuck with what Mason recommends in one of his essays:
1. Play hands w/4 cards that work together, i.e., pretty darn tight.
2. For the most part, don't continue after the flop unless you've flopped the nuts or a draw to the nuts.
Also, you probably already know this, but if the board pairs, I say DO NOT pay to continue with a flush draw. When the game's this loose, someone almost always has some kind of full house.
Depending on the game structure, you may not want to do a lot of pre-flop raising. In the game I played in, the bet doubled after the flop, and tripled on the turn and river, e.g., 5-10-15-15. Also, the game was so loose that a raise never limited the field, and in fact often had the opposite effect. Therefore, I felt that building a pot pre-flop was not such a great idea, because then the chasers would be making less of a mistake calling the bigger bets on the flop and turn. I would probably still raise with a super premium hand like As Ah Qs Qh. However, I'd be more inclined to call with a hand like Ks Kh Js 2h - you'll likely need at least a set to win in a game this loose, and if you flop one you want the chasers to be making a mistake when they call your bets or checkraise. I could be wrong on this point - feedback appreciated.
I had some success w/ these tactics, but the variance was still huge. Even a flopped top set w/a rainbow,non-straight board is vulnerable and often needs to pair the board to win. With so many opponents who are reluctant to fold for any amount of money, the collective outs against you are a big factor.
Good Luck, Caddy
10-20 game. I just sat down and am doing well. Game is loose. I have played with a few of the players before, but while I remember them, I doubt they remember me.
I am in the cut off with 9s-10s.
4 limp, I call, button folds, Both blinds come. Take the flop 7-handed.
Flop comes 3s 4s 10c.
Clearly a great flop.
The small blind leads. (he is a typical player who tries to play well, but isn't quite there). Big Blind folds, one limper calls, I raise. Small blind three bets. Limper folds, I call.
Turn comes 10d. Small blind bets out.
Now, I know the small blind is not full, because he would have never bet out a set or two pair. So what would he three bet me on the flop with? It isn't an overpair, since this player doesn't slowplay big pair pre-flop. It could be a big flush draw and now he is representing the top pair that tripped or else its A-10. Most likely, however it was A-10.
I raised. My reason is that I was definitely going to call two bets, and this way I would be able milk him if I hit the flush or nine on the river.
But I don't think I gave enough consideration to a reraise, because this player is fairly passive (not in this hand though). It retrospect I think calling is the right idea.
He just called my raise on the turn.
River 7d.
He checks, I check. Comments?
He had K-10o and took the pot. I was surprised he three bet me on the flop. I am also lucky he didn't reraise the turn.
YEAH IM SURPRISED HE RERAISED THE FLOP W/ KT. BUT YOU PLAYED THAT PRETTY WELL. YOUR RAISE ON THE TURN BROUGHT U A FREE CARD, BUT GIVEN HIS RERAISE ON THE FLOP, I MIGHT BE SCARED OF AT AS YOU SIAD...YOU'RE LUCKY YOU DIDNT GET RERAISED ON THE TURN. IF HE HAS A 10 YOU'RE BEAT BUT I GUESS YOU'RE LUCKY HES PASSIVE.
Well played. In most cases, I am likely to raise the turn here no matter what card comes off on the footing that I am going to call twice in any event and I likely have anywhere from 12-14 outs in case I am trailing. If I hit on the river, my raise on the turn makes me money. If I miss, it costs me the same.
The above is based on your read that the fellow would not have bet out a set or two pairs on the flop.
When he reraises the flop, I can't dream up a hand that I can beat. I'd call the turn, and if I don't improve on the river I'd fold if he bets.
Tommy
JV,
You worte: ”10-20 game. I just sat down and am doing well. Game is loose. I have played with a few of the players before, but while I remember them, I doubt they remember me.”
Just out of curiosity, why wouldn't they remember you?
Anyway, I like your flop raise with top pair and a flush draw with an opponent trapped between you and the flop lead better. Once the inside opponent folds, the play of the hand is simplified as this player could easily have a bigger flush draw or worse (for you) had he called.
”Now, I know the small blind is not full, because he would have never bet out a set or two pair. So what would he three bet me on the flop with? It isn't an overpair, since this player doesn't slowplay big pair pre-flop. It could be a big flush draw and now he is representing the top pair that tripped or else its A-10.”
At the time you raised, I don't see how you can discount him leading with trips or two pair into an unraised pot with a two flush on board. The only time I usually don't worry about trips is when there is a rainbow disconnected board, the lead bet is to the right of the player in question and he raises right on the flop with several yet to act. Trips should be bet out of the blind quite often. Ace-ten is possible but it is not the only likely hand.
In addition to the big hands mention above, on the turn he could even have been betting bottom two pair and when the board's top pair counterfeited him, he decided to give it one more stab since he was the flop three-bettor. From his perspective, this should be a scary card to you, since it is possible he hopes you raised with the flush draw.
Despite my thoughts above, I think your raise is fine on the turn. If he three bets here or leads again on the river, worry about a full or the best ten.
”But I don't think I gave enough consideration to a reraise, because this player is fairly passive (not in this hand though). It retrospect I think calling is the right idea.”
Remember that raising here gains you more when you make it and will cost you no more when you don't since you probably check behind the river if he checks and you don't improve. I wouldn't second-guess your raise.
When he checks the river, I would also check behind against most opponents.
Regards,
Rick
The reasoning that "it costs the same to raise the turn and check the river as it does to call both streets" does not apply on this hand because:
1) There's no chance that you have the best hand, so calling the turn and folding the river is cheaper.
2) There's no chance he will fold.
3) You could be drawing nearly dead, or hit a flush card that fills him up.
4) He might (and should have IMO) reraise the turn.
In other words, your 10 is nearly irrelevant. On this hand it's like an overcard in that it gives you three extra outs (the nines, plus a few out to tie).
Let's say the board was K-x-x-x on the turn and you had a flush draw with A-x and you knew for sure the other guy had K-Q at least. Would you raise the turn? Same thing. The ace here is like the nine in your hand.
I think the best way to play it, to insure saving one small bet, is to four-bet on the flop.
Tommy
"so calling the turn and folding the river is cheaper."
Tommy,
I am not quite sure why you say that the second ten gives JV 3 extra outs. That's only true if the other guy flopped a set on the flop. If the other guy had a Ten, then the second ten on the turn doesn't give JV any extra outs (other than the ones that could get him a chop of the pot).
That said, there's no way JV can fold trip 10's on the river. So, I believe that the turn raise does make a lot of sense as that will usually gain him a bet when he goes on to make a flush on the river as without the turn raise, the other guy will likely checkcall the river if the flush card gets there.
Paragraph one: You're right. My mistake. No "extra" outs.
Paragraph two: Why is a fold on the river impossible? I don't see how calling is possible!
Tommy
Pot size.
The bb does not have to have you beat (he could have an overpair or bottom two pairs for example or a ten/lower kicker).
It's limit poker.
But I would have cap the flop .
Same game.
A-Jo UTG. I limp, middle positon (MP) player raises, button cold-calls, both blinds call. Take the flop 5 handed.
The MP player has fairly loose raising standards including A-J, K-Q, Q-Js.
Flop comes 3-6-J rainbow.
Now, no matter what hand the raiser raised, he will bet this flop out 100% of the time. So what should I do? I know Jim Brier will recommend betting out. And if I get raised, to call. Then consider betting out the turn if a blank hits. Or check-call the flop and lead on the turn. I am not a big fan of playing this way, however. My fear is that I will bet out, get called by he raisers overcards and the rest of the table, or get raised if he has a big pair. By doing this, I pay the max, if I am behind, and eliminate my odds (from the other limpers) for drawing to my five outs. And I eliminate no one by betting. At 30-60, I am sure its different.
Ideally, I would like to check-raise the flop and get it heads up with the MP raiser, since it is very likely that I have the best hand (considered this guy's loose raising standards). There is a good chance he only has 3 outs at this point. However, if the MP raiser bets out and everyone calls, I have blundered. Then, I won't be able to eliminate the field at all.
One of the limpers seemed disinterested, so I made the decision to check. The raiser bet, and everyone called. Ouch. Now that I made a mistake, should I just call? I decided to raise. All called. (At least I know Mp doesn't have an overpair.
The turn 4. Still rainbow.
I led. The pre-flop raiser called, the rest folded.
Based on the action, I knew I had the best hand.
The river came a Q.
Now should I check or bet? Knowing this player, I believe there were many hands that he would call me with, that I could beat. It would be tough to raise me without a big hand. Jim Brier would say check, SKP would likely say bet. What would you guys do?
Results: I bet, he called. And I won. He never showed.
I think the river play is player dependant.
But in my experience, very few people will bluff if you check and very few people will check if they hit a Queen and you check.
Now, based on that analysis, one would think that the best play is to checkfold. But I would just about never do that because if I do, those rare river bluffs will suddenly escalate in frequency. If I checked and he bet, I would call and expect to lose. If the river card was a King, you may want to checkcall because that increases the chances that he might bluff (i.e. he figures that you have put him on AK and are therefore checking). Of course, he will usually show you AK when you do call him but I digress...
Now, another factor that goes into the equation is that very few players will bluff raise the river (in which case I am calling anyway based on what I said above) and very few people will raise the river if they hit a Queen.
So, betting and checkcalling costs me the same regardless of whether the dude has a Quuen.
But the real advanatge of betting is all those occasions when he will call you with a hand worse than AJ which he would just check back if you check.
Other ads include:
1. You increase your chances of winning hands on the turn because the other guy knows that he will generally have to call you twice if his intention is to keep you honest.
2. You increase your chances of pulling off your own bluffs on the river.
So, yes..I would say "bet":o)
BTW, I would generally bet the flop. While I hear what you are saying, I think that the reasons for betting outweigh the reasons for going for a checkraise.
A few comments:
1) A-Jo, IMHO, should either be raised with or dumped UTG pre-flop.
2) A check-raise on the flop, given that the raiser is on your immediate left, will not allow you to isolate him. If your aim is to isolate, you should bet; his raise would then drive out the other players. By letting him bet, the other players all got to call for just one bet and of course you could expect them to call again for one more bet when you raise, which is what happens.
3) I wouldn't be quite so upset that everyone is in. It's a great flop for you and you do have an Ace which cuts down your overcard worry by 1/3.
4) Since you say there are many hands he would call with that you can beat, go ahead and bet the river. I agree with you that you had him beat on the turn, otherwise you would have heard from him then. So in order for the queen to have helped him he would have to have either A-Q or K-Q (or possibly Q-J).
I was a winner. I was great. I bought the books. I knew the the probabilities and numbers. I kept detailed records. I was killing 'em for 1000's of hours of play. But then...
I've been busted. They took everything I'd won in my life playing poker and then some. It hurts so bad. I truly belive I play tight and good and that I was unlucky. It hurts so bad, I ache to the core. Why? Why did this happen to me? Why did I go hours without winning a hand? Why did I always lose rolled up in stud or with aces in holdem. Why would I never make my good low flush and straight draws in O/8 or Stud/8. Why do I have to sit there and watch every loser and gambler around me catch lucky when all I ask for is to get average cards. I don't want to be lucky. I don't want to hit gutshots and runner runner flush draws. I just want to win when I have the edge. But I didn't, and now I'm busted. Go on tell me what you really think. Tell me how I'm just like every other gambler loose player and that I'm just crying. Maybe one day this will happen to you and no matter where you go or what you do, no matter how tight you play you will just lose and lose and lose over and over again till its all gone. But don't worry when you tell your poker friends "I got really really unlucky", they'll nod solemly and pat you on the back while they quietly think you're just like all the other losers out there.
Wow. What a sad story. I am sincere when I say I feel for you. I'm not going to get into a debate on luck vs. skill. Been there done that too many times before. Mr. Brier will tell you that not only is it possible to have what happened to you occur, but it is probable that thre are many other great players who have suffered your fate. "That's why they call it gambling" he is fond of saying. And I agree. To a point. I just draw the line a little closer to reasonable expectation than Jim does.
Here's the problem I have with your post. You are focusing on all the bad luck you had. But why? Even if you were true that you were somehow this incredibly unlucky, why should you believe that you were? Why would it even enter your mind, when you know the chances are overwhelmingly great that luck was NOT the reason for your results?
I can hypothosize an answer if you'd like. Like most human beings, you have a self defense mechanism when dealing with tragedy that cannot be readily explained. In this case, your self defense mechanism of choice is denial. You must believe your misfortunes had to have been caused by anything other than yourself. To believe otherwise, makes you a failure in you own eyes. You focus on the only thing you can grasp onto whether it's logical or not, luck.
I truly believe that one of the things that makes the expert player, and expert, is he is adept at avoiding this state of denial. While he realizes it's possible that luck would cause inferior results, he recognizes that it is not probable. He turns inward towards himself and doesn't waste time focusing on unlikely scenarios such as luck, but delves into more practical reasons he has experience a setback.
Maybe you are one of the few improbable unlucky ones. Great" players who just couldn't win. But the very fact that you're so willing to blame your results on luck, tells me that this is probably not the case.
You dont understand what he's talking about. I do. He is talking about CONSTANTLY making the right play and CONSTANTLY putting your money in good and CONSTANTLY losing. I have been there. It is one of the most frustrating experiences I have ever felt, in anything, ever. Sometimes there is simply NOTHING you can do but continue to make the right plays and hope.
I often wonder how many people realize that it's entirely possible for a winning player with a 1 small bet per hour edge, to play over 1600 hours before he makes a dime. Now, it's not at all likely for this to occur, but very much within statistical reason.
I suspect most people who complain about busting out due to luck, lack an understanding of the probabilities they are dealing with when playing poker in the first place. If they did understand this, they would be adequately bankrolled for one thing. This alone, goes a long way to ensure that a "great" player (as Caligula refers to himself), does not go bust. The other thing, is that if there are misunderstandings over things such as bankrolls and standard deviation (or the measure of luck vs. probablities), there are also very likely misunderstandings about poker theory in general, which inevitably can lead to poor play and the compounding one's problems.
Anybody watch casino diaries tonight? I didn't either, but my wife came in to tell me that Scotty Nguyen has been on a $200,000 losing streak. Ouch. I start feeling bummed after 3 straight losing sessions. At the minus $200,000 mark I'd be looking for a nice skyscraper to do a swan dive off of. If you play better poker than your opponents, you'll eventually start winning again. Can you drop down to play weaker games? Get that winning feeling back somehow. Poker is way too much fun to stay away from.
10-20 game. Game has been action-packed so far, and I am stuck about $400.
UTG limps. He seems to be one of the better players, but still on the loose side. A fishy player raises next, a few fold, the guy to my immediate right cold calls and I am in the cutoff with AcKs. Is a reraise mandatory here? Note that in these loose games, a three bet usually does not shake off a limper. I just called. The button and both blinds fold and the limper calls, so we are 4-handed.
The flop comes QsKc3s. UTG checks, fish bets, next guy folds, I raise. UTG cold calls, which screams spades or (maybe) 10-J to me. Fish calls.
Turn is a dreadful 9s. UTG leads out, confirming my read. Fish calls. I call only because I have the Ks.
River is a blank. UTG bets, Fish folds. I call on the two-bit rationalization that UTG could have something like AsQc or even AsJc, though in my heart I know he has a flush. He turns over As6s.
I am angry at myself for not reraising preflop (although my guess is this fellow would have called anyway) and for making the long calls on the later streets. Please comment.
thanks
yeah you probably should have reraised preflop, to at least force the blinds out...utg would have called ur bets anyway and you would have lost more money this hand...so at least that's a positive. but in the long run, reraising preflop with AKo in late position is a good idea, especially if a fish raises before you. if a tight player did i would tend to call.
I usually 3-bet with AKo to try to get head's up with the raiser (unless the raiser is a solid, tough player). In your situation, I wouldn't re-raise, although a re-raise might get UTG to fold if he's a solid player and has to call 2 raises. I probably would fold to the river bet since I don't think someone would play like UTG did unless he did have the flush.
Rahul
Pre-flop, 3 betting with slick is not at all clear given the situation where you have a UTG limper, a raiser, and a cold-caller. If you can isolate the fishy player then 3 betting has merit but given the presence of a cold-caller this will not happen. I would just cold-call as you did. You need to realize that your hand needs help to win in most cases. Between the UTG, the raiser, and the cold-caller cards that you need to improve could be tied up in their hands. The rest of your play is fine. Most solid players don't limp in under the gun with Ace-Little suited. He could have easily had Ace-Jack offsuit or Ace-Queen offsuit with the Ace of Spades as you surmised.
I would not beat myself up too badly on this one.
You should certainly raise on the flop as your are likely best, or a close second.
I don’t understand why you want to knock any one out? AK plays perfectly well four way.
Certainly can’t argue with the flop play.
The turn seems to be what’s worrying you. If you trust your reads go ahead and fold. If you’ve seen UTG be tricky in this sort of position then maybe you should call him down. And as you point out, if he has the straight you have the odds to try for the redraw.
Once you have reached the turn you probably have to call. You only need to fold incorrectly occasionally for fold to be a loosing action.
I just don't see a significant mistake here.
Re-raising pre-flop is not mandatory. Cold calling is fine given the action so far and the game you described.
Raising the flop is fine.
Calling the turn with top pair/2nd nut draw is fine.
On the river, he would only have to bluff or bet a worse hand 1 in 11 time for your call to be correct. Against typical opponents, you call here is fine as well. Can't win 'em all...
The concensus so far is that the preflop decision is a close one. It needn't be. I think the deciding parameter should be your read on the button player, long range and short. Long range, the more likely he is to defend, the less likely I am to raise. Short range, I'd be looking for clues as to his intentions. If he already looked at his hand, some indication is likely there. If he looks undecided, I'd raise.
Tommy
Tommy,
I think I agree completely with your analysis. The cutoff seat should be played aggressively multi-way unless you already have a read on the button.
The other day I had a young guy on my left who fancied himself a player (he was at least tight and tricky at times) yet he would telegraph whether he would be in pre-flop 100% of the time for four hours. What an advantage (for me)!
Regards,
Rick
10-20 online holdem...i get dealt two black kings in cutoff. One late position fishy limper calls, I raise, only he calls. Flop comes 10s 9s 6s I bet he calls. TUrn a 9 pairing the board, I bet he calls. River comes a 7. He checks.. Should I bet here with this board or check it down. I'm pretty sure he doesnt have me beat, so should I milk him for another 20 or check that scary board down.. B/c I checked it down and he turned over 6h2h.
2) Pocket Jacks on button. Early position raises. Hes an average player. Fish calls I call. BB calls. Flop comes J 4 5 rainbow. What a flop! Original better bets, fish calls, I call intending to raise the turn and bb calls. Turn is a 3 still rainbow. Raiser bets, Fish calls, I raise, bb calls (Hmmm) raiser calls, and fish makes it 3 bets. I didn't think fish had straight made so I cap it. River comes a 6. BB now bets, raiser folds, fish calls, i call. BB had pocket 7's, dish had A2o for the bike, and I had the worst hand. ANy comments?
