![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
3/6 HE. Usual loose, passive crowd, but one player two to my right is fairly aggressive. As a side issue, I don't think this guy likes me too much. and the feeling is mutual, I must agree. We had a minor set-to a week ago when I called him down at the river and he at first refused to turn over his hand. I told him we'd be there until hell froze over before I turned over first, and he eventually mucked. But I digress.
On this hand, I'm on the button with the black 6's. Two middle position limpers, including our friend. Expecting a 5-way hand, I limp in. Flop comes down Kd-Kh-4d. Checked around to my buddy, he bets out.
Now I know from watching this guy's play over the past couple of weeks, that he could have just about anything, except a King. He loves to wait until the turn to slowplay any sort of big hand, but he loves to steal and semi-bluff. He would have likely raised pre-flop with any sort of medium pair in late position with only one limper in front of him. Most probable hands for him at this point are some sort of 4, maybe a diamond draw, or most probable, he's stealing.
Now I know (strongly suspect) that he doesn't have a King. But I also know that he knows that if I immediately raise at this point, he won't put me on a King, either. I would be more likely to wait until the turn with a small field and pot to pop it. So I decide to wait until the turn. I can see that the two blinds are getting ready to muck, so I suspect that it will be heads-up from here on in. As expected, both blinds and the other limper fold.
Turn card is the 5d. He bets out again, a little TOO confidently, I'm thinking. Sticking to the plan, I raise. He calls. Before the river card is even on the board, he says out loud, "Here, I'm giving you another chance to raise me," and bets blind. A blank hits. Your move.
Questions:
1) I presume there would be little or no opposition to limping on the button with 66 in this situation. Even S&M approve of the play on the button in an unraised pot with a Group 6 hand.
2) Plan to raise the turn reasonble given my read on the bettor, and the fact that I can see a couple of players getting ready to fold the flop? Who would raise immediately? Anyone up for folding at this point?
3) If you do stick to the plan and raise the turn, how would you respond to the bettor's actions of calling quickly, and betting blind on the river with his comments?
Results later in the day.
Duncan I love your posts.
No time to read the rest so forgive me if I am being redundant.
First, I would always raise on the flop here. Forget about trying to convince him you have King. You have a hand that is very likely the best, but is very vulnerable. That spells R-A-I-S-E! I know you said you thought the blinds were folding, but were you really sure? You do not want even one of them in under any circumstances. You have to protect.
As for the river, I would call. I know the type of player you are describing. Very likely no king or pair. I'm thinking either a 4 or an Ace or both. Frankly I think it's an easy call on the river.
Over in the Mid-Limit section, Joe Medwick posted a hand this morning about raising UTG with AQs, and then facing a decision when 4-bet. Interestingly enough, I had somewhat the exact same decision last night in 3-6, and I will post the hand here to see if there are differing opinions based on the nature of the game, and the number of players involved.
As in Joe's case, I picked up Ah-Qh (he had clubs), but I'm first in from middle position. He was UTG. I raise, as he did, and I get 3-bet from a solid (there's that word again) player to my immediate left. A kid in the next seat 4-bets it. This player had been playing a wide variety of trash, but had bet his big hands aggressively as well, and was running all over the game at this point. To my surprise, the SB coldcalls as well, and it's back to you.
In Joe's case, there was only the 2 other players involved, and my decision to call or fold was mitigated by the fact that there was this one additional player involved. Now I fully realized that I could be badly dominated by one or more of the other players in this hand, but I felt that the suitedness of my hand, and getting 7:1 on the additional $6 I would be required to invest, tipped the scale just enough to make it a reasonable call. Agree, or disagree at this point?
Flop comes down 7-6-2 rainbow with 1 heart. Not exactly what I had hoped for. SB checks, I check, and player to my left bets. The kid raises, SB folds, and IMO this was an easy fold at this point for me. I have no hand, a very slim runnner-runner draw, and am quite possibly facing a re-raise and cap on my left. Agree with the fold, or anyone sticking his neck out here?
Results later.
Of course you raise AQs coming in. Of that I am certain.
Personally, I would usually fold to the 4 bet. From the information provided, I perceive this to be a reasonably close call either way. But I know you are seen as a good player. So when another good player reraises you, this means something: You have some catching up to do. Then someone comes over the top of both of you? AIYAH! Your chances of winning this pot are slimmer than Calista Flockhart. I understand you are enticed by the prospect of a big pot. But big pots are the most hotly contested. You are going to pay pay pay to get to a showdown. You are hogtied even if the flop is Axx or Qxx. In situations like this I like to err on the side of low variance. You will have better chances than this. Be patient.
Kevin I agree that it would be incredibly unlucky for a player capable of beating a $6-$12 for $12 per hour to be stuck after 3000 hours of play. But that is because 3000 hours is a long period of time for a little game like this. But suppose the game were $100-$200? According to Sklansky and Malmuth from their book "Gambling For a Living" an excellent player can expect to win about $50 per hour. The standard deviation in this game would be about $2000 per hour. At the end of 3000 hours of play, the uncertainity associated with their computed hourly earn would be $36.51 per hour. In other words, if you had 100 excellent players playing in a $100-$200 game that they could each beat for a theoretical earn of $50 per hour there still are a few of them that would be losing money after almost a year and a half of full time play. Those that won a lot of money would be the toast of the town and hailed as great players while those that lost would be earmarked for oblivion. If you want I can give you some real life examples of this.
Mason Malmuth in his book "Gambling Theory and Other Topics" talks about an excellent low ball player who can beat his $30-$60 game for $30 per hour but could have a 4000 hour losing streak. The reality is that only a true masochist could withstand losing for two years. Everyone else would have quit long before that point. I would estimate that most good players would quit after about a 1000 hour losing streak.
Good players lose because their hands stop holding up through no fault of their own. Results that decent players get even over a long time period of time (e.g.-1000 hours or more) are usually driven by differences in luck experienced not playing abilities. Furthermore, many of the playing decisions that players discuss are really "fraction of bet discussions" over time and are not foundational to what a decent player's bottom line is. If you see a player getting great results over a long period of time when playing against decent opposition, it is because his hands are holding up more often than others and he is drawing out more often than others.
"But suppose the game were $100-$200? According to Sklansky and Malmuth from their book "Gambling For a Living" an excellent player can expect to win about $50 per hour. The standard deviation in this game would be about $2000 per hour..."
I haven't had a chance to read all this thread, but I'd say this is a little misleading, Jim. There are definitely a fair number of players who play at such limits and make a good deal more than that per hour. In fact in the same essay you mention, they further say that an excellent player who is game selective can make $125/hour, and a world class selective player $160/hour. I think that will change the math pretty strikingly.
But will an excellent player who is game selective be able to find these games on a consistent basis to play say 1500 to 2000 hours per year? Being selective is fine but you frequently don't have a choice at these higher limits. With regard to a World Class player's earn, I did not feel that it would be representative of the situation since there are probably not more than a dozen "World Class" full tabled limit hold'em players in the world.
I probably should not mention this, but there is player who used to play $60-$120 and $80-$160 quite a bit at the Bellagio. He is very well known around Vegas and I believe that both David and Mason viewed him as a top player. I don't know what his earn was but presumably it was better than $50 per hour. Well, this same player is now playing $20-$40 at the Mirage on a regular basis. I hope David or Mason read this post because they will know who I am talking about. Since I have a lot of respect for this person, I will not divulge who he is on a public internet forum like this. My only point John is that something must have happend to bring this guy down from $80-$160 to $20-$40. My guess is that he starting running bad and I suspect that his earn at this level is no longer averaging $50 per hour. Yet this player is probably as skillful as he always has been.
Well, maybe we'll never know what happened with him. But one thing that I think *very* often is responsible for a serious downturn on the part of an excellent player is what I address in the essays on "Subtle Losses of Judgment" in my book. If we could rule that out in every instance (very tough to do because players tend to *think* and insist that they're still playing well) I'll bet there would be many fewer stories of really good players going busted.