On the button with K-9s. Already have one $3 in for the drop, so it's $6 to me to call. three limpers, I toss in two chips and both blinds call.
Flop comes K-9-4 rainbow. Checked to the cutoff who bets. The table's been pretty tight, so I decide to flat call. Mistake? SB raises, BB mucks, UTG calls, fold to cutoff who three bets, I four bet, all call.
Turn is a blank. Checked to me, I bet. SB calls UTG raises, Cutoff calls two cold, I am scared $%!less and just call.
river is a blank. UTG bets, only I call.
Please point out my many mistakes here
results to follow.
UTG had a set of 9's. Not knowing this (of course) would a three bet on the turn be correct? I didn't figure UTG for a set of 9's, as he was pretty aggressive and would have raised with them. Wasn't sure where to put him here (set most likely) so I went into check/call mode to the end.
I would raised the flop, but hey you got 4 bets in anyway. Right now, I still think you've got the best hand. IF UTG is a decent player wut would he hold in this situation? My feeling is maybe AK. U got a K and a 9, so the probability of himhaving a set of Kings or 9's goes down. And i doubt he has the set of the blanks or 2 pr King's and blanks. With this board on the turn I might repop him. On the river when he bets I would probably pop him too depending on what he did on the turn. Who knows he might just have Aces alone. I think you have the best hand.
I didnt read your results, but i didnt figure him for a set of 9's either. he played that well i guess.
I don't think you really made any big mistakes. With top two pair and and a relatively non-scary board, I'd just call the first flop bet, hoping to trap some drawing hands like J10, QJ, and Q10. I would hope to get calls from SB, BB, and UTG, and then see the turn and then consider a raise then (assuming that someone would bet the turn). However, things didn't work out like that as you got more action than expected on the flop. When it gets 3-bet to you, I like the 4-bet. I would guess that you're ahead, but when you're raised on the turn, I'd just call down the hand from there. I would have guessed that UTG had either your same hand (K9) or maybe 44. I didn't put him on 99.
when you lose a hand like this, its just the way poker is played. there's nothing you could do about it. sometimes, especially when dealt the second best hand, you just suck up the loss and go on.
however, with 4 players in for a capped pot after the flop (and no real draws), you have to consider someone having a set. all you can do then is check and call.
two pair is always a tricky hand in hold-em and frequently loses to a set.
Not B&M-ing. Just wanted to see if there was any way I could have saved a few chips in this hand. UTG played it well, as far as I can see it, and I think I did too, with the exception of a lack of aggression on the flop (which didn't matter, as it turns out). Is there any merit to dropping to his turn checkraise? not with top two, I think. The river? given the pot size, I think Ihad to call with top two. At least, I had to be beyond very damn sure that he had a set to let it go. it's a little less than 20:1 my call, and, while I think he has a set at this point, I can't really say that I'm 95% sure. I know that I had the worse hand the entire way. just wanted to see if any loss of chips could have been avoided. -2d
10-20 holdem... I get dealt 35o in the BB. 5 limpers, I check. Flop comes 9 3 5 with 2 clubs. I bet it out 4 callers. Turn and 8. I bet it out 3 callers. River comes queen, i check soemone bets, one caller, I call. Better turns over QJs for a pair of queens, other player turns over Qc7c for flush. Did i play this wrong? i think i did ok, but im not sure any ideas?
Next hand I get dealt Ac9c. Flop comes 2 clubs and a rag. I check. Checked around to button woh bets i call, two calelrs. Turn a rag, checked around. RIver rag I check a limper bets, button folds I fold. Should I have played this more aggressively like betting it out, or some other play. I know I played this weak but dunno wut else i could have done to win the pot.
You did ok. What's the problem? You can't win every pot you play.
first hand: you almost certainly have the best hand on the flop, but it's vulnerable to flush draws and midsize cards (which can give someone a better two pair). you need to get your value now, and by just betting, you aren't getting it. you need to seriously consider going for a check-raise on the flop.
:-)
(1) Either bet it out and fold to a raise, or check and fold.
(2) Nope, this is fine. You want the overcalls from the other limpers. You're out of position and can't play the hand aggressively against that many runners. Note that if the river comes a club, you probably should bet out.
Chris
Badger is an example of one of those 'pros' who is broke because he's not a very good player. He freely admits that he has been a losing ring game player for the last couple of years. He blames it on 'running bad' (for two years? Gimmie a break!)
You be the judge.
I got into a game with Badger (I won't say where). A friend of mine, a dealer, was also in the game. My friend is a very smart player - he comes off as being a loose aggressive 'semi maniac' but I can honestly say that he IS a winning player. I think he could win more if he played a bit more solid, but he makes up for his loose play by being perhaps the BEST hand reader I know. He is also great at picking up tells.
He splashes around quite a bit pre flop and on the flop but his turn and river play are exceptional. He has stunned me with some of the lay downs I have seen him make.
Anyway, Badger was unable to adjust to my friends play. Judge for yourself.
One person limps and my friend raises. Badger is on his left and three bets him to isolate. Folded around to the limper who calls, my friend calls.
Flop is K 9 3 (suits not important.)
Limper checks, my friend bets, Badger raises, limper folds, my friend calls.
Turn is a blank (say a deuce.)
My friend bets, Badger raises, friend 3 bets, Badger calls.
River is another deuce.
My friend bets, Badger grabs enough chips to raise. My friend makes a motion to muck his hand. Badger raises. My friend reraises. Badger calls.
My friend has KK for kings full and drags the pot.
Badger goes to muck but my friend asks to see his hand.
Now, for those of you who know Badger, you know that he can be, for lack of a better word, an as*hole. Badger jumps up and tries to mix his cards into the muck. The dealer intercedes and turns over Badger's cards - A7 offsuit.
Badger got red faced and cashed out.
What do you think?
-SmoothB-
But do you not agree that your friend pulled off a classless move?
It's bad enough for a player not in the hand to ask to see someone's losing cards but for the winner (with Kings full to boot) to ask is shameful.
IMO, about the only person who might have a legitimate reason to ask would be the limper had be stuck around till the river and paid for all those raises to complete his draw or whatever.
I also think that your friend going Hollywood on the river is a bit distasteful.
As for the hand itself, obviously Badger played it bad but who knows, he may have had good reasons to do what he did but simply "misread" the situation. Now, if you had evidence to say that he does this twice an hour like clockwork, then you can write him off as a terrible player. But one hand doesn't prove a thing as far as I am concerned.
And I am not saying any of this because I am Badger's best buddy. Heck, I have locked horns with him on a few occasions here. And I would no doubt support your assertion that he can be very abrasive and argumentative. Nevertheless, I do respect his poker knowledge and come to his defence if you will only because he does not post here.
That Badger was clearly not showing proper etiquette in trying to muck his cards when asked to show them. He has a right to be irritated by the request but to thwart it by trying to muck is a clear no-no.
I disagree on this point. The rule about having to show a losing hand in a showdown is ridiculous and absolutely over abused. I mix my cards in the muck every chance I get when asked to show them. as long as you are polite and courteous at all other times you will get nothing more than a stern look from the dealer.
While it may be a ridiculous rule and one that is overabused, it still is a rule. To deprive someone an opportunity to enforce the rule is itself against the rules. I am not saying that you should be lynched for it but the fact is that you are doing something that is improper.
I have never asked to see someone's cards and probably never will (although I frequently go to hand histories on-line to have a peek:o)]. I too get irritated when someone else asks to see my cards but I certainly would not muck 'em to get under the other guy's skin.
I can't believe how many of you guys and gals get upset because someone wants to see a called hand. What gives you people the right to say a rule inforced is made manners.
If you can't live with the rule then work on getting it changed. I don't like when my pocket aces get beat by rags, should I now verbablly beat up the rag man for beating me with a hand that should have been mucked when I raised pre-flop?
So you don't like players to see your losing hand oh my gosh, some of you act like you have been raped. I don't care who whant's to see my hand just ask. If I show you rags and you but in the clueless section ok by me. If you see a monster hand that I just got beat with, that's ok also.
SPM,...change the rule or live with it like a man/women, in other word grow up life is tough...
SPM, i've never seen you have such a passionate opinion about any subject. In any event, The casino management just doesn't listen to anything I have to say on any subject so I am left to fend for myself. I don't really care if I had rockets cracked or 7-2o; I hate it when asked to show my hand. Since no one is going to look out for me except me, I will resort to other means to get my way. this usually means confronting/embarrasing the player who asks or shoving my cards in the muck. A friend of mine who has been a pro for over 20 years told me that if I did this in Vegas I would be picked apart. I don't play in Vegas and only one person has asked to see my cards more than once. I'll continue to do what I do until the rule is changed or I get chastised by management. Keep in mind that this is the only time I disparage another player at the table. 99.9% of the time I'm not an asshole.
No rule against throwing cards into muck.
No rule against calling the "asker" a complete idiot.
No rule against asking to see that players hand the next 300 times. (I would never do this to a poor player).
If the player is bad, I cheerfully turn over my cards. If the player should know better then it's a "situational" kind of thing.
I agree that the friend's play was, generally speaking, a classless manuever. However, it's probably valuable here to consider the specifics of the situaion. If the friend thought he could infuriate Badger to the point where he'd leave the game, then why not do it? Who wants to play Badger? Or, if Badger actually is a losing ring game player but has one of those acidic personalities that often ruin a game, then why shouldn't our hero make a stab at getting rid of him? Or maybe he just doesn't like Badger and wanted to humiliate him. God knows there are plenty of players I'd make this move against if the right circumstances presented themselves.
This hand perfectly validates Badger's claim that he is running bad. When a good player (like me) tries that raise the maniac with A-rag to isolate and then keep firing chips at them even though they check-raised the turn play, they usually get the other guy to fold bottom pair or can show down their Ace-high for a winner.
But when Badger does it, he runs into Kings-full and then gets needled by some hollywooding off duty dealer.
BTW, his raise on the river was particularly horrible, especially since he was prepared to call the reraise. Didn't this guy write an essay about bad players who leak chips by stubbornly refusing to ever concede a pot. Pot kettle black.
Classy post, SmootheB. What's it illustrate? That because Steve Badger blew one hand in a hold 'em game means that he's a poor player, and the hundreds of thousands from Omaha tournaments are ill-gotten gain?
If you're interested in bashing people because you enjoy being spiteful you might find more of an audience at r.g.p.
Yeah RGP that where Badger is. Then he can defend his self. That more classy way to go.
This is easy to understand. Badger is pissing off all of America one player at a time. SmoothB is not alone.
Given that your friend is a dealer and experienced player, I think he committed an absolutely unforgivable poker sin. My feeling on the story is that nothing you could ever say about Badger could ever cast as dark a shadow as what your friend did.
Next issue of Poker Digest I have a non-humor article called, "I Want to See the Hand."
Tommy
:-(
I will wait with baited breath to see this one.
It has to be funny in a "hit with a rock" kind of funny way! Peoples stupidity is always funny.
8-)
If badger plays like he posts to the forums then I could easily imagine someone wanting to tweak him. The guy is all ego and mouth backed up by a very modest intellect, a combination certain to piss off 3/4 of the poker playing world.
Of course chasing a major donater like him out of the game is -EV.
That river raise deserves a column all on it's own.
As a fairly new poker player I'm intensely curious as to why the stigma exists around asking to see a players hand on the river. I must admit I've done this at times before (all though much less frequently this past year) and my sole purpose has virtually always been to determine how they play, what cards in what position, ect. It doesn't seem unethical at all to me since it is allowed by the rules and any player may ask. If it were not allowed by the rules then I would be perfectly content asking, but since much of poker is an information war I don't understand what the big deal is about asking to see a players hand on the river, you are just trying to help your EV in a legitimate manner.
Shawn Keller
"...since much of poker is an information war..."
Shawn, that's the key right there. Say you and an average opponent never see one another's hands. Presumably you are the better hand reader. So over some time you will end up with a better line on his play than he has on yours. But what if he asks to see some of your hands? Now he's greatly accelerated, or made more accurate, his aquisition of a line on your play -- closing the gap. If you both ask to see each other's hands, then you'll both get a lot of good info in the other's play. But it looks quite likely that your advantage is greatest over this player if neither of you asks to see the other's hands, so that your superior hand reading will give you a much better line on his play than he has on yours.
If you ask to see another player's hand, he is now likely to ask to see yours, reducing the edge I mentioned above. The custom, therefore, among a lot of better players is the simple, two second procedure, used when it's unclear whether your hand will win, of calling the general type of hand you have by saying something such as, "I missed" or "Ace high" or what have you, allowing your opp to show his winning hand so that you can muck, or to acknowledge that the hand you say you have is best so that you can show it and he can muck. All in all, showing as seldom as possible is going to help the better player.
Hmm you bring up an interesting point and I would entirely agree with you except that in my (3 years) of experience I haven't found that asking to see an opponents hand significantly increases the amount of hands that that opponent asks to see of mine. It seems to me that the great majority of opponents never ask to see an opponents hand (unless they think something rather shady is taking place).
Shawn
Yeah, it's hard to say. I know when someone asks to see my hand, I don't turn around and ask to see theirs because I don't want to start anything in that direction. But I've known players who will do it for "revenge". But another reason not to ask is just to avoid embarrassing a weak player or a player on tilt. Against a good (non-tilting) player that reason isn't a factor, but a lot of players do take a bit of offense at it. I just don't like to nurture an asking-to-see atmosphere.
1) Asking to see a hand is considered unfriendly/competitive.
2) Some people who would otherwise be friendly/uncompetitive become more unfriendly/competitive becuase of your unfriendly/competitive behavior.
3) A game with unfriendly/competitive opposition is a tougher game.
4) Players may even direct their unfriendly/competitive spirit towards you (i.e. they become more aware and tricky when you are involved in a hand).
The above is a general argument for being nice and amenable at the poker table.
Nota bene: You must of course balance the above argument with other considerations (in the case being discussed, how the information balance will be affected and how this will in turn affect profit)
"But another reason not to ask is to avoid embarrassing a weak player or a player on tilt".
This is precisely why I never ask. Making a loser feel miserable to the point where he will either start playing better or leave the game is one of the dumbest things you can do at a poker table.
Thanks guys, all these reasons listed are good reasons not to ask to see player's hands. BTW I never ask a weak player to show their hand on the river (for the reasons listed above). After some deliberation I've decided that in almost all cases the profitability gained from viewing the hand is not worth all the negatives.
Shawn Keller
Exactly right.
You know, I've asked to see maybe 3 times. Never over the last 3 years. I still get reminded of "the time that ..."
8-)
That's quite possible. I post later on why I would happily show my hand when some players ask.
IMHO the rule "should" be: On the river every player that called shows his hand. How many times do you hear: "What have you got?" "I called, what have you got?" The dealer -- "Come on guys, somebody turn over his hand." I get tired of watching these idiots play with themselves.
The game is cards speak. Everybody turns over his hand, the dealer identifies the winning hand and passes the pot, end of hassles.
makes sense to me...everyone turns them over and there wouldn't be a problem, would there?
if I ask, it's done in a manner that is nonjudgemental of the player's style or skill level, and I'll usually add something like "good hand" or "I was just curious." I think it actually flatters some players' vanity if you ask them. (they may well think to themselves, "wow, he's a pretty good player and he's wondering how I play"). it's a good way to determine whether or not one has figured out who had what. but I certainly don't overdo it.
I'll also ask the dealer to reveal all hands if I suspect there has been some collusion between friends or spouses. so far so good I must add.
I'll assume you are a strong player.
Calling you names and hassling you at every opportunity may drive you from the game and hopefully you'll be replaced by a poor player. This increases my EV and is allowed by the rules. I wouldn't do it though.
Asking to see a players hand may not increase my EV. It won't increase mine because I already know what he has. It may decrease it because this player may play better in order to avoid having to show the table his pathetic calls.
Now, if you would like to ask me to see my hand after I thrown it in .. go ahead. If you are weak, I'll be happy to show. Weak players aren't going to figure out too much. I won't play the same way against better players. If you are average, I may let it slide or maybe not.
Uh oh, reminds me of a story.
Decent sized pot. I have top pair A's with a Q. Two other players at river. One is a very strong player with good hand reading ability and the other is, well ..., bad.
River card puts up a potential str8. Weak player had bet weak aces earlier and now bets out. I raise with no hesitation. Good player asks for time (he as A with K kicker). Finally calls and I know I've lost. Bad player re-raises. I fold. Good Player folds.
Bad player is kind of dumbfounded. After mucking he claims over and over that he wanted to try to bluff cause he never had. You had to be there but you KNEW that he was lieing at this point.
I simply told him that if he wanted us to believe him he should have showed us his cards
Of course he lost his chips over the next couple of hours (he was bad after all)
Hmmm, this story doesn't really have a point!
SmoothB, I have a tough time believing that Steve Badger is not an excellent player. When he was posting here on 2+2 he got involved in some specific hand analyses and demonstrated to me that he his technical knowledge of limit hold'em was substantial. He also gets staked in both tournaments and ring games because players close to him know he is an excellent player. I believe Omaha is his best game and not hold'em. With regard to your particular example, Badger had his own reasons for the actions he took. I have seen some well-known players make some pretty strange plays at the table based on their read of situation. Roy Cooke is one of the best middle limit hold'em players in the country and from time to time he will really "jump the fence" based on his situational assessment. He even writes about it in his columns. One time in a $30-$60 game, I saw David Sklansky limp in from middle position behind an early limper with Qs5s.
I must agree.
After reading Badgers analysis of holdem hands (card reading by thinking out loud), I was glad that he didn't play in my game.
His thoughts also have an air of originality in them, that I wish I posessed.
Regards Mike N
I'll tell you what I think, and it is that on these forums we are suppose to be discussing how hands are played, and how we can better our games. Putting down indiviuals, even those we don't like, has no place on Two Plus Two. If I would have seen your post sooner it would have been deleted because a personal attack like this has no place on our boards. We ask you not to do it again.
Due to the problems that Steve Badger caused us in the past when he demanded that all his posts be deleted we are going to continue to honor his request and delete tham all. In the future if Mr. Badger is unhappy with anything that gets posted on any of our forums he should email me directly and I will take appropriate action if necessary. (He has already done this before and should be able to do it again.)
The purpose of these forums is to exchange good information on poker and to have a little fun. Personal attacks will not be tolerated no matter who they are made against.
If "personal attacks will not be tolerated" (and I strongly agree with that policy), then how come this thread is still here?
Tommy
I've already explained that. By the time I saw it there were alread 20 posts, some of which contained worthwhile discussion. So it was my decision to leave it as you see it.
I think that these types of threads are relatively informative.
Not by the info they give us on the players attacked but by the insight they give by the original posters and by other posters responses.
First off, I have trouble believing the story as written. The content, I mean, not the source.
Many like to kick someone when they're down. Some like to attack the player directly. I think you may know just a little about both of these since I've seen you on the receiving end of such attacks.