Another factor may stem from pushing tiny edges too hard, which in turn can foster long term losses of judgment. Along those lines a while back I was discussing a couple of rgp posts with an old poker friend. In the posts David S. and Daniel Negreanu were discussing their relative styles of play in a 200-400 game in Vegas. Daniel was slightly chiding David for things like not defending his blinds tenaciously enough, not pushing edges aggressively enough, stuff like that. David pointed out that he felt the game was good enough that he didn't need to push very small edges too hard in order to have a good win rate. And he said he wondered if Daniel really appreciated how quickly one could go through several hundred thousand dollars in a game that size. On hearing this my friend said, "Well, that's why Sklansky will never go broke. Daniel is risking more and may well eventually go busted a time or two as a result." Now in no way am I criticizing Daniel or his abilities. I suspect he's quite good, and respect what I've heard about him and seen from him on the Net. It's just that when you push it that hard you risk more, and at the same time you risk crossing the line between prudent and reckless play. And I think a lot of players cross it and have a hard time finding their way back.
You make a good point about the difficulty being game selective at higher limits. Of course the best solution is to be proficient in several forms of poker. A player who could play as high as 300-600 or so, and was good at all games would almost always be able to get into a good game 80-160 or higher at Commerce, for example. (I'm certainly no example, as I'm way too much of a hold'em specialist still.) Just being good at stud as well as hold'em is a big help in that regard. Short of that, you could probably bounce between limits around 40-80 and 80-160, depending on where the good games were. That would be enough to create an hourly rate significantly above 50/hour in the 40 games and somewhere over 120/hour or so in the 80 games. I'm not sure, but I think maybe you could play 80 half the time under that scenario. So I think you could certainly average 90/hour, probably more.
Finally, I think I define "world class" a bit more liberally than you. Twelve just seems awfully low. I mean I've never thought about it, but if you consider all the people who play hold'em , then take just, say, the top 0.01% of them (Would that be world class? I don't know.) , that would be more than 12 wouldn't it? (With 100k players it would be 10, but I don't know how many hold'em players there are...)
(n/t)
John-
Every time I read something you write, I am simply awed by how much there is to understand about this game, and the depth at which you seem to understand it.
If you ever go broke playing this game, please let me know. I will get a tattoo saying " Jim was right, it's all in the luck", and never play poker again.
Kevin
Well thanks. I don't think Jim is really saying it's all luck, but I do think it can occasionally begin to seem that way, even for very good players.
My reason for folding this is that I will probably catch some garbagey piece of the flop and get stuck calling too long.
David "Lead me not into temptation.."
the reason to fold it is that it sucks.
Great story, although I'm sure some of its hilarity has to do with the fact that it was a 'Kill Pot'...can someone please explain how a kill pot works?
Thanks
Jase
It's hard to be the flop with you talking...
Jase -
Here's how the kill works at my casino.
The 4-8 and 10-20 games play with what's called a "half-kill." When a player wins two hands in a row (that made it to the flop,) the game becomes a half-kill. The blinds go up to 6-12 in a 4-8 game and a 15-30 in a 10-20 game...1.5 times the usual limits. The winner of the previous hands must post a big blind, regardless of position. If he's in a small or big blind position anyways, this counts as his live blind. Play goes around to the original small and big blinds before it goes to the kill player, who may check, call any raises, or raise himself. After that, all players act in natural turn. If he wins the hand again, he goes through the same routine. Our games don't go beyond a half-kill.
Scott
I'm playing in a loose 3-6 game. I'm pretty young and most players know me as tight aggressive. I have a few hands in question.
#1...I'm on the button with pocket 4's. 4 players limp, I limp, bb checks. Flop comes 9 5 2 mixed suit. Everybody checks to me, I bet, and I get raised by one of the earlier position players and reraised by player two off the button. Both these players are very loose and aggressive and the later caller is almost all in, but I decide to fold. THe first raiser reraises and the last raiser calls all in. The turn brings a 7 and the river a deuce. They show down and the first raiser shows A4o the second raiser shows 46o. Is there any other way I could have played this hand?
#2...I have 73s in the bb. UTG raises and the whole table calls. Do you guys think this is worth a call in lower limit holdem? Well I questioned my fold immediately thinking that the pot odds were so great. The flop came 3 of my suit, and the river made two players trips and the winner dragged a big pot. Did I make a mistake here?
#3 I have Q9s in the BB. 5 players limp and the dealer makes it 6 to go. I call as do all the limpers. the flop come 665 with two clubs. I check, middle position bets 2 call I call. turn is a K. I check middle position bets again, everyone folds I call. River brings the 2 of clubs. I check, bettor bets, I raise, he calls. At this point do you guys think I have the best hand with the bettor just calling?
"1...Is there any other way I could have played this hand?"
no. a fold was correct. seeing the flop with 44 was questionable. where are you going with a hand like that?
"#2...I have 73s in the bb. UTG raises and the whole table calls. Do you guys think this is worth a call in lower limit holdem?"
yes, but only from the bb and only cause it was UTG raising so it cant get reraised.
"#3 I have Q9s in the BB. 5 players limp and the dealer makes it 6 to go. I call as do all the limpers. the flop come 665 with two clubs. I check, middle position bets 2 call I call. turn is a K. I check middle position bets again, everyone folds I call. River brings the 2 of clubs. I check, bettor bets, I raise, he calls. At this point do you guys think I have the best hand with the bettor just calling?"
yes definitely. he may have a king high flush, but it's not likely. your call preflop is pretty fishy though, not a good call there.
First hand, you are going for a set. When the set doesn't flop you should not bet IMO and almost always muck when bet into you. The only purpose to bet the flop here is to take the pot right away. I think that chance is very slim since you're playing against very loose opponents and your opponents shouldnt be too scared with this kind of flop.
The second hand is more difficult. The pod odds are great, but you can't be certain that even if you hit your flush it's good enough, and that way costing you alot of money. But i think it's a (maybe marginal) call.
Third hand: I dont think MP would bet into a large field with a flush draw, especially when the preflop raiser is yet to act. So i think he has at least a 6. You posted this hand here, so you're probably beat, but i would normally think he has a set 6's and no full house, because if he had a fullhouse his river call was terrible.
List your suited hands like this:
Qs9s = two spades
Q9s = queen nine suited, no particular suit
8c7c = suited connector in clubs.
9d8h = 9 diamonds, 8 hearts
makes it easier to read.
first hand the fold was fine regardless of the result, but I don't think I would have bet into that many players despite the fact that they all checked.
second hand I think I would have called since it couldn't get reraised, and assuming ten players you were getting 19:1 to call.
third hand you probably had the winner but would have most likely made a couple extra bets by just calling and allowing the others to overcall.
This hand may be routine to most of you, but being a beginner, I am always unsure if I play AK correctly, no matter how much I read about this holding.
4-8 10-handed game. I hold AKo in the SB. About 7 limpers to me, including a fairly solid lady in mid position (MP). I raise, all call.
Flop is Q87. Suits don't matter.
I bet, 2 call to MP, and she raises. All fold after her, I fold.
I will give results here as I don't think it will influence your answers. Turn was K, river was 7. MP turns over Q8 and wins the pot. If I had stayed in, I would have won with K7 two pair.
My questions are:
1. I think my fold when she raises was OK. But what about my raise pre-flop and my bet after the flop?
2. How do you figure outs when you have to catch two cards, one on the turn and one on the river? In this case, say I somehow knew she had Q8. I need a combination of A's, K's or 7's to beat her, but I need one of each of these 9 cards on the turn and river. How do I figure my outs?
Thanks for your replies.
Papio
I'm with Remco on this one. I'm usually extremely selective about what I come shooting out of the SB with. With 7 players already in for a fraction of a bet, a raise pre-flop is only going to build the pot, which is the last thing you want.
On the flop, I don't think AKo is tenable in this situation. Playing overcards (assuming they'll even be good) with 7 players in there with you? Careful, they've probably paired most if not all of the cards on the board between them, so you probably need a running combination of Aces and Kings. A bet here is really a pure bluff.
I agree with Remco, also. You need a REASON to raise with any hand in the SB since it is likely that no one will release their hand for the raise and you will be in the worst position for the rest of the hand. Since the flop defines your hand in most LL games, I would have seen the flop as cheaply as possible. When that particular flop came, I would have just surrended the hand. You have only 6 outs to make an overpair with no guarantee that that hand will be a winner. SB is a very dangerous position. It will generally get you into trouble and must be approached with some caution.