"Passive Aggressive" doesn't really apply to poker playing but it can certainly apply to a poker player.
"Putting down indiviuals, even those we don't like,has no place..."
Oh, I don't know, I love getting on Sklansky and Zee. Not you, of course, Mason because your are my hero and I like Charmaine. Come to think of it I get a kick out of bashing Badger too and Carson also. Hey how did Badger find out about this thread? Is he lurking here? Getting the benfit of my, I mean our, wisdom? Or is there a squeslly cat here telling him our every move? O.K who is it? Probably Feeney, Paul or John, take your pick they're twins anyway.
Putting others down can be a healthy thing. Try it. "Vince Lepore is a babbling idiot". Now wasn't that fun? Doesn't it make you feel superior? Oh, yes there is a place for put downs. And if not for 2 + 2 where would I get the chance to ride Mark Glover or Louie Louie Landale? I know not cousre others may take but as for me put me down or leave me alone!
Oh, I don't like John Cole so I'll put him down when ever I feel like it. And another thing I told all of you a long time ago that I do not read anything with SmoothB's name on it. I still don't. Maybe now you can see why. That seems to be this guys sole purpose. Bash the other guy. Even if he is justified in this case because it is Badger that doesn't make him worth reading.
Vince
I wish I had the ability to simply not read posts by particular posters.
Inquiring minds want to know! This is me. 8-(
BTW, am I still on your "don't read" list. Don't answer if I still am.
Regards Mike N
It should be noted that Badger claims that this post by SmoothB is a total fabrication. Since we will not let him post here I have decided to, in this particular case, let that fact be known. However in general Two Plus Two is not going to go to the trouble of paraphrasing what Badger would like to post here.
"a total fabrication"
Man if this is a paraphrase I'd like to see the original.
vince
Mason, how about an update on this affair.
If Badger would post and were he allowed to, I would like to see hime here again.
If you do care to elaborate a new thread would be nice.
Apologies in case someone has already posted this, but just for the record, over on rgp Steve Badger has stated that this incident never happened. He also says that he has not even played hold'em since last November, except in a mixed-game tournament. Frankly, what he says has the ring of truth and I think this SmoothB is making it up. But what a gloriously sick mind to invent such a complex and amusing fabrication!
Oh no!! Not again!
I don't think it's so glorious to commit slander and libel against someone and, as in this case, impugn the reputation of a professional player. I think rather, that it shows complete lack of character and integrity on SmoothB's part. Especially to post that distasteful fictious play on a forum where it is evident that Badger cannot defend himself.
Desire:
Keep in mind that Badger cannot defend himself here because of his own wishes and demands. We had to go to a great deal of effort to delete all his posts, and there were many of them, from our archives. He made many statements about not wanting us to make any money off of him -- I think this was referring to any advertising revenue we get from this site -- and has attacked me personally on many, many occasions.
Yet with this being said, I do agree with you. The purpose of these forums is to discuss poker and to have a little fun. It is not to make personal attacks, no matter who they are aimed at.
By the way, I have already deleted another thread that SmoothB started which was also a personal attack on Badger. We have also stated, see one of my other posts, that Badger is adamant that this play never happened. Furthermore, I will monitor these forums as best I can to make sure that there are no more personal attacks.
Mason
I agree with desire and Mason completely! In life's general sense, some people just have the need to be critical! We learn about people from their actions. Therefore we learn about poker players from their playing styles and from the attitude they bring to the tables. This all adds up to more fuel in the winning players tank. Am I critical at times? Absolutely, I'm far from perfect (but striving excellence). However, I try to be constructive when I voice my opinion out loud. If I don't, it probably is the first stage of tilt! Thanks desire and Mason, I'm right there with you.
I'm waiting for the "I didn't post that" post.
Mason, please confirm the addresses when this happens.
Thanks
I think that -
This is a fairly useless post aimed, in a spitefull manner, at a specific player.
Very nice.
...there is no doubt that he is both an intelligent, well informed individual, and also a very logical poker player. (His math may be shaky but I cannot judge that). And don't forget he has his bracelet.
Read the columns he posts on his web site. Some are damn near profound. Think Kerry Mullis without the Nobel!!
A9
I was playing in a typical $10 $20 game holding 10 Js in the cutoff. I am not sure if the correct play is to raise hoping for a steal,to limp hoping for three callers or to fold. All advice is appreciated.
First, you should try to play with someone on your left (the button) who gives away whether or not he is going to be involved in the hand. Note that you should always look for this type of tell.
In the absence of button tells (indicating he is folding), I would toss JT offsuit against most lineups. If the blinds and button are very tight AND easy to read post flop then you may try to steal with this hand. Most of your EV will come on stealing. If they do usually defend then you often are in trouble and have to flop or play well relative to your opponents after that point (which often means folding if bet into or betting with nothing if checked to).
Don't ever limp here. You will get raised by the button quite often and really don't have much high card strength to battle two probable opponents.
Here are some rough guidelines for attacking the button and blinds that often defend. Raise with a pair of fours or better, an A4 or better, a K9 or better, and a QT or better. These hands can be slightly worse if suited. The tougher the opponents, shade towards better hands. The tighter the opponents, you can add a few hands. The looser the opponents shade towards high card strength and pairs since you will often have to go to the showdown (e.g., Q8 suited is not good against loose defenders).
Try Abdul's web page (www.posev.com) for more details. I'm putting this up off the top of my head just to see how far my mind is slipping these days ;-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
I am a longtime reader of 2+2 and had been a "poster" about two years ago. I enjoy reading the post comments from you, Jim, skp, Tommy, Tom, as well as others. In reading this comment, I could not resist interjecting that Jeff was commenting on 10 J suited. If this were the case and I am in the cutoff with no callers when it is my turn, I would raise 20% (more if I have a tell on the button, if the button is tight, if the blinds are tight, or if I believe that I can outplay these players) call 60% (mainly to encourage a volume pot) and muck 20% (depending on the flavor of the table--aggressive,strong players). 10 J suited can stand more heat and is a much stronger hand (HEFAP). Just my opinion. Regards, Quan
Cards aside, I think open-limping from the cutoff is very rarely a winning play.
Tommy
I have a player to my near righ (15-30) who will raise 100% of the time from the button if he is first in - never folds his hand. I know because I've seen him do it with 9/4 off. He lost with it, but it didn't slow him down a bit.
I need answers to a few of questions -
1. If it is obvious [and it usually is] that the other blind is going to fold - or if I am the BB and he already has - what is my minimum calling hand ? ? ?
- I do play better than he does (all modesty aside) post-flop, but not by all that much; it's not by enough for me to start calling with any two cards.
2. How often do I want to play back at him ? I know the mathmatical answer, at least I think I do, but I don't want to do it so often that he alters his behavior. I like having him play this way.
- It's kind of like having a "stone-cold" tell on someone; you don't want to call him down with every hand that beats him - if you do he might figure out what is going on.
I pretty much know how to handle myself if the other blind is in (or is going to be in - he has a little thing that he does when he likes his hand, and so far it's been completely reliable), it's the 1 on 1 confrontations that I am a little unsure about.
- - - Thanks for any and all responses; BTW, the game is going on as we speak, so I may only have the chance to read your answers - I may not get to respond right away.
- J-D
When you say "the game is going on as we speak" I presume that means you're talking about an online player, right? What "little thing" could he possibly do when he likes his hand?
Tommy
Actually, the game was (and is) being played in the next room.
I don't mind the "little shot", but if you were going to take the time to respond it would have been nice if you had added at least some advice - useful or not.
I was under the impresion that was why we were here.
Thanks anyway,
- J-D
JD,
Swear, it wasn't a shot. I thought maybe you were getting an accurate read on an online pause and I wanted to hear more.
As to defending against overzealous thieves, I tend to just let' em rob me and wait til I've got at least two paints or an ace to play back. That's because I really have no idea what the best threshold is, and out of position I tend to play the cards more than the person.
Tommy
If he truly raises 100% of the time in this position, then his hand is completely random. My simulation shows that after 1000 runs, 72offsuit, the worst hole cards, win against a random hand 33.8% of the time, giving it 1.95 to 1 odds. The payoff you're getting from the pot is 3.5 to 1. So it's worth it to play any hand.
Except for the fact that you're out of position. So I dunno.
Position was the ONLY consideration.
I was tempted to call with "any two", but I didn't want to do anything that would cause him to stop his over-agressive tactics.
- He lost a little over 2K; I got almost half of it.
When the button is a blind thief what should you do...?
Well if I'm on my "A-game" I would only call with a hand that I would re-raise with or at least a hand strong enough to call any raise. Playing the blind thief with reckless abandon, doesn't seem to be good poker in my opinon.
Some players will defend their blinds at all cost, I think they don't understand the blinds are only the tax to see ten hands.
SPM,...not the final answer, but it's mine...
If in the small blind you want to 3 bet with any hand you are going to play in order to get the big blind to fold. if the big blind comes along you could be in trouble. depending on how frisky I'm feeling I will come and play with any ace, pairs 66 and above, any two paints and maybe Kxo down to an 8 kicker.
if you are in the big blind and the small blind comes in then I would only call with fairly decent hands like pocket pairs, suited connectors and one gappers, two paints. If the small blind folds then 3 betting any hand you would normally play is probably a good idea if you are normally a tight player from the blinds. hopefully if you 3 bet enough the button maniac will back off and you can see some flops for free.
THis doesnt exactly answer your question...but I read (Poker Digest perhaps) that if you knew with certainty that someone would raise with any two cards and bet them to the river, what would the minimum calling requirements be to be successful in calling all the way to the river. Man that is a bad sentence...sorry.
The article indicated that one could call on the RIVER with only Jack high. Did anyone else read this article?
This has been discussed a bit in a thread below but i'm wondering what others would do in the following situation.
I was playing in a 15-30 game at the bellagio. It's heads up and I have position on the one player at the table i think plays as well or better than I. On the turn I pick up the nut flush draw to go with my middle pair and raise his bet.
The river goes check, check and he shows a set. I muck my hand and he asks to see it. I must admit this pissed me off (although i never show emotion at the table).
I ended up just ignoring the situation and continued to play my regular game. I seriously contemplated having the dealer turn over this player's hand every time he was in until the river from that point onwards. Would this have just been childish or is it a good counter strategy? Keep in mind that this was a strong player and I wasn't worried about embarrassing him.
Rob
I personaly never ask to see a person's hand. I just think it's rude. If you're observant, you should be able to ascertain within some degree what he did (or sometimes more importantly) did NOT have. I see your point and while it would be nice to goad this player for the remainder of the session, I think you'd just be stooping to his level.
Rob,
I know the temptation must be there to ask to see every called hand of his...but don't do it. You are a good solid player so do not tarnish your own rep due to a classless act by another player.
Glad to see you are at Bellagio again. Hope you saw our friend Abdul.
Regards,
Bob
The other guy initiated the rude behavior, and if you were going to ask to see his mucked hand purely for the retaliation factor, then that is wrong. But there is a theory of negative reinforcement. I believe I might ask to see his mucked cards at least once, not for revenge, but to put him on notice that the street goes both ways. To allow an opponent the advantage of unchecked ignorant behavior, in my opinion, only reinforces that behavior and may cause others to do the same. There is, btw, a female dealer at the Bellagio that will go into the muck to retrieve a hand. I told her to never do that again, and believe it or not, she did..or tried to. I called floor so loudly, she about died. She was then informed if the cards hit the muck, she was not to draw them out. She had the nerve to argue that she believed she could tell which two cards they were. Again, she was told once they hit the muck they were history. It surprised me how upset the dealer became. As if she were Super Poker Woman, righting the wrongs of all of us errant poker players. I wish more dealers would play so that they would have a better understanding of the other side of the felt that they're dealing to. It bothered me, and I must say, I still toked her, but half the normal amount. Again, the negative reinforcement theory applied.
Another funny incident related to asking to see a mucked hand.
At the Taj, 30-60 Stud, the winner, a regular and decent player, asked to see the loser's, unknown player to me, mucked hand. The new guy never said a word. Then the tables were turned and he asked to see the other guys hand. He fired them in the muck, where they stayed. Couple of rounds go by, and they are at the river. The new guy bet the river, the regular called. Before the new guy would turn his cards over, he advised the dealer that he wanted to see the gentleman's hand since it was called. The dealer then covered the muck cards with her hand, thereby making any attempt to muck a called hand futile. The regular grew livid. I could not believe how upset he got. His whole demeanor changed. He stung the dealers hands as best he could, firing them into the covered muck. Truly no class. But the regular didn't ask to see another mucked hand the rest of the night.
desire,
I like the story. Consider this, when we think about "getting back" at the player who asked to see our hand we are emotionally on tilt. Same feeling when we get our big hands cracked by those 2-5 outers.
We go on tilt when we make act and make poor decisions. The better players let it go.
Bob
I have to admit I see no problem with asking to see a player's hand (although I rarely do it) or someone asking to see my hand. I don't understand why players get upset by it (unless it's done maliciously).
In the situation described he has the right to see your hand, and ,given that you raised the turn, that information is very valuable.
Asking to see a guy's hand after you've just beaten him and are dragging the pot is a totally classless act. It is poor poker etiquette and you would never see two pros do this. See John F's response in "More Badger Bashing - evaluate his play". This rule was originally instated as a measure to prevent collusion and other forms of cheating. NOT to give weak card readers a means to see what there opponents are playing. This is one of the most abused rules in hold'em.
when some one make a move on me, and i still end up winning the hand i will sometimes ask to see the hand...very rarly and only to a few players.... i you try to make a move, I want to know what you tried to do
when some one make a move on me, and i still end up winning the hand i will sometimes ask to see the hand...very rarly and only to a few players.... i you try to make a move, I want to know what you tried to do.
I don't mind showing my hand to some one, unless its done out of spite
It always amazes me how rediculous players are about this rule. Bad manners my foot! The rule says a called hand maybe seen by any player who asks. Get over this bull about manners and learn to live with the rules.
The best example is the post above about the regular asking to see someones hand and then going balistic when someone wants to see his hand. How rediculous. I asked to see a players hand some years ago, because he was new to me and I wanted to see how he played the hand.
Then I went to the head and the player follows me and button holes me with this statement. "I'm a serious poker player and if you ever ask to see my cards again, I'll have your legs broken." This sums up the stupidy of the action players will take regarding this matter.
The young player got his poker name that day "Break Your Legs Wally." Now when he comes to the casio everyone calls him Break Your Legs Wally.
If you don't like the rule then work on getting it changed in your poker room. Other wise grow up and play by the rules.
SPM,...you can see my hand any time you ask...
I remember a time when a kamikaze player capped both the flop and 4th street on me while I held the nuts. He went on to hit a puny flush on the river. As I mucked my hand, he literally yelled at the dealer "I WANT TO SEE THAT HAND!". I'd be less than honest if I didn't admit that I considered asking to see each hand that man lost for the rest of my life! But I never said a word.
I very much agree with what yogi has to say on this. This rule was developed as a means to protect the games from cheating, not to level the playing field for bad players with no hand reading ability. You will almost never see a top player ask to see a hand. Why should he? One of his advantages is being able to quickly develop a line on his opponents. Why would he want to even things out by encouraging this practice?
FYI- There are also other "rules" which can be used for gain, especially if you play at Hollywood... Did you know that you can forego paying the blinds at the start of a game and come in behind the button for free? You can also play 3 hours with a straddle button, win it, and have it taken out of the game. Both of these practices also fall within the "rules". But it still takes an a**hole (IMO) to try and gain from these advantages.
Ironically, I'm not as passionate about this as my post might indicate. It really doesn't bother me when someone asks to see a hand. I'm just in favor of keeping games friendly, flowing, and not disturbing the action.
Kevin
Now Rob me boy, do not get so upset, just yet. Tell us how this fellow asked to see your hand. Did he say. "Sir may I see your hand please?" In which case he was being polite and propper and because of his nice manner we could concievably forgive him. Maybe he said "Let's see that hand!" in a strong , staunch voice. In which case he may be trying to detect possible collusion between your two cards. This also can be forgiven because you can see that his motive was to keep the game clean. We all want that now don't we.? Or did he say something like "Hey stupid what in the hell did you call with?" and utter a boisterous yelping howling laugh when the dealer turned over your silly drawing hand. Now if that is the case we can still forgive him because he was probably just trying to lighten up the atmosphere at the table. You know, keep things merry for the weaker players. So you being a strong player might even secretly thank him for asking you to expose that puke of a hand you had. So you see young Rob look on the bright side. Don't view everything in a negative manner. The next time they ask to see your cards, gladly turn them over and say somehing to encourage this type of behavior in the future. Like, maybe: "Why, yes sir, I have the nut flush draw and was hoping to complete it but alas I missed my draw. But thank you for your concern" Then smile and ask the dealer to get them in the air for the next hand. Ah, now isn't that a much nicer way to play poker.
Vince
:-)
Here's how it happened. He turned over his set. I fired my cards into the muck. The dealer was about to collect the whole pile of cards to shuffle them but before she could he says "wait, i want to see that hand". That's all.
Rob
p.s. haven't been down to foxwoods in a while vince, the conveniece of online poker has got me trapped.
See Rob, even this can be looked at in a positive lite. He probably thought to himself" Oh my, we have this young man from Bean town visiting us here in Vegas and looks a little upset. He may have thrown away the best hand. I better ask the dealer to look at his cards and make sure" Thus his asking to see the hand out of courtesy. Now isn't that special.
Vince
Great response.
In this case, since the opponent was raisedon the turn, he was curious to see how poster played. It shouldn't be a big deal.
Then again, there are those morons who ask to see hands a lot, even when they're not involved. I remember a hand where my opponent had A-7s in the big blind and I had 6-6 on the button. I raised him on every round to the point where he went all in when the board finished up 7-6-2-7-6. My opponent is not a friend, but he is known to me and is a gentleman. At the end of the hand, a player who wasn't involved, asked to see his hand after he conceded when I showed my hand. I grabbed my opponent's cards and shoved them in the muck. My opponent announced he had had a 7, as it should have been evident to the blind, deaf and mentally challenged.
The twit who had wanted to see his hand called the floorman on me. I explained that I had had quads and the opponent, who is known to all as a gentleman, had been having a rough day and had lost with top full house, and that it had struck me that the player who asked to see his hand was being needlessly obnoxious. The floorman agreed but asked me to not touch anyone else's cards again. Struck me as fair.
The rule was indeed intended to detect collusion and is sometimes used now to needle, but, as you say, so what? When, on the river, they show you a set you can't beat after you raised on the turn with a draw, muck your cards real quick before they can ask to see them.
Don't call a bet on the river if you aren't willing to show your hand. What's the problem here?
Rob's case was check-check on the river. The rules state, at least where I play, anyone at the table can ask to see all hands that remain live after the end of the action.
The solution I see is to hold your cards and shoot them into the muck whenever you don't want anyone else to see them.
By the way, I also don't like to have to show my cards when I raised on the turn and then didn't win on the river. I'd much rather show them when I meekly called all the way. I think Mason's right in saying that a tight image is better for hold 'em.