I am also concerned about your thought process when you decided to bet into a large field with nothing but two overcards. You had to expect the possibility that you would get raised and be forced to lay down your hand. What did you hope to accomplish with that bet? All you achieved was to lose 3 bets when you should have lost just one. Never bet just to put money into the pot. In LL games, that is a long term loser.
Now I see that I played this hand too aggressively. I am trying to pick up my game in this regard because I thought I was being too tight/passive. Just have to learn where to pick my spots for the aggressive play.
See my post above on another AK hand.
Papio
Full tabled limit hold'em is like being able to buy a lottery ticket once a week at a discount from someone else who pays full price. The better you are as a player the deeper the discount. But just because you get your lottery ticket for 50% off does not mean that your number will ever get picked or that you will win the grand prize. It is quite possible that you could be making highly positive EV ticket purchases each week and at the end of the year still lost money.
There you go Kevin - problem fixed - although I am not sure that Jim is wrong because I still am not sure what his point is. If it is that poker is dominated by the luck factor - well, then he is wrong.
To Jim:
You wrote:
"It is quite possible that you could be making highly positive EV ticket purchases each week and at the end of the year still lost money."
Sure it's possible. But the question is whether it is likely. I think not. In fact, I know not.
Now, you are obviously a highly skilled player already. But yet you try to better your game by participating in this forum. Why bother if the slight increase in knowledge you might gain by participating can so easily be negated by this supposedly inevitable long run of bad luck that we will all suffer.
One last time: Poker is a game of skill first and foremost. Luck plays a part but takes a backseat to skill. If you disagree...well, we'll have to agree to disagree.
i don't belive in luck, i belive in the mathematics of the game it just like bein an advantige player in blackjack, If you have the skill you can make the money.
Im fairly new at poker but have been playing Black jack for a wile so I belive the same princaples
"i don't believe in luck".
Trust me dorrex, luck exists. Luck is real. As you begin your 100,000 hour journey into the world of full tabled limit hold'em you too will believe in its existence and awesome influence on both your bankroll and your mind.
Im back for my 2nd post...I just returned from another 3-6 game, this time winning two racks. I played well I think but have one questionable hand.
I hold 78s on the button. 9 handed game. Everybody limps, I limp, BB checks. FLop comes 452 with the 4 5 being spades. Everybody checks to a middle position player who bets. 6 call. Turn comes J of spades. UTG bets, and only original better calls, leaving it up to me. UTG is a predictable player in that he plays trash and does not bet with at least two pair. Middle position can have anything. Do you think a raise is correct in this situation? I simply call thinking if either player is drawing with the Ace or King they would call my raise regardless. The river comes a 4, UTG checks, middle position bets and I call for time. Im not really sure what middle position has, and I know UTG has two pair now that he checked. I call once again thinking he might possibly have a boat or a higher flush. UTG turns over two pair J5, middle position shows straight with A3o, and I drag the pot. Can i have played this more aggresively?
"Can i have played this more aggresively?"
yes! and you really should have. you shouldnt play 87s unless youre gonna play it for max profit when you hit something with it. you should have raised with your four flush on the flop to clear out some riff raff if possible and increase your chances to win it. you definitely should have raised on the turn when you hit your flush. make two pairs and sets and idiots pay two big bets to try and beat your hand. dont worry about whether you are beat by a better flush, not with 3 of your suit on the board. if there was 4 of your suit, then youd want to get to the showdown cheap or free, not in this case though. your river call is not as bad, now that youve given them a chance to catch up cheap. you cost yourself some bets on this hand. that's too bad. good luck.
you actually could have raised preflop but thats another story. You should have raised on the flop, you have a monster hand. You definately should have raised the turn. My bet is that you played more than this hand wrong, since that was a monster mistake. Think of it this way. If everyone is going to call your raise (6 people I think) you only have to win one in six times to break even. I think you will win close to 80% of the time.
Hi Yellow Boy,
Your play was somewhat passive---you should have made considerably more on this particular hand.
Before the flop your limp is fine. Depending on you comfort level, however, you may want to raise here as well. Certainly this is a higher variance play, but with the entire Addams family limping in ahead of you, you can raise for value. You have the best position, and if your game is loose-passive (which it sounds like from your post, but of course, I'm not there) in the event that you miss the flop, the field might check to you, and you can see the next card for free. At any rate, raising suited connectors and small pairs in late position following many limpers, might be a wrinkle to consider adding to your game.
On the flop, you have 1 out to the pure nuts (6s), 3 additional outs to the nut straight, and 8 outs to a flush. When the middle position player bets, and the next few call, a raise (again, for value) is in order. With 12 outs you have about a 45% chance of making your straight or better by the river. In other words, you are a 1.22 to 1 shot to improve, so if you can nail two or three players for multiple bets, you make money.
(In this particular case, the mid-position player who flopped the bike will likely re-pop, at which point I might back off if it looked likely that I might lose customers.)
Again, the fact that you raise might buy you a free card on the turn, plus, it may clear out the bettors ahead of middle position. A small field may be to your advantage if you think that a lonely pair of 8s or 7s may also be good. (Not likely, but an added bonus in a small number of cases.)
Now, while the two raising plays I have advocated pre-flop and on the flop are tactically sound, they will increase your variance, so if you are on a short bankroll, I could understand why you wouldn't want to play this aggressively. However, when the Js falls on the turn, you have to play aggressively. You made you draw---let's charge the bastards! True, if another spade falls, your hand is diminished in value (unless of course, it's the 6s, in which case you'll love your hand). But until someone tells you otherwise, your hand is boss! Raise! Charge a singleton As or Ks as much as you can for him to pursue his draw. If three-bet, you can call a reasonably straight-forward playing character, but I'd likely cap it against a more "testosterone-driven" player.
On the river, when the board pairs low, I would call any bet, and bet if checked to. (If check-raised, I'd grumble and call.)
All in all, you could have made much more money on this hand. I guess most importantly, you have to consider the fact that if you aren't going to extract the maximum when your draw actually hits, why are you playing it in the first place? Exercise caution, but don't go looking for snipers behind every tree!
Good luck at the tables,
Dave
First, when you write 87s it usually means eight-seven suited, if you mean eight of spades, seven of spades it should be written as 8s7s.
I will assume that you had 8s7s. On the turn if you think that your hand is best you should raise. Don't you want to get a someone holding an ace or king of spades to call for two double size bets instead of just one.
On the river, it is a different situation. Here you are virtually guaranteed an overcall where if you raise you may find yourself reraised by a better hand. This is a common mistake that many players make. With a good but non-nuts hand it is often better to go for a likely overcall on the end than to raise.
Thanks for the tips guys. In retrospect I think I should have played this hand more aggressively, especially on the flop and turn. Upon realizing my mistakes, I went back to play in a 4-8 game. I held 9h10h on the button. Everybody limped to me, I raised for value. Flop comes 6h7h2s. UTG bet everyone called, I raised for value. Turn comes K hearts. UTG bets again, three callers, I raise (instead of playing it passively) and get four callers. River comes a blank, I bet get 3 callers and take the pot down. Turns out UTG had 4h5h, another caller had trip 7's. Thanks for the advice all, as you guys made a 3 rack profit tonite.
Where do you find all htese cards?
At the lower limits, calling to insure overcalls has always been a mistake in my experience. It becomes important to stop thinking logically. They find ways to call, they find ways to call raises cold. And often times they aren't able to identify the nuts and reraise. This concept goes especially for value betting. I have made a mountain of bets milking small pairs at 4-8. I remember a hand where it was check through and I rivered a pair of sevens with the top kick and bet it. I got three calls, and was good. Not that there was any doubt.
Pre-flop: you should raise here on the button with everybody in. you have a hand that plays well in big pots and if you hit you want people to stick around 1) to give you the odds to draw to the last card of your straight or flush and 2) to stay in with weaker when they are beat beacuse the pot is so large.
Flop: raise because you will get more callers than you will odds on making your hand.
Turn: raise precisely because someone may be sticking around with a bigger spade. Like you said they are going to call regardless of one bet or two. The majority of time when they don't draw out on you on the river wouldn't you want more money in the pot?