:-)
Here's a situation that comes up a lot of the time and I think I handle it poorly. I will raise from early position with J's or T's. get 1 or 2 cold callers and there will be 3 bet out of the blinds.
Flop comes all undercards. Blind bets, I raise,limpers fold.
Turn and River are undercards. Blind will either 3 bet the flop and then lead all following streets, or checkraise the turn and bet into me on the river.
I find that I have a hard time laying down an overpair to the board but I am being shown KK and AA over and over again on the river. Do I need to lay down this hand earlier? What have others done in this situation.
Is it much different for QQ?
Rob
I think this is a unique situation in that it makes little difference what type of player the preflop reraiser is because against everyone except a chip-slinging maniac, you can rely on your first hunch. They do indeed have a big pair. I think more and more players are simply calling from the blinds with AK and AQ, more often.
Like you I tend to raise the flop with the overpair just just just in case they have a lower pair to my QQ, JJ, or 10-10. But then I'm done. Assuming it comes down to heads up, I call a reraise on the flop to draw to the two-outter and then fold if I miss. I don't get trapped into the check-raise on the turn because, like I said, I'm done. If the turn goes check check, I payoff on the river like a chump.
As crazy as it feels, I can't help but wonder if the best play in the long haul is to muck for one bet right on the flop. Or even more strange-sounding, to merely CALL on the flop, drawing to a two-outter or back-door draw, without getting tied in physically or emotionally to any subsequent big bets.
Tommy
Arrgh, Tommy, I will rob you with AK and AQs.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
You 3 bet an early raiser out of the blinds with AK and AQs?
With many cold callers, yep. -if
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
Once you have a raiser and three cold callers, you've got good odds to raise with a wide variety of hands. The main reason for this is that most people cold call raises with dominated hands. Most of these cold callers aren't going to be winning their fair share of the pots. Thus, you can raise with strong drawing hands, and hands which are strong dominators. AK is clearly a dominating hand. AQs isn't as clearly a dominating hand, but it is only a real dog against AA/KK/QQ/AK, and it IS a strong drawing hand, thus it even has outs versus those hands.
With only two cold callers, raising with hands which are strong drawing hands only (like Axs, and medium suited connectors) becomes less correct. BUT, if the initial raiser will fear AA/KK/AK when you 3-bet out of the blinds, then you should raise and hope they WILL fold when faced with aggression on the flop/turn.
Moral of the story: call down everyone but the most transparent player when they raise out of the blind AND you have an overpair.
- Andrew
AK is not normally dominated by an early position raise. Even if the raise signifies AK-AQ, AA-TT then you are not dominated. There are only 6 hands that dominate you (AA/KK), and there are 27 you are even money against (AK/QQ/JJ/TT), and there are 12 you dominate (AQ). If you throw in 3 or 4 cold callers, then a raise out of the blinds with AK shows a very nice overlay.
If the early position raiser wont raise with AQ, then most of your overlay is gone.
I'm glad we agree.
- Andrew
Actually, I think this is a very good question. Heads up against a player willing to fold overpairs, it would appear to be very close to correct game theory to 3-bet all big pairs along with some other hands (such as AK) as well.
Kevin
After the flop, there are 16 small bets in the pot.
If your opponent has AK and you have JJ to a board which reads 257T (for example), your opponent will have 6 outs (and will generally know it). His chances of hitting are 6 out of 44. He should call your turn bet (he knows it and he knows that you know it). Thus, you can often check when your opponent checks. While you fail to charge him to draw, you can often recoup that lost bet on the river as he may feel compelled to either bluff or checkcall your river bet. You also save a bit when he hits on the river. But on all those occasions when he has AA/KK (but you can't be sure of it), you save a lot more. Notice that the pot is also big enough for someone to perhaps try a semi-bluff checkraise with AK against which you might just muck. So, you avoid that happening by just checking back.
In other words, I go back to something that I say here often. Giving free cards to more than one opponent is very bad but giving free cards to exactly one opponent (particularly an aggressive one when you hold a hand that would hate to be raised) is not that big of a deal. After all, one opponent will generally only have 6-9 outs on the turn.
Now, checking is not a play you do in other situations such as if no else coldcalled your initial raise as in that situation, the chances that the big blind 3 bettor has AA/KK go down. Accordingly, in those situations, you would bet on the turn even though you only have one opponent as the pot is small enough that he should fold AK. If he calls, well that's okay too because he is making an even bigger error. If he checkraises, you play the man but you should realize that since the pot is still relatively small, the chances that he is semi-bluff checkraising are lower.
Izmet, do you agree?
It very well depends on who you are against, I guess. My default is to bet if checked to. I may be wrong.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
I think that the "bet if checked to" rule makes your play too predictable. You are setting yourself up to be a checkraising station. If the BB knows that you will bet the turn if he checks, this is very profitable information to him (and it's a zero sum game heads up). I think that always betting in this situation really denies yourself the advantage of your position, becuase you are in effect allowing the BB to make the last decision about how many bets to play for.
"If your opponent has AK and you have JJ to a board which reads 257T (for example), your opponent will have 6 outs (and will generally know it). "
Since you prefaced by putting 16 small bets in the pot, I'm assuming you're talking multi-way here. Why would he know he has 6 outs and know you know this? Not only is it possible he doesn't have 6 outs to AA,KK,TT AK,etc., but if the pot is playing multi-way, it becomes even more likely that some of his cards are blocked, right? An ace might now be a terrible card since (multi-way) ATs and other ace/two pairs are likely. Everything else you say, makes sense to me.
Hero raised on the flop with JJ and the other two players folded. Thus, it's now heads up with the bb and hero. If bb just calls the flop and a blank comes on the turn, I am saying that JJ should consider checking the turn if bb checks.
In a heads-up situation an overpair is usually a through ticket. When a decent player 3 bets you pre-flop out of his blind that usually means AA,KK, or QQ and sometimes AK or AQ but usually suited. My approach is to raise the flop bet if there are multiple players in the hand. Otherwise, I will just call him down all the way to the river and make him show me a better hand.
Jim why do you raise him on the flop if you think that he has you beat most of the time, also do you really care if hands behind you call 1 bet on the flop with like a KQ, or smaller pair since they are likely drawing dead to the threebettor?
Shawn
But he won't have me beat most of the time. There are 18 ways for him to have a bigger overpair when I have Jacks but 16 ways for him to have AK and 4 ways for him to have AQ suited for a total of 20 hands that I can beat. I raise with other players because I want them to pay more to hang around. In many cases these other players are not making much of a mistake to call a single flop bet with a large pot at stake but by making them call a double bet they are making a mistake.
I agree with Shawn about KQ. If you have JJ, and somebody has KQ, then you dont want them to fold. Because every hand (with the exception of JJ/TT/99) that a blind would 3 bet dominates KQ. In the case of KQ you would want him in.
But you dont know what the cold callers have, so the best play is to raise and charge them to play all of their draws.
That is exactly the way I play it also.
This may not be a popular viewpoint, but I actually would usually prefer checking behind on the turn (I'm talking about the case where the flop does not get 3 bet and the BB checks the turn). This avoids having to deal with the possibility of someone trying to move you off the best hand with an AK check-raise and it also will induce a lot of river bluffs. You want to make it to the showdown with your overpair, but you don't want to pay 3 big bets to get there.
I used to typically raise the blind on the flop in these situations. The problem, as Rob and Tommy point out, is that the better players today only 3 bet out of the blinds with AA, KK, QQ.
So with hands like JJ, TT and raising the 3 better, you put yourself into either being 3 bet on the flop or checkraised on the turn. If you were not pot committed preflop, you sure are now.
As usual, it depends on the player who 3 bet from the blind but most whom I play with in Norcal have the goods.
Bob
10/20 Holdem, somewhat loose and passive. One limper to me in cutoff. I raise with QQ and am called by the button, BB, and the limper. Flop is TJJ with two hearts. All check to me and I bet. All call. Turn is third Jack. BB and limper check. I bet and am reraised by BB (other two players folded). BB is a very good player, but is also agressive enough to raise with a Ten in this situation. I call and everyone else folds . I call his river bet and he shows JT.
Two questions 1) should I have bet the Turn given that I had so many callers. My reasoning was I did not want to give an Ace or a King a free card and 2) should I have called both the check raise and the river bet?.
Calvin,
I would have played this hand the way you did. When raised on the turn it is likely that you are beat; in addition to facing a Jack the BB could also have AA or KK (which he chose to smooth call pre-flop). But if you are sure that the BB would raise with a Ten (and possibly other inferior hands like 99 or 88) then I think your hand is worth calling to the end.
-- Manzanita
You played correctly. You should bet the turn with your big full house because you will get called by anyone with a Ten and perhaps even a lower pocket pair like Nines or Eights. Your opponents may be playing you for AK or AQ. You also do not want to give some guy with an Ace or a King a free card. Your call at the river is mandatory given the pot size and your holding.
im in the bb with jsjh
utg raises very loose player could be anything from 6-7 suited to pocket aces,
one guy in the middle late position calls(good solid player)
I call
flop 2s 2h 7s,
I check utg betts midle position calls i raise, they all call
turn is and As
I check cause i know one of them has at least an ace, utg checks midle bets, i call utg folds
should i have called here, the only reason i did was because of the js
the river is a ks i check he checks
I win, he held A10
My question to you guys is if i played this hand properly and would you guys play it any differently.
youre advise is apreaciated
I would have led on the flop, expecting UTG to raise and the other player to fold. I'd rather play this heads up. If UTG raised, I would three bet it.
If I got it heads up on the flop, I would have led on the turn. But given the flop play in your case, I would have done the same as you -- check call the turn, and check the river.
I would have led on the flop for the reasons AFish discusses. Why not bet the river with the second nut flush and only one opponent? I think you missed a lick here.
i know i should have
The caller is playing a 3 outer. You dont want him to fold. You want to do exactly what dorrex did, and that is trap him for 2 bets on the flop when he is basically drawing dead to an ace.
Joe,
I am not very good at articulating this, but I believe it is not correct to allow a player with overcards to hang around here, partiularly because of the third player. As I mentioned, I would have bet the flop, hoping for a raise from UTG, and I would have then 3 bet. If I had done this and the middle position player dropped, the pot after the flop would have only had one less small bet, but my odds of winning it would have gone up. I think this is a positive EV play.
It is also possible that the middle position player has two overcards to your pocket pair, in which case he'd be getting correct odds to call a single bet. Also, the middle position player would almost surely drop on the turn unless he picked up a card that would make calling the turn correct.
He isn't playing overcards, he is playing ONE overcard (an ace). Therefore, you want him to stay. If he had been playing 2 overcards you would have wanted him to fold.
In that situation I would bet my flush unless I'm going to check-raise, and I wouldn't be inclined to check-raise in your situation because your hand is too weak to check-raise. Most players will check behind unless they have a spade or absolutely nothing, and it would be hard for your opponent to have absolutely nothing given the action so far. The typical opponent will probably call with more spades than he'd bet, and will likely give a crying call with an ace, I would bet. You will occassionally run into the Qs or a full house, but you'll get calls from small spades and aces much more often.
-Sean
Graveyard shift at the Bellagio. The game has been somewhat short-handed for a while and so is pretty aggressive. In this hand 8 players are dealt in.
I have AdKd in BB. Young Asian tourist open raises from middle position. He's a little too loose and a little too aggressive; plays better post flop then pre-flop. All fold to SB. Small blind is a lawyer/doctor convention type tourist. He's a bit of a calling station. He calls. I call.
Flop is Qd3s4d. SB checks, I check, Raiser bets. SB calls, i call. Turn is 8c. SB checks, I check, Raiser bets, SB calls, i raise.
At this point I put SB on a flush draw and Raiser on a wide range of hands about 90% of which can't beat a pair of queens. I only called up to this point because i thought there was very good chance that not only did i have the best hand but i was dominating the other players.
I didn't re-raise pre-flop because I thought that if I didn’t flop and Ace or a King and one of my opponents made a pair on the flop or a draw and then caught a pair, they would not lay it down and i would actually have to improve to win. By not re-raising pre-flop my post-flop aggression is made less "default" and so would be more respected allowing me a better chance to win unimproved. If I do flop a pair, my hand is strong enough to slow play and check-raise the Raiser, which I would not be able to do had I re-raised pre-flop.
On the flop, after I saw SB call, I put him on a flush draw as he would surely raise with any pair. This flop check-raise-the-pre-flop-raiser-with-any-pair tactic has been used very often in this game due to its aforementioned short-handed aggressive nature. For this reason too I felt that if I check-raised now I wouldn’t be showing enough strength to make a weak queen fold. And, I didn’t mind slow-playing because if neither of my opponents had a pair (most likely scenario) I had them both badly dominated, since their most likely holding would then be AX, KX for Raiser and a smaller diamond draw for SB.
With the turn card being an air-ball, I felt that Raiser would bet again if checked to and I could check-raise now on the expensive street. Check-raise on the turn after a smooth flop call usually indicates a very strong hand that either was made by the turn card or was already big on the flop. I felt that if Raiser had QT, a smaller Queen or a smaller pair, he would lay it down now allowing me to win, unless SB’s diamond draw included 8d or he would pair up on the river.
Please let me know if you have problems with my logic or if you would play the hand differently for other reasons. Thanks.
You were the one at the table, so whatever you did was based on the particular players. In general you are showing a very strong hand. The problem is these guys are calling your raise on the installment plan so they won't fold unless they have no or very few outs. Now you have to bet the river regardless of the card. This is a high variance play and it is tough to bluff out two opponents. I hope you hit an A,K, or dia on the end.(2.5 to 1 against)
While your logic is interesting and will sometimes allow you to win a pot that you could not have one otherwise, in general I disagree with your approach. A loose, goose who open raises from middle position is not to be respected. Despite the small blind calling, I think you should 3 bet with Ace-King suited and simply take control of the hand. About a third of the time you will flop top pair/top kicker and be glad you got that extra money in the pot. There will also be a significant percentage of the time when you flop a flush draw or a straight draw or both. In these situations you are actually a mathematical favorite to make a flush or top pair/top kicker by the river. Rather than resorting to chicanery by check-raising on the expensive street I think you should simply start off swinging and plan to bet it aggressively all the way to the river. You will frequently win because you simply ended up with the best hand and you give yourself a good chance to bet your way to victory without making a hand.
I think you give crazy young Asian tourist too much credit(do you really think he thinks that much?)...make your hand and they will pay you off... If CYA has any hand he is not going to lay down to you after leading all the way....
I am sitting in a $10-$20 game waiting for my $20-$40 seat when the following hand came up. Two early players and a middle player limp. I raise from my small blind with the AsAd and everyone calls. There is $100 in the pot and five players.
The flop is: 5d3d3c
I bet. The big blind raises. An early player cold-calls. The other two players fold. I make it 3 bets and both players call. There is $190 in the pot and three players.
The turn is: 4c
I bet. The big blind raises. The early player cold-calls. Do you re-raise, call, or fold? Results later in the day.
Even though it's looks as though you're beat and might even be drawing to two outs, folding is unthinkable. Also, if you thought there was even the smallest chance the BB could check the river, this would make calling more correct. I don't see what re-raising does, since if the BB makes it 4 bets, you almost have to call to try and snag an ace on the river.
I say all this based on the premise that you are unfamiliar to these 10-20 players. Wouldn't the BB play KK,QQ, etc. similar? The fact that the early player's apparant flush draw is not to the nuts (even if he cathes a diamond), is concerning, but whatever he has doesn't make a whole lot of sense given his position and who knows what unfamiliar players are capable of?
Looks like the BB may have a real hand. It could be KK,QQ or JJ but it also may be 55,67d or A5,A3. The early caller must be on a dia draw. I would just call, then check the river unless I hit my A or3.
With little reason to believe you're ahead and negligible probablity of eliminating anyone, I can't see any justification for a raise.
You probably have two outs (22:1 to make second nuts) and only 14.5:1 pot odds, so a call seems not justified.
However, this all assumes your opposition is rational. I've seen too many opponents turn over garbage in a situation like this to fold. So make a crying call. On the river, call a single bet but fold if the early player raises the BB.
I would say you are definitely drawing at this point. The question is do you have odds to draw. Your getting 14.5-1 at this point, but you only have 2 clean outs and 4 maybe outs (considering how dead the two's are, I would count this for one out). Thus you have approximately 3 outs. 3 outs means you need 15.5-1. The problem is you cant bet the river if a 2 falls.
That being said, I wold fold and be done with it. You barely have the odds to call, and once I called the turn bet I would probably call the river because the pot would be so big.
It sounds to me like the BB protected with X-3 and the cold caller is on a flush draw. That leaves you with 2 outs and $290 in the pot. Your potential win will be 310 and the downside is another 20. (I am discounting quads because the BB would not raise on cheap street flopping that monster no matter how poorly he plays.) If I compute correctly, you would be getting a potential return of 15.5 on about a 24 to 1 shot. Lay it down. Not to read the other posts and to patiently await the results. Looking forward to introducing myself in about 10 days.
The cold-caller either has a diamond draw, poket fives or poket threes, with the first being a LOT more likely. There is a good chance that BB has a 3 , but he could also have 5dXd, 5cXc, 56 or even 52s. There is a small chance he could have a full house now too.
I would call the turn raise, especially since you also have a bottom straight gutshot (plus two aces). I would then check-called the river unless a diamond came. I think that the combined chances of you getting there (and cold-caller not getting there) when BB has trips, and neither BB or cold-caller getting there when BB is semibluffing are good enough to warrent the calls given the pot size. Plus, there is a small chance you spike a Ace.
If a non-diamond hits on the river, you can use the tactic of indicating to BB that you're calling him down to try and make him check, as he may think to continue with his (no-longer semi) bluff, but the chances of that are smaller, i think, then that he's got trips or better.
Guy,
You said, "If a non-diamond hits on the river, you can use the tactic of indicating to BB that you're calling him down to try and make him check, as he may think to continue with his (no-longer semi) bluff, but the chances of that are smaller, i think, then that he's got trips or better. "
If you intend to call the river you want the BB to continue betting when you have him beat, for instance, if the BB has diamonds or say Ac5c. Therefore, you wouldn't employ the tactic of showing the BB you are ready to call his bet because he may be less likely to follow through with a bluff bet on the river. If anything, you would want to show the BB you are folding to encourage him to continue with a hand you can beat. This of course is more applicable in a heads-up situation as you may unduly encourage the cold-caller in this particular hand to raise.
Jamie Collins
I said that, when BB bets on the river, there is bigger chance that he's got a 3 then that he doesn't. You have to call the river anyway (unless there is a raise) because of the pot odds, but you'd rather see the showdown for free. If there was a higher chance that BB doesn't have you beat, then you could try showing weakness to induce a bet from him. I could be thinking about this the wrong way, but i don't think so.