River: I think calling is fine depending on your opponents.
A nice hand, but I think you could have won almost twice as much. Furthermore, bettign and raising on draws will be thought of by some weaker players as "wild gambling" and it will be good for your image.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
Here's my two-cents:
PreFlop: I disagree with the previous posts saying you should raise preflop. 7s8s just isn't that type of power hand. Maybe with 2 suited faces in middle position.
Flop: I always raise on my 4 flushes after the flop if I will have at least 3 callers. I figure the chance of making the flush are about 40% right now, so no matter what the bet is, as long as there are 3 others calling it, your pot odds are good.
On the turn: You've made your flush, make everyone else pay dearly to see the river. The chance of someone else having a higher flush is very low, and you should be able to tell if someone is betting it.
PYRENUS
"I simply call thinking if either player is drawing with the Ace or King they would call my raise regardless. "
This is wrong poker thinking. Raise for exactly the reason you are currently calling. You must CHARGE the A or K to draw against your made flush. if you let them in for cheap you are making a mistake. Raise and make them pay the max. you know they won't fold, and you also know that three of their outs are in your hand, and one of them makes you a straight flush! So why not raise??? You know they will call you anyway, and you know their draw is WEAKENED by the cards you hold!!!!
Raise, raise, raise... etc ad infinitum ad nauseum...
Dave in Cali
Mason's advice for the river is the best way to play that round, raise the TURN.
I would raise the flop. You have overcards, gutshot and flush draw, so there are as many as 18 winning cards for you over top pair. Given the pot size most other players should (and did) see the turn, but you increase your odds if you can fold a big spade and overcards on the flop.
A9
We will assume your hand was 87 of spades.
On the flop, you can raise for value and information both. You have a gut-shot straight flush draw with two overcards to the flop. If reraised, you know you have to hit a draw to win.
On the turn, despite the fact your flush is small, you should raise because the chances are good someone is holding a flush draw that can beat your hand. Plus, you still have a straight flush draw.
i think she had fives full of some crap, 10s maybe? anyways, it doesnt matter what she had..
i think you should have bet the turn. with that many people you have to reduce the field, increasing your chances to win it, and make four flushes pay to see the river, along with people like the BB who will come along with a pair or straight draw or whatever. if you get check-raised then so be it, you just call and see the river and hope you fill up. merry xmas.
that's how I've been approaching this and similar situations in the past. the thing is, usually I've found I'm already behind. a doublebet on the turn when one is behind is a breakeven proposition with 2 others betting and one won't as likely be bet into on the river if the board pairs after having called a raise from someone representing a strong flush on the turn.
let's say I had bet the turn. the straight draws might have bowed out (no telling for sure). I'm the type of player whose bets tend to get respected. that would leave maybe 1 or 2 holding a highish diamond to call, maybe some other obstinate hack. on the river, who'd have called?
as things worked out, I collected 5 big bets without the risk of getting pummelled on the turn. my finesse also served as a caution flag to those who would be inclined to stealthbomb me in subsequent hands: I wasn't going to be doing their betting for them.
the wild woman bet out on the flop with the openend straight draw and she caught two running fives to go with the one she had. she held 85clubs.
You collected 5 big bets from a maniac who overplayed her hand. But IMO that still doesn't mean that you played this correctly.
In LL poker, and I would suspect mid- and higher-limit as well, flopping sets is a huge source of profit. Checking on the button with a set here, just because the flush (possibly) came, is a little too cautious. What about all the dozens of other hands where someone is in on Ad-Tx, or an open-ended str8 draw, or something like Kd-Qx? They would have surely called a turn bet, right? Now at the river they fold and where is your source of profit now?
Unless you have an absolutley incredible sense of hand-reading on your opponents, I think routinely checking a set on the turn in this situation is a big loser. Maybe, maybe, once in a blue moon, just to keep 'em off guard, perhaps, but I believe you are leaving too much on the table by checking the turn in this situation. Others may disagree.
I take it you don't agree with my estimate of 85% when there's that much action on the flop?
here's another instance when I employed this assumption and it saved my neck. I hold red TT in mid position after several have limped and just call; big blind (loose goose) raises and all call with 6 or 7 seeing a flop of 679, all clubs. big blind bets, call, call, call, call. here I had an overpair plus the inside straight draw, but I folded because there were just too many people calling for there not to be a flush out, especially with the preflop raise. (the turn was Ts, river a blank, and 7c2c -- seated to my immediate right -- claimed the pot).
to repeat, as with the hand from my original post, the pot had been fattened preflop. low-limit players in particular are far more likely to raise or call a raise preflop with suited cards, a valid tendency, I have to admit. therefore, in a family pot, there is bound to be a MINIMUM of 2 players holding suited cards and the average number is quite possibly closer to 3....
I certainly don't disagree with your thinking that many LL players come in with virtually ANY soooted cards. I see it all the time. But these two hands are entirely different.
In this first case, you are on the button with a made set. Even if you did get check-raised in this siuation, you still have 10 clean outs to win the pot, assuming of course that you are not looking at a possible str8 flush or set-over-set. The same LL players that routinely limp in with something like J-2s, also usually, and I say usually, are the first ones to come out swinging when they make their flush on the turn. As they should.
In the second example you gave, you have an overpair, that's all. The str8 will do you no good if the flush is already out there, and the runner-runner hit the set, pair the board scenario to make your shack is too remote to even talk about. You had a bettor and several callers in the 2nd case. Much easier fold than in your first example where all the sheep checked to you on the button and you had a set.
We will see what the rest of the crowd thinks, Mark, but I don't see these two hands as similar at all.
the thing is, I was no more likely to be relatively best at the critical moment of decision in the first hand than I was in the second. if the turn and river cards been red5red5 in the second hand I would likely have won HAD somebody not already flopped their flush. yes, I admit my TT were vulnerable to overcards as well as the straight and flush, but at that point everyone else had already acted without raising (ruling out two-pairs and trips). in fact, in the first hand, I was acting with the additional information that the flop bettor was probably betting on a draw (even she wouldn't have bet out from the blind with something like K7, I don't think, though she surely would have checkcalled with that hand). and, in the games I play in, made hands tend to defer to the established aggressor and then call or raise depending on that player's style and relative hand-strength. and this usually works to their advantage because they get bet into right and left.
and, remember, no one raised the suited flop in the second hand. many players are smart enough to raise with anything but the nutflush in that situation. even so, the flush had been made.
of course the hands aren't identical. in the first situation, folding was not an option under consideration. in the second hand, I could have called, raised, or folded. the point I'm making is that the assumption that a flush was lurking informed my decisions in both cases. and while I guessed wrong in the first case, my apparent display of weakness induced someone to overplay their cards, so I was afforded some compensation for this mistaken inference. in the second hand, I would have needed perfectperfect to prevail (which is, ironically, what almost happened).
This sounds like the typical 3-6 or 4-8 games I play in regularly. Fully half of the players see a flop with any two suited cards. Many others will see a flop with any two connected or single gapped cards as well as any A-X.
I disagree with your check on the turn. Trips on the flop is a powerful hand in this situation. Most of the players in my game would have bet into you if they had made a flush and you undoubtably had someone drawing to the straight and someone else with the Ad. I feel that you had the best hand on the turn since they checked to you and cost yourself several large bets from the drawing hands who would have paid you off if they had two outs on the straight or a high diamond (high could be any face card.) You also had several outs yourself towards the full house.
This is one of those hands that does not come very often in this type of loose game. You stand the chance to hit a big pot. Even if you get check-raised, the pot will be laying high enough odds to call and see what the river brings.
The maniac in your game is a typical player in my games. She hit a pair with flush potential on the flop and was going to see the turn, generally, no matter what. If she had put in one bet on the flop and it was capped by the time the action got back to her, she would have called, just to see the turn card. Once she saw the second pair on the turn, I expect that she would have called two bets cold just for the chance to make a boat.
In low limit games, you generally have to improve after the flop to take the pot. This situation where you make the set and have the potential for the full house is too good an opportunity to play passively. I am probably the most respected person when I am at the table. Everybody knows that I have something if I am still in the hand after the flop and they expect me to have the best hand or be drawing to the best hand if I raise on the flop. I still get plenty of action from all of the players who pay no attention to pot odds or the potential for hitting their hand and still losing. They are playing their two cards - to hell with anything else. Be aggressive! Build the big pot. That one pot may be the difference between a good win and a small loss for the night.