Well, you could be beat and drawing to only two outs (or less), but I think I call. You're getting $290 for your $20 call and if you spike an Ace on the river you're going to win some more. Early player is most likely on a flush draw. Big blind might have something like 7d6d. If he has a 3, his most likely hands are A-3s, in which case your remaining aces are cutin half and a 2 on the river get you (at most) a split; K-3s; 5-3s or 4-3s. It's not inconceivable that he has a pocket pair and that you're still in the lead.
In 10-20, you often see less powerful hands than you might expect given the board and the action. I call and hope nothing ugly comes on the river.
I suspect you lost the hand, but I call.
Jim:
I think the BB has a 3 and raised on both the flop and the turn making it expensive for any draws. If he was on a diamond draw with overcards or had a medium pocket pair, he would not raise you on the turn. If he was full, you would not hear from him until the turn because he would not want to lose the other players behind him. The other cold caller is on diamonds. This leaves you with 6 clean outs provided the BB does not hold an A. When you are raised on the turn, the BB is stating he can beat your lone big pair (which is consistent with your SB raise pre-flop).
When i thought about this a little more. the play of the BB seemed out of line for any of the above hands i mentioned but of course I do not know the players. I guess you have to consider that the BB could have AA (same as you) or KK and just called pre-flop.
I guess you can't go too far wrong by calling as the pot is fairly big. Our read of hands can't be right all the time and maybe this is one of those times
I believe the BB has KK or QQ or possibly AKc. I don't believe he would raise preflop with 76d or something similar unless he is super aggressive, but being new to the garme you never know. Call him down...
Without looking at the other responses it looks a 2-outer to me. fold
I'd call and then check, check-raising if the river's an ace. Whether you call the river naturally depends on the game and player: if you have no prior knowledge, at Lucky Chances or AJ's I would call the river for one bet no matter what the card.
I tend to give 10-20 players credit (being a lowly 3-6 player), and something strikes me odd about this hand. Several other posters commented that the cold caller must be on a diamond draw. Given all the action, I have to feel that he must suspect a full house, and I do as well, probably from 55 out of the big blind. So, given that, he must be aware that a flush has a very strong possibility of being no good. Even given that there may not be a full house out there, he must accept that there must be full house draws out there which reduce his outs if he is on a diamond draw. So, given that he must assume that if he is drawing live, he is drawing to something like 6-8 outs, he should realize that he barely, if at all, has pot odds to be coldcalling 40 on the turn (and this is assuming he is drawing live at all). So, I don't put him on a diamond draw.
I'm guessing early cold caller flopped quads and was laughing it up as you guys bet it all the way for him. His play is certainly consistent with his betting pattern.
David
I folded. The river was: 5c. The board was: 5d3d3c4c5c. Both players checked. The big blind won the hand with the JsJh and the early player had the 6s6c. They had 8 collective outs to beat me with any Jack, any Six, or any Deuce so 34 cards win it for me and 8 cards lose it. My mistake cost me (34/42) x ($290) or $234 which is about 12 big bets.
I figured between the big blind and the early player that someone must have a Trey and that I was playing two outs. I must have overlooked the straight possibility with any Deuce so even if someone has a Trey I still have 6 outs to beat trip Treys. There is $290 in the pot and it costs me $20 to see the river so I am getting almost 15:1. Even if I discount the 6 outs to 3 outs because someone may have a Six, a three outer is still a 15:1 shot. But what I did not consider was that neither opponent may have a Trey but rather they both could be raising and cold-calling with overpairs and playing me for AK or AQ. There are a lot more ways they can have overpairs than any other kind of hand.
A major blunder on my part.
An interesting side question would be, what happens if the river gets bet by the big blind and called by the early player? Is my decision to call on the turn really a $40 decision because I will be obliged to call a river bet as well when a blank comes?
Thanks for the comments.
Jim,
In answer to your last question, I think you asked and answered it. In deciding whether or not to call the turn you have to figure in the possibility you hand is good as well as your outs. If you have a dead read on your opponents and know they are incapable of having the types of hands they actually did, that's one thing. But that was not the case here I assume.
IMO, you made a mistake by not calling the turn but a bigger mistake would be to call the turn and lay down on the river if a blank hit.
Enjoy your posts as always,
Jamie Collins
Yes, I think you are obliged to call a river bet when a blank comes. But there's no guarantee that there will be a river bet if you call the turn. And, yes, I overcall on the river with pocket aces.
Your comment that "there are a lot more ways they can overpairs than any other kind of hand" is interesting. Even though I had said I would call in my earlier post, mathematics always has to be tempered by the betting pattern. When someone keeps betting it may be more likely that he has the mathematically less likely hand because his betting indicates this. For example, when an Ace flop this makes it statistically less likely that an opponent has one, but if they keep betting and raising as if they do, this may be a more significant element to consider than the fact that their chance of holding an ace went down when one flopped.
Kudos to you for having the guts to post a hand where you layed down a winner, pocket aces at that. Another reason why we all love you.
Gosh Andy, that's a pretty long call on the river...
What you say is true but if you have an overpair in this situation and are going to call twice anyway then raising on the turn and checking the river can be a good play. In this hand the BB had a good idea the 4 didn't help anyone.
"I folded. The river was: 5c. The board was: 5d3d3c4c5c. Both players checked. The big blind won the hand with the JsJh and the early player had the 6s6c. They had 8 collective outs to beat me with any Jack, any Six, or any Deuce so 34 cards win it for me and 8 cards lose it. My mistake cost me (34/42) x ($290) or $234 which is about 12 big bets."
And the sevens.
I didn't post to this before the results so I will keep my mouth shout, but I think you could gather what my opinion would be here.
Lets just look at the river. On the river, just to call (assuming a bet from BB and a call from the middle) you would have 16- to overcall. Thats pretty good odds. When you consider the turn, you must consider the hand as a draw only, because if you include your chance that the hand is good you must also expect to call on the river. This is very important. If you plan to fold on the river you cannot include the chance your hand is still good, unless account for the times the river is checked through when your hand is still good. It is of little use that the river is checked if your hand always loses the showdown here. (This may occur with an opponent who will continue to bet his weakest hands but will check some of the stronger ones).
I doubt any of the above makes any sense.
Good post again. Don't worry about this mistake if it is one. I have made folds like this one in the past and I am still kicking.
Regards.
An unrelated question Jim: When I see that I layed down a winner in a nice pot, I'll feel ill for close to a day. Does this type of thing bother you for any length of time at all?
I'm not Jim, but speaking for myself...
It only bothers me if when I review the hand I can identify an error, as Jim has done in this case. If the laydown was OK under the circumstances, I soon forget it.
Depending on the severity of the mistake, it can bother me for years. I look at it as a way of reinforcing learning.
Two things Don.
1. Never, ever show anyone your hand or let anyone know that you layed down a winner.
2. Yes, it really bothers me because it is what David Sklansky calls in the "Theory Of Poker" a mathematical catastrophe. It helps when I post it on the forum to see how others would approach this problem.
This may have been a major disaster but I'm not so sure it was a major blunder. Think back to how many times you have made a similar decision and been correct. It might be that this is the 1 in 20 that is going to happen but that still makes the call a loser in the long run.
10-20 online holdem... 1. Ac9c in cutoff. I raise, button calls, bb calls. Flop comes 10 7 6 rainbow with one club. I bet out button raises, bb folds, i call. Turn is 5 of club. I check he bets...should I raise my draws call or fold?
2. AdJd in late position. I raise preflop with 3 early limpers already, and everyone behind me folds. Limpers call. These players are pretty lose and have been calling preflop with crap hands...Flop comes J 6 x... First Limper bets out, second and 3rd call, I raise all call. Turn is a 6. Checked to me. I have a feeling someone has a 6, because they had to be calling with something with no draws out there, and there can't be 5 jacks in the deck right? But i bet it out anyway...Is this a mistake? Sure enough i get popped, one of the limper calls, I call. River a blank. Bet call call...Early limper shows 67s, 2nd limper shows 68s. Should i have thrown my hand away on the river...even with the $200+ pot? or should i have tossed it on the turn? or was i right in calling it down?
1. Looks like the button has at least a pair, and you'll need to catch to win. You easily have the odds to draw, so call and see what falls on the river. Play on the river could be tricky. Obviously you muck if a blank drops. If an ace falls, check and call; if you make your straight, check and call; if the flush makes, I think betting out is the play.
2. I think you knew you were dead in the water on the turn, but couldn't get rid of it. But, I think betting out is the play, with the intention of folding if you are raised (and with the cold caller this play is made even easier). If you don't bet, you may have to call the turn and the river, losing one extra big bet.
#1- Check/raising might be correct. The problem is that it might cost you 3 bets to find out if he's got a hand he can fold, because there are quite a few draws he may have himself which he can not fold for a check/raise on the turn. So I would say if he's a player who would release hands with a ten AND would not call you down with a hand like 99 or 87s, because of the now bloated pot, then check/raising might be correct.
#2- Did you consider just calling the flop? No doubt your raise creates equity while you probably hold the best hand, but... With all those players who called a bet in front of you, they are correct to take another card off when you raise. I like to sometimes just call in this spot with the intention of raising the turn when a blank falls. Playing in this manner, saves you money when the turn card beats you (a six now has to either bet or raise the turn since there is no gaurantee you'll bet). So you might even get off this hand with a minimum of 1 flop bet when the six comes, yet, collect many big bets when a blank falls.
Just sat down in an online $15-30 game.
I am in the big blind with black 8s. Everyone folds to the small blind who I do not know. He calls. I raise, and he calls the raise.
Flop comes Q 4 2 rainbow.
He checkraises me. What is your gameplan for the rest of the hand?
Results to follow... Puggy
The key here is he needs to be capable of making this play without a queen. Since you don't know this player, I don't think you're giving up too much by simply folding. If you knew differently, your game plan might be considerably different.
Duck
FOLD!?!?!?! You were kidding, right?
You have the best hand. Use his aggression against him. Call him down. You might want to pull the trigger with a raise on the river. But if you can't lay it down to a 3 bet, then just call the river.
If he checks at any point, bet.
Folding (except to a 3 bet on the river) is not an option.
Joe-
No, I wasn't kidding. After just sitting down in a game against a player I know nothing about, to be perfectly honest, I don't care whether he's got a queen or is making a play. This pot's not yet big enough to be meaningful. I don't want to call him down with 2 outs, be shown a queen, and have him now making thin value bets against me. In addition, there are 20 overcards that could fall on the turn which makes continuing against an unkown player difficult. I stand by what I said. It is not giving up too much to forfeit this one pot until you get a better line on his play.
At this point, the pot has 7 SBs in it. You can call all the way down for 5 SBs. Considering you probably have over an 80% chance of having the best hand makes folding insane. Short handed play is tons of fun and very profitable, but you sure can't go around dumping 2nd best pair heads-up.
I believe we basically agree that this hand should at least be continued to 4th street against typical players whom we've previously played against. But here's what I think is happening here. You are seeing me as weak/tight and I am seeing you as someone a little too concerned with posturing.
Your statment "you have the best hand" is only an assumption. Against certain players (and you can't be sure this player is not one of them), it can be a big assumption. I understand that chances are your opponent has missed the flop. But I'm sure you'd agree that these chances become at least a teeny bit less likely after a check/raise. If you are wrong and do not have the best hand, you are getting very much the worst of it. Not just for this hand, but for subsequent hands against this player as well. I already mentioned my problem with having my opponents think they can fire thin value bets at me, but there's another point which you might be missing. If I simply fold, my hand is not shown. Sure, I might fold the winner this one time, but no one is the wiser. Since I don't show down many hands, I also figure to pick up a line on his play before he does mine. This alone, can be enough reason to simply fold this unimportant pot in the limits I play. Maybe that's where we have a problem? I don't consider 7 small bets when I could be drawing dead to two outs, all that important.
Bottom line: In first time encounters against an unkown player (unless the pot is important), I tend to give credit before chips.
Duck,
I agree with Joe here that folding here is slightly insane. The SB could easily have absolutely nothing, or even just a 4. However, I do see your problem with playing on. When another overcard comes on the turn, and the SB bets again, and on the river, the same happens. Should you ever fold it now that the pot has grown a decent amount? Also, should you attempt a turn raise here? I'm not inclined to unless an A or K falls, in which case I might.
Here's what happened. The flop was Q 4 2 rainbow. The SB checkraised me. I called.
The turn comes a J. He bets. I called.
The river comes a 9 putting 3 diamonds on the board. If he bets here, I can only beat something like A4 or K4 (most players would raise with a small pocket pair from the SB so he likely doesn't have that). What should I do if he bets?
He checked. I checked. He showed down Q3 off and takes the pot.
Puggy
I would no doubt raise the turn (with the intention of checking it down on the river) and take it from there. If reraised, I would not consider folding (if you are inclined to fold to a turn reraise here, you're much better off flat calling against tough players) until the third overcard hits or the draw comes in on the river in which case you have a very, very tough decision if he bets again. Generally, you want to call if you make it to the river, but against a typical player a fold is maybe ok when that scary card hits.
Your play was certainly fine, though, you got off very cheaply in this particular case, as your opponent is a wuss.
You can't go around folding pairs just like that in the blind headsup game. I know, I know, sometimes the board simply looks desperate, but you are never very, very, very wrong to call the river with anything remotely reasonable against those online maniacs. They will call you a fish because you'll waste that last bet very often, but nobody will bother to count down that big pot you'll take down once in a while with your bare ace.
Aggressive and tenacious, there you have it, a recipe for headsup play. Abdul preached it eons ago.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
The hand presents several problems. First, against very aggressive players you need to call a lot when playing short handed. You also need to be willing to make some fourth street raises with hands that normally don't look so good against these very aggressive players. So at least to here Izmet is right.
But is your opponent a very aggressive player? He's an unknown player in an online $15-$30 game who called out of the small blind when everyone else has passed. Wouldn't a very aggressive player raise here? An exception might be if he held a big hand. So based on this, it looks like you are against a legitimate hand on the flop, so folding on the flop after being checked raised is probably correct since typical players at this limit usually require top pair to raise.
This is somewhat different from being in a very short handed game that attracts the super aggressive. If the game was three handed, now your typical player profile would probably be different.
By the way, when I say typical player profile I'm not saying that that is correct poker. In this spot middle pair or bottom pair has a fair amount of value and you should not check and call with it. But many players will do exactly that.
Wouldn't a very aggressive player raise here?
Eh, Mason, sometimes I get the feeling you disagree with Abdul or myself only because you want to.
I think of myself as an aggressive player. Yet, I WILL open limp in sb out of position with 65o, 54s, Q5o and similar weak hands. I will fire on the flop (or check-raise) if I catch a draw or a pair, anything reasonable. I will fire with Q5 and such regardless of the flop, assuming my hand is best (when opponent flat knuckled preflop), taking down that 2 small bets pot he is usually not interested in.
For balance (and deception), I will open limp with AA, AK and friends. Also, I will open-limp some medium offsuit aces (A6 to A9), because when an ace flops after I limp, I don't want them to be sure I don't have it.
In a two-player game, I will ALWAYS open-raise with position in sb on the button, no need to bother with limping when in position (we already discussed this on this forum, note that David disagreed).
This is just one way to balance preflop play, of course. I'm sure every tough player has his own methods of doing it (so Puggy could easily be against a no hand there). Bottom line is, don't be too quick to assume. Learn to play optimally against a generic tough opponent, THEN try to exploit the info your not-so-good opponents are leaking (and you better be sure of what you are doing). I think folding 88 headsup is a nyet-nyet.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
Izmet,
I'm not really that interested in how you (or Abadaba for that matter) play. What is being addressed is how an unknown player at $15-$30 might play. In general, they don't play, especially if the game is full, in the matter that you describe, and this has nothing to do with whether your balancing, hyper aggressiveness is correct or not when you are first in in the small blind.
My point is that short handed games do tend to attract the ultra-aggressive players. So with very little to go on the opponent in question is much more likely to play as you describe. But in a full game where everyone passes to the small blind he is much less likely to be as you describe, so the proper defense against the super aggressive is in my opinion not the best strategy.
In my experience, most of the players at this level need top pair to make that check raise. If that's the case making the type of plays that you describe is certainly wrong. Now, after you get to watch this guy in action for a while it may turn out that his tendencies are more towards the hyper aggressive, then you must make the switch. If it happens to be you or an Abadaba type, then the type of defense/take the initiative that you advocate is certainly correct.
Come on, come on. You said, and I quote:
Wouldn't a very aggressive player raise here?
So I gave you an example of a "very aggressive player", me, Izmet Fekali, who would NOT "raise here". If I went to great length to explain why, I apologize:
I'm not really that interested in how you (or Abadaba for that matter) play.
Now this was not nice. You want me to keep my mouth shut. I will try to grant you your wish, enjoy your forum.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
"I'm not really that interested in how you (or Abadaba for that matter) play."
Izmet-
I think all Mason was trying to say, is that how you or Abdul might play, is not necessarily relevant to this particular hand. Your posts here are important. I hope you're not serious.
Kevin
Izmet-
What the heck kind of games do you play in where opponents routinely 3-bet the turn, out of position, on a board of Q429 (3 diamonds), without being able to beat a pair of eights?!!
Gimme my blanky mommy- Izmet's friends play WAY too rough! (Looks like I'll be sucking my thumb here at 10-20 for a while longer).
Kevin
.
The board in Puggy's hand was Q42J with *two* diamonds, right?.
Anyway, don't forget we are talking the blind headsup game here (blind vs. blind) where both parties start with cheese and both parties know it, which makes for an interesting slugfest. If you start folding medium pairs on the turn, thin 3-betting becomes pretty much correct, wouldn't you agree? Your more observant opponents will soon learn to do it if they as much as smell you avoiding your turn dues (by Allah, I even see idiots *showing* their pairs before mucking on the turn, "I'm a good player, see me fold on you, I play you like a violin!").
You need to know your man well before you can afford raising the turn for information and then folding confidently when that information is gathered. Against tough players that info can easily be wrong, you *must* make it to the river with your pair against them (and against maniacs, of course). Your average Joe is probably foldable against, granted, but you are exploiting his weakness in this case and you must be careful doing it.
Puggy smugly avoided this dilemma by flat calling the turn with his pair. A perfectly nice rope-a-dope play that has some drawbacks (maybe the guy wanted to gather some info preparing to fold his A2 to a raise, or has picked up a flush draw with his 53s, or is simply confident his ace high or 64o is good), but has benefits too (your showing weakness might induce a river bluff and you get off cheap when already beat).
Just don't call turn and fold river (you better fold immediately then), that's about the worst thing you can do. Grit your teeth and don't get mad when shown a better hand, it will happen a lot. But a nice pot here and there that you snatch away from a thief makes all this trouble worthwhile.
To answer your question, you'll see stuff like this in $20-40 Paradise games. The mix of maniacal fish, tilting losers and *very* tough players coupled with the ease of click-splashing virtual chips can make your mouth open on showdowns.
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
I am not trying to say you played the hand poorly by calling it down. In fact, I would often raise the turn here with 88.
My only point was that with some players, the odds that 88 is best are greatly decreased after a check/raise (it's not out of the question for a sb to limp with a big pair here also). Because you do not yet know anything about this player folding (even a better hand) is not a disaster from a long term perspective. However, it would lead to long term calamity if this were the type of player who would only check/raise a queen or better and you continue to pour chips into the pot drawing at two outs. The only reason I kept replying to Joe Medwick, is his blanket statement of "you have the best hand and cannot fold!" Against a player who is more likely to check/raise top piar, this obviously is not true and you'll be betting very much the worst of it, by blindly calling with what may be an almost hopeless hand. There are also other considerations such as bad turn cards, and image issues. Certainly, you're not going to make these laydowns in the future unless his play warrants doing so. But by then, you'll have a better idea. btw- You do realize that your opponent missed a bet. He should've made you pay again on the river to see that your pocket eights were no good.
One last point: I believe there IS a difference between short handed play and short handed situations. I assumed this was a full ring game in which you found yourself in a short handed situation with the sb. Many people think this automatically calls for short handed game strategy. This is wrong.
Duck
Well, my first loss as the 10-20-40 game in over six months is in the books. I can't blame the cards, they were decent.
I'm still learning and still getting used to the mental aspect of the game, the indifference needed to go to the next level, but I now know what I can't do.
I can't play with a time constraint. When out the game with a friend who had to be home to his wife by a certain time, so we had to leave at a specific time.
I pushed way to hard. I felt I had little time to book a win and had to push any edge. I got burned. The A game wasn't there.
An example, called a late position raise from the SB with Q-10. Got two to the flush on the flop and bet it and raised it the whole way and gave up when it didn't come on the river.
Tried to slowplay KK and ran into 2 pair-twice. Bet AA with a KQJ board after I raised before the flop and got 4 callers. (lucked out with a T on that one) I was just ramming everything cause I felt like I had to. It is worst I have played in the last year, quite possibly the worst I have ever played.
When you are worried about winning a good amount in a short, specifc period of time you are doomed for failure and heartbreak, not to mention a dent in to the ole bankroll.
I find this to be true and have found that I have to be very careful not to play the same way when a game gets short. You must understand that when I am playing there is only ONE game...so a short game and time constraint become the same thing for me.
I have learned to over come that somewhat by being determined to tighten up in a short game.
you havn't had a losing session in six months!? that is absolutely incredible.
Your first losing session in 6 months?!? One of three things is happening here:
1.) You are the luckiest person in the world (it sure is tough playing those pocket aces 5 times an hour!)
2.) You haven't played in 6 months.
3.) You're lying to yourself.
Think about how difficult what you say you are doing is. The std deviation on limit games is about 12 - 14 BB an hour, depending on how the game is. This may even be higher in loose, wild games (i.e. Northern California mid-limits). Assuming that you make 1.5 BB an hour, which I highly doubt, there's no way in hell that you'd do what you say, unless one of the three conditions above is met. Think about it.
2 years ago i played 1 time a week at a home game for 44 strait weeks and had 2 losing sessions for 30$ and 90$ playing 3-6. Unlikly but possible.
Guys, I know it is hard to believe, but it is true. I admit, I did cash out for $60 less than I bought in for, but I kind of wrote that off to blinds and tokes. Other than that, it has been either break even or a decent size win.
The guys in La (that's Louisiana) don't know what a kicker is. Every player raises with two face cards and plays there two cards the same from any position. The "regulars" are about as easy to read as that letter 'E' on top of the chart.
That's why I'm anxious for my March-April trip to Mississippi and Vegas so I can see some decent competition, because these guys down here just don't get it. Tight with selective aggression gets the money, everytime.
The scary thing is, in my losing session that last about 7 hours, I had AA 3 times and they held up everytime. It isn't a matter of luck, it is the skill level and ability of the other people at the table.
Why don't y'all come on down to ole Cajun country and see the game you guys would dream about.
When I first started playing, I won seventeen straight times (home game).
I am in the cutoff with QQ. One player has called and I raise. The button calls and the big blind calls. The folp comes KQ10 rainbow. Big blind checks, I check bottom checks. The turn is a 4 which brings in a flush draw. Big blind checks, I bet, button raises, big blind folds. I reraise here. Button calls. The river is a K. I bet and button calls.
Please comment on the play of the hand.
Results later in the day.
.
I think I would have bet the flop. Your hand is pretty well disguised, and I don't think you can make a whole lot from this hand, but you can lose a lot against only 2 opponents.
However, the only thing you are afraid of is a lone J, ao checking isn't horrible. But on the same note, if an A or 9 comes and your opponents won't call with out a J, leaving you with nothing.
I would have basically played this fast and pray somebody had AK or KJ. But other than that, the play was pretty straight forward.
1. KQ gets a free card on the flop. 2. ditto KT. 3. ditto any J. 4. This kind of flop draws calls like flies. Why slowplay? If you build this pot you protect it also, but you have a hand strong enough to do that IMHO.
Lemme guess. Button had AJ and was also sandbagging.
The results were that I had Queens full and the button had AKs. The turn did bring in the flush draw and the river "made" his hand. He did not raise on the river and I took down the pot.
In hindsight I belive that slow playing was the wrong way to play the hand. I play in this game and routinely play hands straight forward and I was trying to show the table something different. The real problem with this strategy was the fact that the button player doesnt routinely play in the game....not to mention allowing some big draws to come about.
Thanks for everyone's comments
In a typical game I would almost always bet the flop and hope I got raised. Then, depending on the position of the raiser and the other callers, I will either re-raise or smooth call and maybe try to get in a check-raise on the turn.
I agree that this hand should not have been slowplayed because (1) the flop could have easily hit your opponents, and you will get a lot of action, (2) it is unlikely that the next card would make a second best hand, and (3) you are giving a free card to possible straight draws and backdoor flush draws. In fact, if an A, J or 9 comes on the turn, you might be afraid that you are behind.
If the purposes of slowplaying on the flop are to:
1)Induce bluffs 2)"Let them catch up" with a hand they would have folded on the flop but now play because they caught something on the turn
then:
1) You wont get many bluffs with a flop like that and a preflop raise. 2) What the heck can they catch up with that they wouldn't have played with on the flop anyway?
Bad slowplay, IMO.
Tommy
You're nuts checking the flop here, you'll always get action on a board like that. Other than that your play is fine. I don't understand the button's play at all though, guess I'll have to read results.
Chris
15/30 full game at the Bellagio. I was the button. New player (NP) posted on cutoff seat.
All players fold to NP who checks. I raise and both blinds fold. NP calls.
Flop comes A,2,5 rainbow. NP bets. I raised, NP three bets, I four bet, NP five bets, I six bet, NP calls.
Turn comes a King. NP bets, I raised, NP calls.
River card is a 3. NP checks, I bet, NP calls.
Hands and results to follow later.
Looks like you have AA and NP has A2 or A5
Tony,
You're correct. NP had A2 offsuit and I had a pair of 5's.
How is it possible to say if you were too aggressive if you don't tell us what you were holding? If you had 9-4 you overplayed it just a bit; if you had a set or flopped a str8 I think you played it fine.
Winger,
Sorry. I had a pair of 5's and NP had A,2 offsuit.
-Overheard at the tables this week.
It rains in Vegas four times a year. I came to Vegas to get away from bad weather.
If you can't convince them, confuse them.
When choosing between two evils, I always like to try the one I've never tried before. " - Mae West (1892-1980)
Top 19 things not to say to a cop.
1. I can't reach my license unless you hold my beer.
2. Sorry, I didn't realize that my radar detector wasn't on.
3. Aren't you the guy from the village people?
4. Hey you must have been going 125 mph just to keep up with me.
5. I thought you had to be in good physical condition to be a cop.
6. Bad cop! No donut!
7. You're gonna check the trunk, aren't you?
8. I was going to be a cop, really, but I decided to finish high school.
9. I pay your salary.
10. That's terrific, the last guy only gave me a warning also.
11. Is that a 9mm? It's nothing compared to this .44 magnum!
12. What do you mean, have I been drinking? You're a trained specialist.
13. Do you know why you pulled me over? Good, at least one of us does.
14. That gut doesn't inspire too much confidence, bet I can outrun you.
15. Didn't I see you get your ass kicked on Cops?
16. Is it true people become cops because they are too dumb to work at McDonalds?
17. I was trying to keep up with traffic.
18. Yes, I know there are no other cars around-that's how they are far ahead of me.
19. Well, when I reached down to pick up my bag of crack, my gun fell off my lap and got lodged between the brake pedal and gas pedal, forcing me to speed out of control.
Those who make perfect laydowns just give up to much. Most observant opponents who notice this will eat your lunch. They will bluff with four card straights and flushes. You are getting odds for not folding in most cases.
Those opponents who are making most of the money are not doing what you are doing.
This week is more of a story but a tip. But for those who wish to play higher take heed.
Early in my career I did not have the experience that I now possess. When learning and playing the small limits I figured out the tighter you played the better I would be. I read the Sklanskys, Malmouths and the Brunsons and all the other books out there. When I could not get a book that was out of print I had a used book store buy them at a premium after they scoured the world. I used these books as guidelines for starting hands and decided tight and aggressive was the way to go. More like tight and tight. Players who knew me back then said I was so tight at that time they wondered how I could make money. But the players I was playing against played so bad the tight is all I needed.
I remember playing hold-em at the Peppermill Casino in Reno Nevada with a meager two thousand dollar bankroll. I had 3 policies in my game back then play tight, do not pay off any bets with bad kickers such as A7s when and ace falls when there is any type of heat and do not pay off check raises on the turn unless you have a big kicker. Very simple but it worked for me and I believe it still will work for you. Playing at this level not to many players have to many moves and the volume in the pots will allow you to play tight. People usually play straight ahead not trying to figure out what you had and how it hurts there hand. This is poker fun poker as you move up it gets more serious a lot more serious. Players at this level are often heard to say. If I only had the bankroll I would play 500 and 1000 and beat the best players in the world. I am sorry I laugh at this every time I hear this. First of all you will get slaughtered and in short order you would lose you entire bankroll. You have to understand that the reason why you are playing 3-6 is because you do not have the ability at this moment to rise to a higher level. Each level is different and at each level different attributes are needed to beat the game. You have no chance playing against the best and as you move up levels you will slowly acquire the skills that are needed. A 3-6 player just does not know the psychological warfare that is required to play at the highest level of poker. Many players break down under the strain and fall back to a level where they feel comfortable. Many players just break period and never are able to play poker again. Some top players become drug addicts and alcoholics because the pressure is just to great. This is poker at the highest level.
Playing 10-20 requires more skill as the players are better. They have knowledge of ranking of starting hands, odds and a understanding of what and opponent might be playing. The game still proceeds straight forward with and occasional check raise thrown in for good measure. Players start to bluff every so often. Yes you still have the loose ones but they are somewhat better players. The game is more serious. Very few plays are made. You will be spending some time here so take head an try to figure out what is going on. Copy long time players who are winners and are respected by other good players. You will start to see many winning styles of play. Tight and aggressive will be used by most players.
As you move up to 20-40 and 30-60 players begin to play at a different level. Players who just use the 3-6 and the 10-20 style will not survive. The game has changed. Players at this level know all the odds, strategies and understand what the opponent might be playing. They play the player, they are more aggressive, they are able to put players on hands and make plays on what the opponent. Psychological warfare has just started at this level. Pressure is the name of the game. No free cards will be given unless a play is going to be made or the player has nothing. Play at this level will require you to have a calling strategy for raises. The opponents you play against when you are raised will become of prime importance. Having no strategies for calling raises will make you call raises to liberally or fold to often costing you a fortune.
Moving up to higher levels of play players will be able to read your hand read any tells that you have. Players at this level will be very tricky and be willing to check raise you with nothing. They begin to see the whole hand as a package and as each card is turned over all the tendrils that lead off and will make sequenced mathematically correct plays. They will put you on a hand more quickly and will not pay you off on the river just to see your hand. Understand that calling a large bet on the river allows you to play two small bet hands before the flop they will fold correctly. These players will keep the pressure up when they feel they have any type of edge. Rivers will be bet only if they feel the other opponent will call with a weaker hand or there is a possibility of losing the pot to a check raise. Game selection becomes of prime importance with shorthanded play becoming a close second.
Past the intermediate you get to the players of the 500-1000 level or higher. At this level you find the elite of the poker world. Players at this level make between one and three million dollars a year. These players play the game as if it were chess. Knowing all the strategies, odds, short handed plays, tells, game selection and psychological ploys. Decisions made at this level are accurate and no room for error will be tolerated. They design plays against particular opponents hoping that one or two players will break mentally for a given time in order to be able to reap some reward. In their games only one average player is all that they require to make a a living. Players at this level usually have very high IQ's and very good memories. All strategies are protected in order for them to maintain there edge. Psychological warfare is at its highest level. At the highest level you must play all games well as games at this level are combination games. Combination games contain seven stud, omaha, hold-em along with a myriad of other types of games. People at this level are truly all around games players.
-Hosh is still looking for any things heard at the table any funny poker jokes. An suggestion on subjects you would like me to discuss.
Please email me at Hosh115@aol.com
Play well and have fun!
Hosh,
Thanks for sharing the different levels (worlds) of the game.
How deep and long can the variance be for the highest limit, best players, in the cash games?
Bob
Variance goes up as the competition get a lot tougher. It is not unheard of for a player to go on a losing streak for a year. Just because it has not happened to you does not mean it won't. Vince you look a little like a policeman. David would agree.
Great post Hosh. By the way I e-mailed the beginning to the Fratenal Order of Police with your e-mail address. You should be hearing from them shortly.
I would like to add or clarify one point to this and I hope that I can do so without taking something away from your really great post. A key to moving up in limits is "comfort". The comfort I speak of is the players attitude towards the stakes or money he is gambling. You mention "high" stakes gamblers becoming "drug" users because of the pressure. If the pressure is caused by the money being wagered then these players are playing out of there comfort zone and should not have been up there in the first place regardless of their skill level. If the pressure is due to another reason, maybe the need to succeed, then they should be sitting down with the likes of John Feeney to get over their glory hunting ways. Moving up in limits should be done with a calculating mind that ensures one has the necessary edge in all aspects of the game especially the "comfort" part. Of course taking a shot now and then can be a stimulating experience but should also be done with lots of forthought.
Vince
P.S. Say hello to Nita!
Typically open, aggressive Saturday 20-40 game at Bettendorf. I'm in cutoff with AKd. It's preflopped raised and I just call . It's three bet by the button, the fourth person in the pot. We get both blinds in for six-way action.
The flop is Jd 9c 4d. IT is bet out by SB ,called by BB and two others, and raised by me. All but one call.
Turn is 5d. Checked to me, I bet out, sb and person to my right call. $640 in the pot.
River is 4s. Sb checks, person to my right bets out.I call, crying like a cold infant. Even though i won (she had QTd), wasn't I a distinct underdog at that point? If I am playing me, I would put me on nut diamonds without batting an eyelash. The player sitting opposite me said that when player bet out I looked like my dog had just died.
so you're scared because the board paired eh? usually i would be too, but look at the situation. if you mean you have AdKd, you have the nut flush. You are bet into from the person on your right who showed no aggression on the flop with two diamonds. wouldn't she have raised with a set in this situation? IMO i think most people would make this play with a flush draw out. so when she bets into you, pop her one and make 40 more bucks. it would have been a different story had she raised the flop though.
First of all let me explain that I play in the game that Bruce is discussing. I am reasonably certain I was playing with him Saturday...though not when this happened. Bruce you were the six or seven seat I believe.
Now given this, I would NOT have raised here for several reasons. First, the woman that bet out will not bet her hands. She is extremely tight in general, though she will over protect her blinds in a big pot situation.
Second, and far more importantly and David points out in the post below, the proper move is to call. With a large pot like this, the player behind our hero is almost certain to call...especially in that game. Therefore, you gain the same amount of money without the additional risk of $40 dollars. This is because the person calling behind our hero is unlikely to call $80 cold.
BTW, I was in the 1 seat when the game began, Bruce.
Yes indeed, that was me in seat 7, and the tightness of that lady was part of the scare.
Hope to see you down the road.
Since the proper play with someone behind you is to just call on the river as long as your chances of winning are anywhere from about 5% to 80% there is no need to try too hard to figure out her hand.
you may be a big underdog, but not by more than 680-40
On Saturday I had my first real experience of what a typical (maybe even tough) middle limit game was like. I sat down in the 20-40 game at the Yellowhead in Edmonton. I have most of my experience at 3-6 and 5-10 but for recently I was in a location where I played 20-40 (half holdem, half Omaha) and I was able to build my bankroll up a bit. The 20-40 game was very similar to a 3-6 or 5-10 game as far as skill level was concerned, the only real difference was the stakes. Thus I was able to beat this game for a fairly significant profit.
The game on Saturday was a lot different. The overall quality of the players was vastly superior to what I was used to. There was a lot more raising before the flop (probably 50% of the hands or more were raised pre-flop) and blind stealing was a strategy that was used by most players. In the games I am used to playing in blind stealing is almost impossible since there are almost four or five players seeing the flop every hand.
I usually play a fairly tight poker game and I think that I have a pretty good grasp of pre-flop hand selection. In the games I am used to I limp often and play suited connectors often. An UTG limp with Axs is a profitable play (at least in my opinion and experience). This game was obviously different and I adjusted my pre-flop play accordingly (at least I think so). Another thing that I noticed was that there are more opportunities for correct semi-bluff situations because the bluff aspect of the play actually has merit. Thus, I believe that the advanced plays in HPFAP will actually work in this game, which means I need to reread HPFAP and get a very thorough understanding of this text.
Here are a few hands I played that I would like some comments on:
Hand #1 UTG limps in (he is one of the poorer players at the table, but still better than most 3-6 players), another player limps in from early position, and I limp in from the button with QTo. Is this a correct limp? Looking back I don’t believe it is. I believe that I am putting myself in a dominated situation and for this reason I think I need to readjust my pre-flop play for this style of game. Both the blinds call. Five players see the flop, with $100 in the pot.
Flop: T 6 3 rainbow. Blinds check, UTG bets, early player calls and I raise with top pair Queen kicker. Too aggressive? I can’t imagine, but let me know. The blinds fold and the other two players call. Three players see the turn with $280 in the pot.
Turn: 7. Both players check to me, I bet and UTG calls. Two players see the river with $360 in the pot.
River: Jack. UTG checks and I check it down. He shows me ATo. I think my only real mistake was playing QTo against two early position limpers. Do you guys agree? When should I be playing hands like KTo, QTo, QJo, etc., in this type of game?
Hand #2 I’m three from the BB, everyone folds to me with Kd Jd and I raise. Most of the time I limp with this hand, but because the game was much tighter than I am used to I raised it because I thought there was a decent chance to get up against just the blinds. Next player folds, next two call and the BB call. Five players see the flop with $170 in the pot.