In showdown poker where bluffing is a very rare event, you win by playing the stronger starting hands than your opponents, but you must be very aggressive when you hit with them. The profit comes from making your opponents pay for their loose play.
By the way. I agree that there is a world of difference between your 99 example and the 10-10 example. I would have thrown the hand away also. The potential for 2nd place with just an overpair is too strong.
the wild woman didn't flop a pair, she flopped the openended straight draw.
trips are only truly powerful when no one else has a better hand. when someone else already has a better hand, and you've made trips (on the flop or turn), then you have a drawing hand that is a notch and a half better than if you held Axspades on the turn with 2 spades and no pair showing.
do you routinely bet out with a flush draw on the turn hoping to get raised (and maybe doubleraised)?
if my 85 percent estimate (of someone else holding either the flush or staight on the turn) is high, what's your estimate? 50%? 70%? and, assuming someone holds the straight or flush, about how often will they NOT checkraise in that situation? if you KNEW that the straight or flush was already cinched 50% of the time on the turn, and that you would get checkraised 40% (.8 x .5) of the time, is it better to bet or check?
dunc did what i was going to do, tell you that youre wrong and that you should have bet instead of checking. a set is a very strong hand and you have tons of outs to a full house and big payoff if someone does happen to have a flush. 85% is not right. you seem shellshocked which is reasonable cause low limit players will play suited trash and im sure youve had your share of bad beats.
you asked for advice and you got it, it's pretty unanimous that you shouldve played your set much faster and you wouldve won much more on the hand. do with that what you will. no one cares what the crappy player had and the results are actually irrelevant. you owe it to yourself to play more aggressively.
"it's pretty unanimous that you shouldve played your set much faster and you wouldve won much more on the hand."
ever heard the expression "two wrongs don't make a right." a poll with exactly two respondents isn't very scientific. 85% seems too high? well, maybe. but there was close to a 40-60 chance that the wild woman was betting a flush draw, and that's just one opponent out of 5. would she have bet the turn? yes, probably. but then her not betting increased the likelihood that it was another opponent (calling stations one and all) who held the flush.
by the way, I don't solicit advice from posters who resent having their opinions challenged. it's only by rigorous post mortem analysis that we gain insights applicable to future play.
"you owe it to yourself to play more aggressively."
this is what i said before and this is what i would leave it at. the extra bets you will collect when you fill up or your set holds up will more than pay for the times you are up against a flush on the turn. but only IF you play your sets aggressively.
you seemed to have made up your mind about your play being fine so of course our critique of it will not change your mind. youre using the results and bad comparisons to hands that are very different (as dunc pointed out) and now youre adding in more info on what you thought were reads on the players, etc. this forum is good for general, somewhat typical hand analysis. you gave us enough info in your first post for us to answer that we thought your turn play was weak. whether you think we're right or not is ultimately irrelevant. if you want a second opinion from some real experts then post the hand on the medium stakes page and see what they say. it'd be an interesting experiment.
medium-stakes players don't usually play against a) pocket mice who are afraid to bet a dinky flush (with 3-of-a-suit on board) b) chronically oblivious opponents who'll bet into made obvious nut hands (e.g., lots of action on the flop with a 2-pair on board) and then reraise with an underpair against 2 solid players.
Poker according to Hoyle (or S and M) can only get one so far. after that, we're on your own.
Mark, when you, I , or anyone else for that matter, posts a hand on this forum, we expect to hear a variety of points of view about how the hand should, or could, be played out. We are in effect baring our souls to the world, and if we get flamed, we get flamed. I have posted many hands over the past couple of years where virtually everyone kicked my online butt for how I handled a particular situation. But I have learned a great deal from this forum, and my play has improved exponentially from when I first started lurking here.
I don't "resent" having my opinions challenged in the least. I certainly didn't re-invent the poker wheel. But what I do resent is an attitude where someone seeks out the opinions, and I stress the word opinion, of other (hopefully) knowledgeable poker players from around the world, and then when those opinions don't quite match up to the poster's pre-conceived notions of what was right and what was wrong, they get upset and try to justify their actions by nothing much more than results-oriented rhetoric.
I'm just telling you, that in my OPINION, checking a set on the button with a possible flush on board in LL, just because the sheep all check to you, is bad poker. If you disagree, fine.
And don't for a minute think I don't understand about the perils of overpairs on coordinated boards. I raised pre-flop the other night with the minor-suit Aces' got FOUR coldcallers,plus both blinds.The board comes down 7h-6h-5h, and the BB bets into me. Those bullets were in the muck, and I had no reservations whatsoever about doing so. I was right, there were a set, and a flush already made. I could have easily been wrong, but I made what I felt what the correct decision at the time, and what actually happened was of only minor consequence to me.
.
oh come on, dsf declaring there was a unanimous verdict was sheer bombastic nonsense.
the reason why I posted this hand in the first place is that it included a deviation from the standard formula, one that I've habitually employed myself in the past.
instead of quoting chapter and verse with which I'm already familiar, why not try to analyze what ingredients were necessary for such a stunt to work out O.K. and then extrapolate from there?
"instead of quoting chapter and verse with which I'm already familiar, why not try to analyze what ingredients were necessary for such a stunt to work out O.K. and then extrapolate from there?"
if you know the general good play rule (which we cited), and you know you had a good read that caused you to deviate, then what are you posting about in the first place? you are confident you made the right play and i am confident that you are mmart enough to have properly weighed the variables at that time and place. your question is not a question but a good play you felt you made. fine. good play. its' hard to describe detailed tells beyond saying, this guy is wild and this guy is a passive fish and so on.
i think your estimate of 85% is too high, but you would know best as you were at the table. it's not uncommon for someone to bet out with a flush draw on the turn, given the right circumstances it's not a bad play and fish will do all sorts of weird things.
i really think you should post this on the medium stakes page as they are flat out generally more experienced, smarter, and willing to consider things more carefully. just say it was an 8-16 hand, that's not a lot different than low limits usually.
Lowest rake,what I expect to make an hour if I'm excellent player(I used to play 15-30 up make $ 30+/hour easily).
Another loss,New question " where is the best 3-6 game in LA?" Can I make enough to support my two kids in this game?
The Bike in Bell Gardens always has a good 3-6 game. However (and this is a BIG however), you pay $3.00 every round of play (the button pays the collection). That easily adds up to at least $12.00 or more (not including the occasional tip). Bottom line: The game is not beatable, you're looking at a break even proposition. MAYBE an outstanding player might squeeze out $2-3 an hour!
Thank you, I better work at Mcdonald.
Hi there!
This is 5-10 HE, full table, mostly average players, a couple of good ones and a couple of clowns.
Here are three hands that I played in which I think I could have misplayed. Especially hand 2.
HAND 1:
I get AdAs one seat to the left of UTG. Fold, I raise 2 cold call, BB calls. 4 players on the flop, 4BB in the pot. Flop is Th9d3h. BB checks, I bet, lady calls, fold, fold. Turn is Qh. I bet, she raises. There is 8 BB in the pot. I've seen her raise only with str8, flushes or 2 pair on turn. I folded. If she's got a str8 or a flush I'm dead, if she's got 2 pair then I have 6 clear outs (ace of clubs, and any non heart non matching her 2 pair card) that would give me 2 pair. Maybe I have a couple more outs if she does not have a single heart in her hand. Right play?
HAND 2:
I get a free play in the BB with K5o. 5 players on the flop. Flop comes A A 5 rainbow. Checked to a late player who bets. I'm the only caller. Turn brings a 5. I check and call his bet. River is a rag. He shows an ace and takes the pot. I think I should have bet the turn and folded to a raise. Comments?