Flop: Ad 7c 3s. The blind checks, I see one of the players to my left is going to muck so I bet. Next player calls and everyone else folds. Two players see the turn with $210 in the pot. At this point I’m ready to slow down and concede the pot because I think my opponent must have an Ace or an under pair to the Ace but over pair to the seven, I don’t want to dump any more money into this pot with no hand and no draw.
Turn: 9d. OK, now I have a flush draw and there is still the possibility my opponent was just looking me up to see if I would slow down on the turn so he could steal the pot. I semi-bluff bet again. Too aggressive? Who would check/call here? He calls me. Two players for the river with $290 in the pot.
River: Td. Yes!!! I runner runner the nuts!!! I bet, my opponent raises me and I reraise and which point my opponent says “I only have ten of that”. Pot is now $470. I flip over my nut flush and he almost chokes as he flips over pocket aces and shows the table his top set. I think I got some good advertising on this hand and it also reinforces how bad it can be to slowplay a hand. Did I really play the hand that poorly? Preflop? Flop? Turn?
Hand #3 Early player limps, two middle players limp and the small bind limps in. I have KQo in the BB. $100 in the pot and five players.
Flop: K 9 4 rainbow with one heart. I bet out and two players call. $160 in the pot and 4 players.
Turn: Ah. Uh oh, a scare card. What should I do? I thought AK would have raised at some point in the hand prior to this, and I didn’t think anyone would stick around to catch one over card so the only hand that scared me was an A9s. Since I had only two opponents and I didn’t want to religuish control of the pot I bet out (better to be a better than be a caller?), prepared to lay my hand down to a raise since it would indicate I was likely beat. Is this a good bet? Would it be a correct laydown? Two players call. $280 in the pot and 3 players.
River: Jh. Ok, two callers on the turn, with no obvious draws, except the flush, and an Ace on board. I’m going to check and call at this point. Someone may have a weaker King and bet out trying to steal, someone may have hit their kicker and I don’t want to have to call a raise, someone may have backdoored a flush and I don’t want to call a raise, and I may be beat by the Ace. I check, the next player bets, the other guy folds and I call. $360 in the pot. The early position player shows me Kh Th for the back door nut flush. Did I play my hand wrong on any street or is this just a beat? The hand felt somehow different sitting at this table with this lineup, compared to sitting at a 3-6 table. I don’t see how I made a mistake, but I don’t think my opponent made one either except not raising me on the flop or turn. What do you guys think?
Hand #4 Early limper, middle limper, late limper, small blind limps and I have KQo in the BB again. $100 in the pot and five players.
Flop: K Q 3 with two diamonds. SB checks and I bet out not wanting to risk giving a free card. Should I have gone for a check raise here? Early limper and middle limper call. Three player and $160 in the pot.
Turn: 9. Can’t be afraid of every scare card so I bet out again. Early limper folds and middle limper calls. $240 in the pot and two players.
River: Td. Shit. Diamonds made it and any Jack is a straight. Scary board. But could my opponent have a Jack? I think it is unlikely. Diamonds are likely. I check and call. Who would check fold? Who would bet out? My opponent shows me A9d for the nut flush. I’m concerned with the river play. I really didn’t have too good of a read on his hand other than a possible diamond draw but can I lay it down that easy? Let me know.
Hand #5
Obvious steal raise from the button. I have Ks Js in the BB and call. Should I have reraised? Two players and $90 in the pot.
Flop. Ts 6s 3d. I check, he bets and I check raise him with my two overcards and flush draw. He thinks for a minute and calls. Is this too aggressive? Two players in the pot and $170.
Turn. 9c. I bet. I have the initiative, two overcards, the flush draw and I picked up a gutshot draw. He pauses and calls. Am I too aggressive or what? $250 in the pot.
River. 2h. Shit, I missed everything, but he didn’t seem to happy with is hand and the pot is getting a decent size so I bet out hoping to win on my bluff. He calls me and I show him my Ks Js (since I was the better I thought I was obligated to show my hand first and I think those are the rules here in Edmonton) he shows me 5d 6d. I watched this player closely over the next few hours (he had only been at the table for about an hour before this hand but he had shown some moves and some good play, I considered him to be a solid player at this point) and my respect for this player went up. At the end of the night I was talking to him and I realized that he is a very strong player. We discussed this hand and he said he had a good read on my play and he didn’t think I had any of the small cards on board. He thought maybe I had an overpair or a set but he thought it most likely that he was best. He also told me that he thought I played the hand perfectly but he just had a read on me. I guess I was just outplayed on this hand, what do you guys think of my play?
Well this was an awfully long post, but I needed to straighten out my head and get some feed back on my play. I dumped some money that night and these are some of the key hands I played (I also missed a couple of draws which contributed to my loss). I want to see what you guys think. There are a couple of other hands I will post about later, but I think this is already too long. I’m not sure why I wrote a lot of this. The night was an interesting experience for me and I wanted to share my experiences and hopefully learn something about these games from you more experienced players. I will try it again later and hopefully I can book a win. I didn’t feel like I was leaking chips but I hope to plug any leaks that may exist.
Doesn't seem that tough to me. I will agree that it is typical. Too many flop callers against you, since it didn't seem you were betting into full fields with nothing.
I don't have time to comment on the hands, but I will say hand reading and the psychological aspect of poker becomes important at 20-40.
Yes, the hands I indicate in the above post were mostly multi-way, but in general most pots were played with two or three players in them. With the occasional multiway pot.
I think you played these well.Except....calling a board with 3 to a flush AND 4 to a straight is wrong without either unless you have a read on the bettor. On the blind steal hand you must figure that if he called the turn he is going to call the river. calling QT on the button is ok but you were lucky the AT didn't reraise you(unless he was good and rope-a-doped you). Would you be good enough to release it? if not then you can't play it. You already know you lucked out vs. the guy with AAA
Seems like a decent table to me. you got a fair amount of action on your hands. I can't respond to all the hands but I will say in general that you should work on your hand reading skills. Many times you have to pay off in limit poker on the river; it's a bad spot to make good laydowns. And it looks like you were stuck in this situation several times.
The last hand interested me though and I'll tell you how I handle this type of player. When he stops to think on your raise he likely has a pair and is trying to determine if it's good enough. I'll then check the turn and if he bets raise again. Now I'm indicating a strong hand and he is unlikely to call with an underpair. It's a strategy that can be quite successful if not overused.
Really I like the vast majority of your plays.
Hand#1 : you are right you probably shouldn't limp in third in middle position with TQo. I would need one more limper before me and a later position.
You played the hand fine. Against an agressive player I would bet the river. UTG should have played his hand more agressively.
Hand#2 : I don't mind your bet on the flop. A check would not be bad either. The two calls preflop and on the flop from your immediate right are two strong actions and you need to analyze those plays. I would have hard time to refrain from betting the turn but if the player is good then he can only have a monster. I might be result oriented on this one. I would always bet against an average player (to make him fold a 7 or a middle pair) and check against a calling station. Hand#3 : fine play. Notice that it is extremly rare a weaker king and even a jack would bet here to steal because he would be very happy with a showdown. However you are right someone might bet here a 9 or a 4, sure losers.
Hand#4 : fine.
Hand#5 : fine. How can you ask if it is too agressive? It is the minimum of agression you must have on this hand. Against a tenacious but capable of folding player you might think about putting pressure on the turn (check-calling then trying a check-raise, check-calling then betting with the intention of three betting...)
Think about this: Maybe he's just like the average crappy low limit players who tries a steal, catches a pair, meets a player who know how to raise, and just call all way out of curiosity.
"He had a good read on you, and didn't think you had any of the low cards on the board." I've heard the biggest low-limit suckers I can think of say similar things. It's almost a cliche how some LL players (particularly loose-aggressive ones who can't lay down a pair, but wins a bit) will call a solid player if they've first tried to steal his blind, then get raised after THEY have catched something (anything).
lars
#1 ; QToff terrible limp .You have what could be a good 2nd best hand . You should raise KTo,QJo , QTo , ATo , A9o when your in a late position and no body elese is in the hand or there is one limper which is a calling station . #2 ; Bad raise preflop , that hand better play multiway , his flat call will usually annonce Ace-medium kicker like AJsuited . His slow play was correct , But I would raise the turn , but any way , poor guy . #3 well play #4 I'm not sure if the board was big enough to call but he could have KJ . #5 Could to check raise the flop just to bad you have hit nothing and he has never believes you .
Hand #1: Yes, your only mistake was playing QTo in the first place.
Hand #2: Your play was fine apart from the preflop raise. IMO you should just call. If the game is tough enough that you are always going to be isolated and destroyed, you could even fold the hand in this position. Or find a new game. Meanwhile, he played his aces horribly. Had one player already cold called when the aces cold called? If so that's terrible play. Your other option in this hand was to check and fold the flop, but since you caught a tell on one of the players, a bet is fine.
Hand #3: I would have tried to check-raise the flop, but other than that your play is fine. Bet the turn and probably fold to a raise, check-call the river. Note that KThh would probably have scared you off your hand even if he didnt make his flush, by raising on the turn. Mistake by him.
Hand #4: In the do's and don'ts of slowplaying (a fine article) Izmet Fekali gave the following rule, which was given to him by Abdul Jalib: Don't slowplay with two broadway cards on the flop. You'll get action. The two diamonds make it not even close. Just bet it as hard as you can. You can't avoid the extra bet on the river against tough players. Just toss in the bet and accept you're probably beaten.
Hand #5: Whether or not you reraise from the BB depends on the player. Aggressive and loose or a weak player? If you can force him off his hand when rags flop, reraise. Otherwise call and prepare to rope-a-dope when you hit your pair. Post-flop your play was fine, but you ran into a strong player.
Sounds like you played fine, just remember not to play QTo in future.
Chris
Lesson well learned with QTo. Like I said, I am more used to low limit "style" games, even played at higher stakes. QTo doesn't play terribly in the low limit game in this same situation, but maybe I haven't played it enough. I know I WON'T be making the same mistake with it in the Edmonton game.
Hand #2, I got overzealous with the KJs. I should have limped and then check folded on the flop, unless Aces slowplayed them in this situation as well, and then... I drag the pot anyways. He was the first player to smooth call my raise, but if he had reraised I'm sure he would have been able to isolate me and take the pot. Poorly played hand by him, in my opinion.
Hand#3, when he showed me his KhTh, my first thought was "Wow, that semi-bluff turn raise of S&M's would have been perfect for this guy in this situation, good thing he doesn't know about it."
Hand #5, he was a strong player. Not sure how he would react to a 3 bet preflop, I never saw anyone try it against him in this situation (before I moved into the seat to the left of him, and he hadn't attacked my blinds yet, although I noticed him trying to convince himself twice).
Thanks for all the great posts. I think I may enjoy this game. I will be able to hone my skills and drastically improve my game, as long as I am able to keep my head above water. I do need to improve my hand reading skills, but in low limits games everything is a little more cut and dried and I never developed this skill as much as I should have (besides who can read hands against six opponents and four guys on the turn in a pot? hehe)
Another thing, I saw many opportunities to apply the some of the strategies that S&M write about. Strategies that I saw little application for in the low limit style games. I'm sure I will be thanking them for these strategies as soon as I understand the nuances of how to apply them.
I just sit down in PP 10-20 online game in the BB. I get dealt A6o in the bb. 6 limpers I check.
The flop comes 6 6 6... I'm shocked. I check, and its checked around. Turn comes Q. UTG bets, next player calls everyone else folds. I raise here, UTG folds, and next palyer calls. River jack I win pot. But should I have risked waiting for the river to check raise? Stupid question i know, just curious...
You should have bet out. Then, no one will put you on quads and hopefully you can bend over pocket sevens or something.
I would have probably just called the turn and then bet the river. When you checkraise the turn, you are just screaming 6, and you might lose both of your opponents. I wouldn't risk a checkraise on the end; both opponents might be too scared to bet.
Betting the flop would be a bad idea; you want to give your opponents a chance to fill up.
Sklansky mentions that if you have the absolute nuts (e.g., quads,) then you should bet in the hopes that someone else has or can make a great hand as well and will play back at you. His example is of a friend who flopped a straight flush and slowplayed it...as did the guy who had the Ace-high flush. I had a hand like yours recently...I had K9, and the flop came 2 2 2. One guy bet, and a few of us called...no doubt trying to pair our overcards and fill up. Sure enough, the turn was a King, and it cost me a LOT of money when the original bettor on the flop showed me the deuce. Everyone is expecting the quads holder to slowplay...betting out is a nice way to throw them off. When the flop comes low, like 6 6 6 or 2 2 2, many players will rationalize that there's no way someone could have the quads. The overcard players will almost always stick around, trying to pair up. The overpair players will probably raise you, and you can do what you like...call or reraise.
Scott
I assume that the purpose of this post is to find out how to make the most money out of the hand. I think this largely depends on your position and the type of players on your table.
I actually had a very similar situation happen to me recently, where I had J10 in the BB and flopped quad 10s. I checked, someone bet, late position player called, and I called. On the turn, I checked again. The original bettor bet again, late player called, and then I decided to raise because I felt that these guys were already half stuck now. The first guy called and the other guy folded. On the river, I bet and the guy called with a medium pocket pair.
My feeling is that you need other people to bet this hand for you and pray for multiple callers. Once I realized that there were people who were semi-pot stuck, I felt that a raise was a good move. If they are unable to lay down their full houses, then you've effectively trapped them for an extra bet as they will call your raise on the turn and bet on the flop.
In late position, I like to slow play to the max. One time, I flopped quads (with the board showing 3 of the same cards) and was on the button. Everyone (including myself) checked the flop AND turn. On the river, someone bet, another raised, and I 3-bet. If my memory serves me correctly, I had at least 2 callers there. I was fairly sure that if I had bet the flop or turn, they would have folded because they didn't make anything yet (the river ended up pairing their big face cards).
Any other thoughts on how to maximize when you flop quads when 3 of the same cards flop?
Wow, good advice! I would say that there is no definite answer, just because this question depends on how you have been perceived as playing and how your opponents have been playing. Personally, I think if there is a raise before you, you check and call all the way to the river and then raise. If there is no raises before you, I would say bet it all the way making your opponent think you have overcards or are just bluffing it the whole way.
My two cents :)
EnderFFX
While looking through old r.g.p. threads, I found an interesting post by Daniel Negreanu. In it he says that if you bet top pair and get raised by what you think is a flush draw, you should re-raise. He says that "playing the hand by calling and then betting out on the turn doesn't flow at all. It looks goofy, and it's also the weaker choice. So a 2 of clubs hits the turn and you bet again? Are you saying the 2 helped you?"
His advice is this: "If you are going to bet the turn no matter what, take last action on the flop. Otherwise you are playing the hand half aggressive/half passive. Go all out or put on the brakes!"
This advice seems to contradict David Sklansky's advice on p. 114 of The Theory of Poker. In the section titled "Calling a Possible Bet On the Come", Sklansky states: "...it is usually a mistake to raise with a good but not great hand when you think your opponent--particularly a very tough opponent--has bet or raised on the come for a flush or a straight." He goes on to say: "However, when you call an opponent who you think is on the come, you usually do so with the intention of betting right out on the next round any time that opponent draws a blank card that would not make his hand if he was in fact on the come."
What am I missing?
Thanks, Mike Watson
Of course it can be mathematically correct to call then come out betting. You are either against a flush draw ar a made hand that beats you. The combining probabilities of those holdings knowing that the flush draw might improve in two cards makes a reraise on the flop a -EV action. Now on the turn the flush draw is less likely to improve and a bet becomes a +EV action. The less likely he has a made hand that beats you the less likely you should just call the flop.
The problem is that you give your hand away : you say I have a good but not great hand. So be prepared to be raised on the turn against a tough opponent. So against this kind of opponent and opponent's likely holdings do not always take the best mathematical EV path on the flop. For example, if your hand is not at all a through ticket then it might be better to reraise the flop even if it is not a +EV action and release safely on the turn if reraised. Conversely with a great hand against this kind of opponent you might call the flop and bet the turn to be raised with a draw...
The problem arises when your tough opponent makes it four bets on the flop. I know a lot of players who will do this, particularly if they have an overcard or two with their flush or straight draw. If your plan is to go to the river (unless the board gets really scary), then I don't think there's a problem. AQ with a Q 7 6 board comes to mind. If your top pair hand is weaker and you're trying to find out where you're at on the cheap street, three betting won't work against an aggressive player.
IMO, the best answer to this fairly standard situation--after all, you can get top kicker/top pair in the blinds just as easily as you can anywhere else--is to vary your response to the initial raise. If you automatically reraise, the player who flops a set or two pair can have his way with you; he can slow play you and raise you on the turn, he can make it four bets and beat you all the way down to the river.
Agreed that variance is best, with the deciding factor (for me) being the likelihood of getting four-bet by a draw. The more likely the four bet, the more likely I am to just call the flop raise. I reraise the flop about 80% of the time. I think the long-range image results from frequently three-betting prevents some players from playing hard on the flop with a draw and position.
"...it is usually a mistake to raise with a good but not great hand when you think your opponent--particularly a very tough opponent--has bet or raised on the come for a flush or a straight."
Sklansky is correct and to a somewhat lesser degree so is Negreanu. Both plays are valid options. The trick is knowing when to do one or the other. Sklansky very wisely qualifies his remarks with "usually a mistake" and "particurarly against a very tough opponent". Negreanu makes a blanket statement and in that sense he is not totally correct. So the question is really when do you reraise the possible flush draw and when do you call. Or more precisely how do you play in these situations. The answer is that experience and knowledge of your opponent are your best guide. You must be alert to the situation, who your opponent is and his playing tendencies. Against weak players that will automatically raise on drawing hands to try and get a free card it is correct to reraise and get as much money in the pot as possible. Against a great player like me you must move cautiously. That is the truth and it is undisputed.
Vince
Granted, both statements are correct at times, but can it be that the reason for Daniel's blanket statement stems from his tournament play? From what I understand about tournament play, the "correct" play may be the lower EV one if it makes it more likely that you'll win the pot. In general, I think aggression is the key here, and is what Daniel is exhibiting. In a live game, the same aggression is called for at times, but may not be the blanket strategy that you want to employ.
No. Daniel is not incorrect. In fact if Sklansky ever answers this thread he will clarify my point that it is sometimes correct to reraise the possible draw on the flop. There are reasons for this beyond what I have mentioned. One is that a weak player will respond predictably. That is he will just call and then call your turn bet or bet a flush if arrives. Information gathering against the right opponent is a prime reason to reraise in the manner Daniel has described. A reraise can cause a weak player to become confused and make another mistake later on. There are more reasons but I will let Sklansky elaborate. After all he made that qualified statement in his book I didn't.
vince
*
The way of Sklansky is when your not sure if he's on a flush draw and your headzup with a could player . There is an exemple . You have KQoff in the blind , flop come 2h-7c-Qc .You bet , and a good player who know that your a good player raise you . What he has ? AQ , KQ , QdJd ? but it could be Ac9c . Your not sure . 3s on the turn , and you bet . By that way you don't give him a river for free in case he has flush draw , and he will rarelly raise you . If he has AQ , he will usually call you hoping that you don't have a hand like Q3 (your in the blind ) . If he raise on the turn after your bet ; fold ; he has 77 . I don't think that he would raise AQ at this point . I think that the way of Sklansky is better headzup with a good player , and the aggressive way ( make it 3 bet on the flop ) is better headzup vs a loose player who could have a weak QToff .