HAND 3:
Early lady raises (I've seen her raise with 76o). There are 3 callers, including the SB, I call with pocket 7s in the BB. Flop is 8d7s3d. SB checks, I check, Lady bets, one fold, a late call, Sb calls, I raise, all call. Turn is the 6s. SB checks, I bet, lady raises, late player folds, SB cold calls , I reraise, Lady thinks and reraises. SB calls, I call. River is the 2s. Sb checks, I check, lady bets, sb folds (diamond draw, I call. She turns 54o for a str8. Are you Fu!$%ing kidding me? Don't comment the lady's play, I know it was awfull and I look forward to playing with her again. My question is, was my turn play too aggressive ?
Flame away please...
Nicolas Fradet (ThePrince)
IMO you played hand 1 correctly, giving your read of your opponent.
Second hand: yes, you should have bet the turn and fold to a raise.
Third hand: i think your turn raise/re-raise was good since their are plenty of hand which she could check-raise with that you can beat, like pocket 66, overpair , two pair, maybe even A8s. The only hands you should worry IMO is, given her preflop raise, 9Ts (which is unlikely since you normally want to have a multiway pot with these cards) and pocket 8. That she raised preflop with 54o is just lunacy. When she capped it you have to pay her off as you did.
The other advantage of playing it aggressive on the turn is that you made the SB pay dearly for his draw.
Hand#1 : Good play , you have to bet the turn . You want her to fold on the turn because , if you give her a free river , she could hit a straight , a 2nd pair , a set , a triple , . Usually the opponnent will fold or raise , a call would mean that she had Ah or Kh . you must fold when she raise . You will find more about that's sitution in " Texas Hold'em for advanced player " by Slansky and Malmuth .
Hand #2 : I remember that hand .I would have bet the flop all the way , I don't want to give a free card to someone who could hit an higher pair than 5 . If someone call , it could be about a inside straight draw (some players like to limp with 2-4suited) .But I wouldn't put more money in this pot on the turn if I am call . If there is a flush draw , on the flop , I would bet the turn except if the turn is a 5 . But wouldn't call a raise .
Hand #3 : ...It's predicatable that unpredictable raiser raiser will lose money in the ,long run . I would have been more scared about 88 than 45off .
Hand 1:
Against most players, I'd probably call this down. The lady could have 2 pair or one pair with a four flush. If she is as predictable as you describe, I might fold.
Hand 2:
I would have bet the flop. You probably have the best hand, and free cards can kill you. If the late position player raises, then fold. You turned into a calling station, and it cost you the max.
Hand 3:
I would have played it the same way.
Two hands that bugged me and were perhaps “catastrophic” in the fold and lose a big pot syndrome.
4-8 holdem with a tough group. Max at this card room is 10-20 and quite a few 10-20 players making it a tough game with lots of pre-flop action.
I’m dealt QQ one off the button. 7 callers to me, I raise, 3 calls, re-raise by mid road aggressive (MRA) player, I cap and 8 players see the flop for 4 sb’s each. Flop is 3K4 rainbow. Check to me, I bet, all call to MRA, he raises, I call. Turn is a J and all hell breaks loose. I call MRA’s bet, 2 raises and MRA caps. I’m holding 2nd pair looking for a 2 outer on the river for 3 BB’s. Pot is huge, no one is leaving. I think for a minute and muck. River is of course a Q and would have won the pot. MRA takes it down with KJo.
A little while later, I’m dealt 99 late middle position (can’t remember exactly). A few limpers, I raise, a raise to my left and MRA caps again. I call and see the flop 4TJ rainbow. I call MRA’s bet and it comes back to me capped again. Now again I’m looking at a 2 outer with two overcards to my pair on the board with a strong possibility of being up against 2 pair. Pot is again large and again I muck. Turn is of course a 9 and I fold the winner again.
Too tight? I didn’t think so, but I can’t stop thinking about what it could have been. Those two pots alone would have been over $500. Comments appreciated.
First hand you should have folded after the flop. 8 way cap and you don't think someone has a king, if not KK? You have to be drawing to (if you are lucky) two outs. You MIGHT have pot odds here, if you assume both your outs are live and no one has KK. But I doubt it.
Second hand you should have folded on the flop (and even the raise preflop with 99 after a few limpers in middle position is questionable).
Don't do results based analysis. Would you post a question "I mucked 72o preflop. Flop was 772. Am I playing too tight?". Maybe a silly example, but the question is essentially the same.
David-
He was on the button. I agree that making a bet was dubious, but there is NO WAY he should fold the flop for a single bet. This pot was HUGE! Even if he KNEW someone had a king, he is correct to call with +32 bets in this pot. IMO-
Kevin
You aren't going to win at low limit games if you play like that.
A few comments:
'Max at this card room is 10-20 and quite a few 10-20 players making it a tough game with lots of pre-flop action. '
There is no such thing as a tough game with lots of preflop action. A game as loose as you describe should be easy to run over.
I'll explain why these games are easy to beat, and what you have to do to get a piece.
Rule 1 - don't go into combat without a PREMIUM hand.
If you can, try to limp with middle pairs like 99 in these loose games in late position. Why? With all those limpers you need to flop a set. Period. Ok maybe a straight draw. Those nines will never hold up against that crowd. And, the few times 99 actually WOULD hold up on the river, you will have folded already because people will be betting flush draws and straight draws for value and, when an overcard is out there, you will have to fold.
Play AA KK and AKs if the game is really crazy. Once in a while you might get lucky and be able to limp in with something like QJs or 99 if the maniacs have fallen asleep and decided not to raise. But EVERY hand is a drawing hand in a wild game and you must get in cheaply with anything less than AA KK or AKs.
Rule 2:
If you have QQ and an overcard flops and there is action, muck it. Every time. Don't look back. Just muck it. Sure, sometimes you will be folding the winner. But all great players fold the winner sometimes. That is part of not being a calling station. Calling stations never fold the winner - and they lose.
Rule 3: Don't bluff. It is of no use. Don't make plays to get action in the future - do one notices and no one cares.
If you have AK and the flop misses you don't bother betting out in a loose game. They aren't folding and you aren't the favorite to win now. Just check and fold and wait for the next opportunity.
Now, of course you most certainly can bet and raise GOOD DRAWS for value. That's why it is nice to play big suited cards, especially aces, in late position.
Some say that in wild low limit games, in order to win, all you have to do is play looser than your opponents. This is not true. It IS true in time charge games but not in low limit rake games.
You need to be playing with at least a 5% edge over your opponents to make up for the difference in rake. This doesn't mean you play a little tighter. This means you play a LOT tighter. Some people might think that playing KJ offsuit is a good idea in these games because their hand has a better than 10% chance to win against a field of 10 players. That's not true. You can't play a hand unless it has a 15% OR BETTER chance to win VS 9 opponents. And I wouldn't touch some of these hands.
Some hands on the borderline of the 15% threshhold are:
KQo A9s AQo 99 JTs
These hands are MARGINALLY playable. IE if all 10 of you could shove all in pre flop, and you shoved all in with these hands VS 9 opponents, you would show a VERY SMALL profit over time. But your fluctuations would be huge. Unless you can afford to get creamed for 100BB a night, you had better stay away from these hands in really loose games.
I know that a lot of people will argue with me about this, but then again most people are not winning poker players. I don't expect them to agree with me.
Now don't get me wrong - some of these hands are very nice to LIMP IN with in LATE position. IE JTs or 99. I am not playing AQ or KQ offsuit in these crazy games. NO WAY. A9 suited? Maybe, but probably not.
My point is that you can't limp in or raise with any of these hands in early - mid position because you might get reraised, and you might find it capped before it gets back to you.
-SMoothB-
A side note:
There is more than 1 type of wild game. There are some where pretty much every hand is a family pot and it's usually capped before the flop, but from the flop on there isn't nearly as much betting or raising, and a lot of people fold on the flop. You must understand that in these games JTs goes way down. JTs is a hand that makes all of it's money AFTER the flop - it's only a J high preflop. Remember that in order to justify putting all that money in preflop you must be able to earn enough back on the later streets. Also remember that you may be so tied to the pot that it may become correct to call a single bet with runner runner draws. Remember there are 40 small bets in the pot and it is more than correct to call a single bet with nothing more than a runner runner flush draw.
If the game is as wild after the flop as it is preflop, JT suited is worth playing but your swings are going to be HUGE. If you play it on the button and you have a gutshot, you must call all bets. The pot has become far too huge to fold, and your implied odds are too great. If it is capped before the action gets to you, there are at least 52 small bets in the pot and you are getting 13:1 odds on your gutshot - more than enough.
Same goes for playing medium pocket pairs. You are getting the right odds to call 4 bets on the flop hoping to spike a set on the turn. (When implied odds are factored in.)
Do you see what all of this is leading to? If you are going to play any hand in these games you are pretty much always going to the river. Once the pot is that huge you are correct to call if you have ANY shot at the pot. The best way to avoid this is to stay out of combat unless you have good weapons - AA, KK, etc.
-SmoothB-
SmoothB, I like your advise. These games are sometimes loose, and your comments are well taken. However, as much as these examples are on the verge of maniacal, they are not the norm. Like I stated, all hell broke loose. Normal pots were kinda small with lots of folders to a raise. That's how I got trapped, trying to limit the number of players with a raise. Please notice that I mucked....yeah I winced afterwords, but mucked never the less. These games are fun as limping in with mid to high suited connectors and middle to even low pairs is possible in late position with the hopes of flopping a set. I see that with the K on the flop I should have mucked to the obvious, but to fold before the flop with either hand capped preflop when the chances are that I have the best hand seems too tight. Isn't it possible to stay for the flop in this situation without losing too much? Also, If I play only AA, KK, AKs etc. Will I ever get action? These players are loose, but they pay attention. I'm in my second year of playing and am pretty much breaking even in only 158 hours so I'm asking, not trying to argue.
Good advice Smooth. Steve, if you form the habit of chasing pairs to the river, your bankroll will collapse.
I would not raise pre-flop with QQ in your position. There are two reasons to raise. To build a pot with a premium hand or to drive others out. You are not going to get anyone out at this point and you do not have a premium hand with that many in. If an A or K comes on the flop, you are dead. There is about a 45% chance of that. I want to see the flop cheaply. If no overcard comes you can play on.
If your lack of a pre-flop raise keeps the pot small, the Kx and Ax may drop. When the pot is huge, which your raise started, no one in this LL game is going to fold. So an A or K ending up on the board in 5 cards is about 70% as well as all the other opponents possibilities.
First hand: I find the first hand hard to follow, because you did not give the positions of any of your opponents, so I won't be specific. Your capping with QQ could be the whole subject of another post. In doing so, you made this pot so big that your post-flop play, is probably not nearly as wrong as some others have suggested.
I'll only say that betting into a field of 7 players with 2nd pair is dubious at best. However, calling a bet or even raising someone else's bet might not be, depending on the situation. This pot is enormous and you are correct to try and see the turn for an additional sb. KK while possible, is not something to be overly concerned with. You were also likely correct to call the turn bet, if you felt there was little reason to fear a raise. Folding to two cold on the turn, with the possibility of two more raises behind you was no doubt correct.
Second Hand: I don't believe that 99 is an automatic raise after a few limpers here. In any event, it seems a clear fold on the flop. IMO-
Kevin
Thanks for your reply. I'll try to add detail to my next post so more facets could be looked at. I was more looking for confirmation of the muck on both hands. The table went from passive to maniacal in one fell swoop,(maybe I caused it), so I was kinda trapped. I didn't think twice about raising with QQ expecting to muck it if AK fell. I didn't expect the cap. I expected the sheep to fall in behind and have a chance at at nice little pot. I can't muck a capped pre-flop with QQ after it came limped to me one off the button, that would be ludicrous (it would wouldn't it??)Yes, AA,KK...but AK has to hit the flop to be better. Figured a K with 7 callers for sure, but if an A falls, he has to worry doesn't he? I for one, know I'm beat, but does the K? I could have AA, or a stronger K, after all, I raised. Wrong way of thinking?
but if an A falls, he has to worry doesn't he? I for one, know I'm beat, but does the K? I could have AA, or a stronger K, after all, I raised. Wrong way of thinking?
I don't know about wrong thinking, I'm just not so sure how productive it might be. Just so you understand that this pot isn't for sale, and it is unlikely a better hand will fold, regardless of what falls off on 5th. In a pot THIS size, no decent player is going to fold a better hand than QQ for one lousy bet on the river. (he might raise with a bust of his own though)
Kevin
On-line 2/4 9-handed. I'm in the BigBlind with AcQd. Next to cutoff, cutoff and SmallBlind call. I check. 4 sb's in the pot.
*** FLOP *** : [ 3d 5d Td ]
check, I bet, raise || fold, fold, I re-raise, call.
Am I overplaying too much? I have one opponent. I think it unlikely he flopped the flush. I have two overcards and a draw to a Q high flush.
*** TURN *** : [ 3d 5d Td ] [ 8s ]
I check, bet || I raise, call.
Now I'm really overplaying - I'm trying to buy the pot outright. Why would my opponent bet into me while not capping the flop? He already has the flush, but it's a small one? I think he should have capped the flop and then bet into me - I would have folded.
*** RIVER *** : [ 3d 5d Td 8s ] [ 2d ]
I bet, call.
I win with a Q-high flush. Opponent had 9d7d.
What are the ramifications of my play? I think I should get good action on subsequent hands. And I should now play a bit tighter and not bluff as much.
I am attempting to vary my playing style and learning to play my opponents as well as the tempo of the table.
Is this reasonable tactic or am I destined to lose over time?
-Michael
I think you were over agressive. Your opponent made huge mistakes by not reraising though.
Your draw is probably good if it hits though because if he had AXd he would be raising you back. With the K he might be hesitant. In any case you know he doesn't have an A-high flush.
However, I don't like your turn raise. To bet out on the turn he either has a set, a flush or a big diamond. He is not going to fold. Furthermore if he has a flush already then 1) it may be K high (or an oddly played A high), and 2) it means two less diamonds to draw to. You may only have 7 outs This means you are about a 5.5:1 dog here. you are giving him a huge overlay with every bet you put in.
If you had the Ad you play would have been closer to correct since you'd be drawing to the nuts, but I still think it would be overagressive.
Regards,
Paul Talbot
If you try ploys like this very often you are going to lose over time.
Jamming the 3rd nut flush draw with 3 of that suit on the flop is dumb.
-SmoothB-
I like Paul's response more than yours. You come off too authoritative and condescending. You're not a poker god ... you're a student just like ALL of us. Thanks for your comments, but no thanks as you do not offer constructive criticism.
After that hand I look very loose with maniac tendencies ... part of the game is knowing your table presence and your opponents and what they'll do when they think they know how you play. While I won't make a habit of playing in this manner, I'm not leaving it out of my toolbox. At 2/4 I have the BR to withstand the variance and if I learn how to play good, I expect to see MUCHO positive ev for periods of time NOT on single hands.
You're wrong. Making plays like this to APPEAR looser and get more action on big hands don't work at 2-4 games because no one is paying attention and no one cares. Only one thing matters in these games and that it turning over the winner.
You don't know how many times I've heard this story. Someone will call in a raised pot with 74 offsuit, then flop a 4. They will call 2 bets cold on the flop. Then another bet on the turn. Finally when they spike a third 4 on the river, and take down the pot, they always have some reason for this 'brilliant' play.
'I did it to seem looser.' 'I did it to get more action later.' BS. I see the same people doing it over and over. It's nice of them to reinforce the concept, and make us think that they are a fish when in reality they are a great player. But the fact is the only people I ever see doing that kind of crap are stone cold losers.
HEH then these professionals complain that they can't get a hand to hold up and that's why they lose. BS!
-SmoothB-
There are PLENTY of players at the 2/4 level on-line who are paying attention. Have you played on-line? Some of them are VERY good. I've seen abdulian plays.
For example, I played with a guy who flopped open-ended in early position. He called a flop (2 of one suit) bet and then re-raised when the betting got back to him after there were 3 callers to the initial raise. The turn and river were both Kings. I called him down with an Ace high. After that another player was commenting that he couldn't believe someone called him down with an A high. He replied "gotto love the action". I replied (probably shouldn't have) that his betting sequence made me supiscious and the pot was so big I had to call.
I would estimate more than 25% of the players demonstrate that they more than pay attention - they make plays that both maximize their winnings and minimize their losses.