This hand came up last month.It is the exact application of this posted question.10-20 full table.
Good Player limps UTG 2 more callers, I call with A6c 2 off button, BB checks.pot = 5 small bets
flop=6d,4d,2c
UTG bets,1st limper calls,I raise others fold,UTG reraises,limper drops,I cap it.pot =14 small bets
turn =9h
I bet out,UTG raises,I call Pot=22 big bets
river=6s
He checks,I bet,he calls. I win I know UTG has high stds to come in this position.I put him on ATd,QJd,JTd,88,77. I leaned toward the dia draw so I felt it necessary to make him pay.When he raised the turn I thought I was beat but called anyway because he is very tricky and could be still following up on his draw.Luckily I spiked my 6 on the river and he hurled his KK across the table mumbling.I guess he was going for the limp/reraise pre-flop
Real moral of this post is: don't limp with your kings.
The real moral of the post is: limp with kings, eliminate the field on the flop and trap a pair of sixes for a billion bets.
Yep, he had me trapped like a rat. So maybe we shouldn't always make em pay for a draw if were not sure as DS says.
If he is a good player, his re-raise on the flop should have told you he wasn't drawing. Good players with flush draws dont like to make limpers pay 2 bets cold. It runs away their customers. Not to mention the free play don't work if he doesn't have position, so he wasn't going for the free card.
n/t
I just sit down in a new game of 10-20 HE. I get dealt 10d9d in bb. Early position raises, everyone folds, i dump. should i call? is it wise to call with med. suited conenctors heads up?
Also, I'm on the button with Q9o. Cutoff posts, everyone folds, cutoff checks, i raise, sb and bb call. The question is...is it worth to raise with such average cards here for a payoff of 25 bucks. im risking 20 for 25 is wut im saying so it seems logical...justcurious on ur thoughts
Well it might be just a coincedence, but it doesn't sound like you had much of a chance to get both blinds to fold. I think who the blinds are is very important. Had you known they call too much, it probably would have been better to limp or even fold a piece of cheese like Q9o. The poster is a different story. If there was even a small chance that you and the blinds would fold, he is correct to raise with a hand like Q9o. IMO-
Kevin
Sorry, I forgot the first question. I tend to muck mid-suited connectors from the bb, heads up and out of position against a solid early raise. That may not be right though.
Kevin
I think you should muck the 10-9, especially on your first BB of the session. It sends a quick, effective message.
Tommy
Tommy,
I agree that you should err on the side of tightness early in a playing session and I would fold T9 suited here too against an UTG raiser.
But let's say you have a line on the UTG's play (let's say he is typical). In a 15/30 structure or even 20/40 structure isn't this enough to call with, especially since it is not a hand that gets dominated (such as Ax or Kx).
Regards,
Rick
Rick and Buckshot,
I can't argue against anyone who says the 10-9 is enough to call with. I've seen plenty of winning players who make that play, so I know it's not a "wrong" play" among some.
For me, it is a wrong play, doesn't matter at all WHO the raiser is, because when I have to bet first, I want a hand, period. I'm hyper on this, to an extreme, to a fault. In short, when I'm up front, I play cards. When I'm in back, I just play.
I think I gain back lost EV from playing the blinds too tight because it bamboozles the soft players. They see all those half-price folds, four chips from the BB, two chips from the SB, and when I come in pounding from the button or cutoff, they overrate my hand drastically, folding too often on the flop and turn, and playing back too infrequently. The sharpies know what's going on so I have to be very careful who I do what against.
To me the whole game is the blinds, playing against them and from them. I'm forever dumbfounded by the enormous bulk of poker literature that treats the blinds only in passing, especially considering that we play about 1/4 of all hands in our entire lives from the blinds, and that when we are not in the blinds, we are playing against at least one blind at least 2/3 of the time.
Tommy
Tommy,
I'm on my way out the door but this struck me. You wrote: ”I'm forever dumbfounded by the enormous bulk of poker literature that treats the blinds only in passing, especially considering that we play about 1/4 of all hands in our entire lives from the blinds, and that when we are not in the blinds, we are playing against at least one blind at least 2/3 of the time.”
In a soft game (especially with a 15/30 structure) I think I probably see half my flops out of the blinds (maybe I'm too loose here and not loose enough in back). Anyway, I agree that it is insufficiently discussed. Maybe we can change that in future threads :-).
Regards,
Rick
Interesting that you mentioned 15-30 because I almost did. To me, the difference between 3-6-chip games and 4-8 chip games (15-30 and 30-60 as compared to 20-40 and 40-80) is SO HUGE that I play almost exclusively 4-8-chip games by design (where I live) and choice (when I have an option.
Yet all four of those games are typically lumped together as one when discussing strategy and tactics.
I loath mid-limit 3-6 chip games. But I LOVE the smaller 3-6 chip games (6-12 and 9-18) around here because the SB is one chip.
Tommy
I think everyone would agree with your, Tommy, that folding when you've just set your chips down is a good idea.
I like Rick's notion of calling from the BB with suited connectors. If I have a real good feel for the table my BB play might be connectors and suited 1 gappers. There are normally many clean outs for you on the flop, but I've been told that I'm a loose goose when it comes to my blinds so take my opinion for whatever it's worth.
~stephen
the message is that you'd like to hold on to your chips at least a litle while...
About how many players would have to be in the pot to make it correct to call with suited rags in the big blind after its been raised?
Thanks
10-20 online HE. I get dealt K4o in bb with 6 limpers, I check.
FLop comes K 10 4 rainbow. I bet out all fold to cutoff, who calls, and button raises, i reraise and they both call.
TUrn is an Ace. Im pretty scared of tthis card as the button could have been raising position with AT, or raising with AK. SO I check and its checked around.
RIver is a 9. I bet out both call and I win the pot.
My quesiton is should I have bet out the turn for a profit or 40 more bucks?
Yes. Somewhere in HPFAP S&M address the issue of scare cards and that you shouldn't fear all of them. I think it is a clear bet on the turn.
Mason:
Thanks for the response. I do see the difference. The more likely your hand is best, the more likely you should be to re-raise.
Best wishes, Mike
Mason and I give you similar advice (a little TOO similar if you ask me). He gets a personal thank you and I get nothing. Shame on you, Mike W. Just kidding.
Uston,
I apologize. Thanks for your advice.
Best wishes, Mike
My comfort level of play is medium stakes ($15-30 to $30-60) and my favorite game is holdem. When in Vegas I will occasionally play $40-80 HE. I remember seeing Davis S at the $40-80 HE table at the Mirage and sat in just to say I sat with David S. That was several years ago and today I know you shouldn't play for the thrill. My hourly rate is a plus but only about $29. Quite frequently when I play late at night at the casino, the games get short handed, eventually break up and I end up playing someone heads up. I try and limit heads up play to someone I know to be less aggressive and imaginitative than myself. My hourly rate last year heads up was between a bb and a bb and a half. Is this where I should be? I also urge any feed back on basic guidelines to heads up play such as starting hand requirements from the blind and the button. I know my answer to a lot of poker questions is that "it depends". That's why I ask for some basic guidelines. David S if you read this I would especially like you to comment. I welcome all replies.
Thanks
It sounds like you need to read the short handed section in Hold 'em Poker for Advanced Players: 21st Century edition. You may also want to look at the comments from Izmet in a lower thread on this page.
Mason, although I regard HPFAP and TOP as sacred religious text and sleep with them under my pillow at night, I have to point something out.
As for the extensive part of HPFAP about playing short handed, all this section really does is teach you how to defend against a hyper aggressive opponent. It doesn't really do much in the way of teaching you how to play against a player who is playing close to correctly.
Of course, a hyper aggressive opponent IS playing correctly against a tight player who doesn't adjust, but we are talking about 2 players both playing close to correctly.
What are good raising hands now? What hands should you call or reraise with?
These are subjects that are not addressed in HPFAP.
Also, with all due respect, some of the advice is, how can I put this, not that good? IE calling a hyper aggressive opponent with hands like 76s. 76 suited doe not stand to be better than a random hand heads up. Also, he's probably not raising preflop EVERY time so 76 suited goes down in value since now it is a hand that is quite a bit worse than a somewhat better than average random hand.
I have pretty much figured out my own style of heads up/ short handed play that wins for me, although I do think I could win more.
-SmoothB-
Izmet, I would really like to hear from you...thanks
12 handed table
Im dealt K8hearts in the cutoff and honestly ready to fold..
Then 5 limpers before i act... i call (good or not?)
Button raise (yikes!!)
Sb fold BB call 8 handed
Flop: 2 6 T 2 hearts
all check to me... here i know that if i bet preflop raiser will raise and might isolate me which i dont want! so i check and he bets..
5 of the 6 players before me call...
i raise for value (mian point of my post: would you do it or not?)
all my opponents called.
i didnt made my heart flush and paid a big bet on the turn (one of my opponent made 2 pairs on the turn and won the pot)and quietly fold on the river saying bye bye to a big pot lol
I think just playing this hand was a high variance play. However my check-raise on the flop was appropriate i think. Do you agree?
Ty for help
Charlie
Of course your checkraise on the flop was a good play. You made a ton of money on that play. Don't spend it all in one place.
Make that same play in the same situation every time and you will show bigger profits.
-SmoothB-
Your play on the flop was correct. You have two minor concerns, one of which is already pointed out, the fact that the bb will reraise. The other concern is you are not drawing to the nut flush.
Often enough you are in the BB with something like Kxs in an unraised pot and multiple callers. If 2 of the suit flop, do you bet out? I usually play the old-fashioned way here - check - because of the bad position. If I bet, there often is a raise next door, all others fold and so my implied odds go to hell. Of course, if there is a bet and several calls, then I get the opportunity to raise for value. Thoughts from the experts?
I do open bet a flush draw in early position. You are right, you can get raised and shut everyone out of the pot. I would rather check and see what happens.
There is another good reason for doing this. If it gets checked through you get a free card, which can't be too bad.
If the flush makes it on the turn, when you bet people will be less likely to think that you have the flush.
One time I flopped a flush draw under the same circumstances.
Got checked through. It also got checked through on the turn.
The river brought my K high flush home. I bet out and got raised by a very aggressive player UTG. Now, I knew he didn't have the A high flush because he would have bet that draw on the flop or turn. So I 3 bet him. He rivered a set of 3's and I got the pot.
Afterward he told me that he never thought *I* had the flush because he thought I would bet that draw on the flop or turn. Often times I do that - but not every time.
I think this play falls into the 'sometimes' category. Open bet draws SOME of the time. But not all the time.
Now, if I had bet the flop and checked the turn do you think anyone would raise me on the river?
-SmoothB-
SmoothB wrote: Now, if I had bet the flop and checked the turn do you think anyone would raise me on the river?
No, but you may very well have gotten several callers on the flop... which may very well lead to several over calls on the river since the pot will be bigger.
sean
I agree witht he way you play the hand. There is no reason to bet out. As a matter of fact it is usually the wrong play, however, I see it all the time as well. As you described, if you bet you are often raised and all the other players will fold leaving the pots heads up. Hardly the type of odds you want. I may bet out if the pot is short handed (1 or 2 other players) but other than that just check and call and maybe check raise if there are many callers.
With a small number of opponents (3 or less) you may win the pot outright by betting in an unraised pot. For these reasons, I like to bet especially since I frequently bet any piece of the board in this situation like top pair, middle pair, and bottom pair so I need to camouflage those times I have something from those times I don't.
With 4 or more opponents, I will usually check a come hand like this since the likelihood of me winning the pot outright with a bet is reduced.
This is a terrible hand and I don't like betting it into several opponents.
If you're drawing to the nut flush (i.e. the A is out on the board), then you are very likely losing to a pair of aces and cannot reasonably win any other way besides the flush. If your K is an overcard you're in double trouble because you're not drawing to the nut flush and if you catch the king, your kicker is bad.
Of course, you're talking about seeing the flop for free, so now you're stuck with a possible hand and how to play it.
By betting into the field, you are the one going out on a limb. I like to check 90% of the time in this situation. Just send it around see what happens. If you check, the cutoff bets, and the button raises, you can fold, and you should.
If the player to your immediate right bets and everyone calls, I DON'T think you should raise. Just call. For one, it's more obvious what you've got if you raise, and too many players will raise in this situation on a draw for value. If you don't raise, you get to see another card for cheap, the pot is still a good size anyway, and if you make it, you have more deception at your disposal for extracting the maximum.
natedogg
Natedogg, In no-limit I'm sure that any non-nut draw is a good way to go broke. but in a limit game a King high flush draw is a very strong hand in a multi-way pot; in a shorthanded pot it is an excellent semibluff hand.
If you think you can get 3 or more people to call, you should absolutely check-raise. Believe it or not there are very few players that will put on flush draw in this situation. You have an overlay and you should take advantage of it.
I would also cold-call a raise on the flop if there were more than 2 limpers or I was pretty sure I would get paid-off of I hit.
Nate,
You are being overly cautious IMO.
You wrote:
"If you're drawing to the nut flush (i.e. the A is out on the board), then you are very likely losing to a pair of aces and cannot reasonably win any other way besides the flush. If your K is an overcard you're in double trouble because you're not drawing to the nut flush and if you catch the king, your kicker is bad."
The Ace doesn't always have to be there. If you bet and get just one or 2 callers. You will probably win with a bet on the turn if either the flush comes in or an Ace hits.
Similarly, if your King is an overcard, your bet on the flop can get rid of better no-pair Kings which gives you additional outs on the turn.
You also wrote:
"If you check, the cutoff bets, and the button raises, you can fold, and you should."
Why?
You also wrote:
"If the player to your immediate right bets and everyone calls, I DON'T think you should raise. Just call. For one, it's more obvious what you've got if you raise, and too many players will raise in this situation on a draw for value. If you don't raise, you get to see another card for cheap, the pot is still a good size anyway, and if you make it, you have more deception at your disposal for extracting the maximum."
I assume you are talking about what to do if the player to your *left* bets. Generally, you should checkraise if you get several callers of the initial bet unless you have reason to belive that the initial bettor will 3 bet and the others will drop to that 3 bet.
Anyway, I am not be able to respond to any response of yours till the weekend. Hope you guys have a good one.
I agree with Jim.
I think the choice depends entirely on the likelihood of a bet winning the pot or narrowing it to heads up against a player who will fold to a bet on the turn if he doesn't improve.
Let's say it's three handed and the flop is 7-5-5 and you have 8-2. Betting here is often a winning play. With no raise before the flop, players are less likely to play on with overcards, not just because the pot is small, but because they are not adrenalized, and because the BB is a wild-card hand. They have NO read.
So if you coincidentally happen to have a flush draw, so what? The situation is unchanged.
If the pot is too multi way to steal, I check from the BB with a flush draw, thereby committed to playing make-a-hand-poker for that hand. Generally I don't put in one more chip than I have to unless I hit the flush or an overpair.
Tommy
windavies,
I've read the top three responses so far, which I essentially agree with. If you do bet the flop, pick your spots. You either want three or more callers (which is a bet for value, not a semi-bluff), win right away (a classic semi-bluff), or get a single call by a weak opponent that may lay down to a follow up bet on the turn. So the type and number of your opponents matter a lot.
The texture of the flop matters in order to win with a semi-bluff. Avoid betting at flops with jacks, tens and nines, or eights or middle connecting cards. It is too easy for limping opponents to hit such a flop. Let's say I have a K-2 suited and the flop comes two in my suit. If I have two to at most four opponents, I might semi-bluff the following flops:
Q-7-3 It is hard for anyone not holding a queen to play.
6-3-3 They have to fear a three in my hand (I tend to bet trips out of the blind).
A-7-4 Good bet especially if the active players would come in with a raise if they had an ace.
Regards,
Rick
As usual, Rick, you've nailed things right on the head, SmoothB's dissent notwithstanding.
12-handed table must have been on-line(?). Hard to get a tell on the button on-line (I would think, although I haven't played on-line.)
In La-la land, button would probably call in this situation with just about anything, as you well know. So although you may be right about the fact that perhaps 50% of your opponents are sloppy about giving away their intentions in this situation, I would think you should normally expect a call from the button here.
Good analysis in HPFAP 21st century inthe loose games section on playing a hand like K-xs from late position against many opponents. The point of your final paragraph was discussed there; you have to be able to let your hand go even if you hit depending on the circumstances.
Amazingly enough if you play 100 sessions where you get AK and raise it 8 times, 4 out of those 100 sessions you will not flop an A or a K.
there was this one where I had pocket rockets 5 times and... never mind
7 times once, and once 9 times, but never 8.
By the way, I figure the chances of being dealt A-K are 16 in 1326, so you should get A-K 8 times in 663 hands. In a 9 handed game, there are about 36 hands an hour dealt, so it would take between 18 and 19 hours, on average, to get dealt A-K 8 times. How long did it take you to get A-K 8 times?
I've not really noticed it in 15-30 or higher at least with AQ, AK, and KQ. Seems like the normal amount of limping to me with KJ and QJ at these limits also. 10-20 is a different matter. Seems like lots of folks play the hands you describe as pure drawing hands, hoping to get in cheaply with lots of opponents by limping as some poker authorities may prescribe.
I tend to push AK and AQ as hard as I can, maybe 80% of the time. I push KQ maybe 60% of the time. I think KJ and QJ are of significantly lower quality and I tend not to push them at all. All this, of course, is based on the texture of the game and players and my position.
SK
I think it may be a mistake to check to the two players who checked to you on both the flop and the turn. IMO, a bet here is in order. I think you need to give your two opponents a chance to fold here. A check-raise on the turn by the BB means you're beat, but maybe not by much!!! A check-raise by the cut-off seat means your dead.
The river is the truly difficult choice. At best, I suppose you win half the pot ($240) with your Ace for a $60 call. A 4:1 payoff against that board and no real solid information on their hands due to check-thru on the turn. Not me, I think I'd fold at this point and give one of my opponents at least a 9 or pocket 7's or 8's.
SK
I think it's automatic to bet the turn when it pairs the board in this situation. So far they have, in a sense, both checked three times. Two actual checks, and a passed opportunity to check-raise. Seems clear they don't like their hands. I think it's a mistake to think in this spot. Bet.
Tommy
I think you're correct. Big blind knows cut-off is weak, why not bet the turn if you have something and catch him in the middle. I was worried too much about being check-raised by big blind and not being able to get to the river. If he had something he would have bet the turn, one would think, after I had checked the flop. Sometimes a check is just a check.
nt
If that's the case then my advice is too conservative.
Medium Stakes Hold'em
February 2001 Digest is provided by Two Plus Two Publishing and ConJelCo