You should be happy that you got such good responses to your question. You are getting benefit of years of experience. Smooth has made many excellent posts in the past, as has Paul. Don't piss these people off as I want to see their answers. You might be left getting advice from me. BTW you did not have the odds to make the play you discussed. Regards, Dave
I've read Smooth's posts before. They are good - I'd even say better than most. But his initial reply to my post was of no benefit and I found it a bit on the degrading side. Smooth quit poker or was seriously thinking of quitting because of an extended bad run which he was having trouble reconciling. This is about 6-9 months ago. So, I know who he is as far as this board goes. I know that he is an amateur. The downfall is that he presents himself as a seasoned veteran. I believe the way he repesesnts himself to be a dis-service to the board. One doesn't have experience before he gets experience(period). In other words he is not an authority, but he presents himself as if he were. I believe people who read his posts and take what he says to heart are hurting themselves where in contrast his posts can be very beneficial when one reads them under the proper pretense.
3-6-9 game with 10 players. I am the BB, when seat to my left posts a live $6 straddle (STR). Up to this point, I had perceived him as a good, solid player.
I had AKs. Two limpers to me, one in middle position (MP). I raise, STR re-raises, MP calls, other limper folds, I re-raise (trying to knock out MP), STR caps, MP calls, I call. 3 see the flop.
Flop was something like 962 rainbow, with one diamond. I bet, STR raises, MP calls and I fold. I figured STR for a high pair at least, and MP who knows, but must be something good to do all that calling. He had just sat down in the game a few hands before.
Turn is Qd. STR bets, MP calls. River is 3d. STR checks, MP bets. STR throws in his hand and the cards accidently turn over to show Jc9c. I was shocked! I was even more shocked when MP showed his cards - 7d3d!
After reading the answers to my post below, "Did I play this correctly?", I guess I played this too aggressively both before and after the flop. (Can't wait for Jim Brier's article on how to play AK!)
The purpose of this post, though, is not to ask about my play (of course, any one may comment on it), but to make some observations. As soon as STR posted the straddle, I should have changed my perception of him as a good, solid player. I didn't, and gave him more credit for his hand than I should have. Also, I learned from this that some people will go to great lengths to protect their straddle (blinds). And what can I say about MP? This is why I love this game!
Still learning, Papio
MP showed 7d2d, not 7d3d. He was proud of his flush.
Papio
Your mistake was folding on the flop. It was an easy call. Do you think he has a set of nines? You should have been raking the chips.
JV,
My reason for folding on the flop was twofold. I did not think STR had a set, merely high pocket pairs, AA, KK or QQ. He capped the betting before the flop and also raised my bet after the flop. Secondly, MP called the raise and re-raise cold BTF. He also called the last two bets AND called the two bets ATF. I figured he had to have something.
As it turned out, my AK didn't even pair, and MP turned up a flush, so I don't see why you say I should have been raking in the chips.
I really don't think my not calling the raise ATF was wrong, but if anybody else thinks so and gives a reason why, I would appreciate it. I strongly suspect one of the leaks in my game is not calling enough, but in this instance I think not. Would love to hear from any one else who agrees with JV.
Papio
I did the math very quicky, but I think you were getting 18:1 on your call. Other will correct me if I am wrong but aren't you going to make the backdoor flush 1 in 23 times. Now, while this makes a call close (probably not enough even with implied odds) you have two overcards. If he has AA or a set, your fold is ok. But if he has KK or QQ, your fold losing a lot of EV. Especially against QQ right? Even against KK you have three outs and a backdoor flush draw. Which is plenty to make the call. And of course AA and KK are less likely considering you hold AK.
This is all assuming that the cold caller does not have a hand that interferes a great deal.
On the turn, if you pick up your backdoor flush draw the call is easy.
The moral of the story is you were getting the correct price to chase, eventhough you were likely beat.
BTW, never believe a straddler!
Your straddle "friend" did have top pair on the flop, so his hand was the best. The MP was obviously a lunatic, going for a runner-runner with no overcards.
I think you did the right thing. BTF your play was correct. What needs to be remembered about AK is your position when you miss the flop. I would have check-called at the most here because I'm first to act on every betting round. Yes it is true you had 2 overs and a backdoor nut draw. But out of 4 or 5 hands, the chances are good you're going to have to play catch up.
If you were last to act, I think you would have taken it down. You simply could have called the hand down and raised on the river and the lunatic would have paid you off.
how big a mistake it is to limp UTG with Axs in a 3/6 game that is so loose that an average of 6 players sees every flop, even after a raise, and so passive that 2/3 of the pots go unraised BTF?
By now I have learned to muck small pairs out of position and without the right pot odds but I still have the weakness of clinging to Axs.
All comments are greatly appreciated.
felix
I believe that limping with suited Ax is profitable in the game you describe. However I don't know where to draw the line. Does anybody have an anwser as to when and when not to limp with Axs UTG?
Jim Roy
In a game like this folding small pairs is a mistake. Even down to 22.
I will muck this hand, even in the loose passive game you describe. Not sure if it's a profitable hand in the long run, but calling is a high variance play. I also muck small pairs here, but I believe a pair is more profitable than Axs.
When a game offers 4 or 5 opponents on almost every hand and only small risk of a raising war then playing AXs and all pairs make sense. The big leak is after the flop. You must dump the small unimproved pairs without a second thought and you must play ace high flops well with your AX.
A7u and A6u are definitely unplayable, imho. A5u down are maybes if you are Dealer. Well, it's all luck, isn't it?
I prefer A-5 over A-6. Neither will win you a kicker war but A-little gives you the str8 possibilities.
A-xs is marginal in the situation described. It is neither a big winner or loser so you can play it if you wish or muck it.
The problem comes up when you flop top pair. This will cost the less experienced poker player a lot of money (not only in paying off, but also folding the best hand). I suggest to newer players that they stay away from this hand until they can play well post-flop and only when they are familiar with the table.
nt.
Thank you all for your comments. You gave me some moral support in mucking Axs in unfavorable position, at least until I am capable of doing so without a tinge of regret. Thanks again, felix
Provided you play well after the flop, I think there are games where AXs IS playable from utg. The game you describe seems ideal. (it's good to have it loose/passive passive post flop as well). IMO-
Kevin
I think both Axsuited and small pairs can be played from any position in these types of games.
Loose 5-handed $3-6 game with one good (not brilliant) player, three terrible players and me.
I raise with KQo in mid-position, get three callers. Two of these would raise with any Ace, so I figure I'm good.
Flop is rags, with two spades. I've got the king of spades. Button bets out, all the of us call (I usually don't like playing overcards at all, but here it's too tempting when I'd probably still get two or three callers if I hit my queen or king on the turn). Turn card is 10 of spades.
It's checked to me, I bet out, button raise, rest folds. I re-raise (semi-bluff of course). I know this player is capable of raising here with a single pair (esp. since he hardly think I've paired with any of these low community card), and in that situation, I believe he MUST fold, as he could very well be drawing dead to a made flush. He calls, however. Need I add that I'd most likely fold to another raise, fearing *I* am drawing dead to a made _nut_ flush?
River card is 2 of spades. I bet out, he calls. I take down the pot with my second nut flush, and he starts abusing me for playing my hand like I did on the turn. He brags about "knowing" that I played nothing and therefore raised me AND called my re-raise with... a single pair.
If I played this hand badly (probably did on the flop, I must admit), then he played it worse on the turn. Yes, he called my re-raise and was a favourite but it actually turns out I had FIFTEEN outs against him before the river, and you don't get any better semi-bluff situation than that with that scary board in addition.
No matter how sure he is that I was playing 'nothing' on the turn, his only choice here, I think, is raise or fold. He certainly would've won it with a raise.
lars
Your most questionable play was probably the flop call. The more I thought about your raise and re-raise on the turn, the more I liked it. It is probably not a move I would have made. I might have just called, setting up a check-raise on the river if I hit. I don't believe for a minute your opponent knew you were 'playing nothing." I think he made a loose play with his call of the re-raise. You did not say if the player in question was one of the ones who would raise with any a-x. if so, i would have figured the k-q spades was the nuts as he would have raised with the As-x.
this is in a LOOSE game. im in the cutoff with 67d. utg is a loose moron who raises. he played 92o in mid position a few hands ago. 1 player calls. i call because im sure that in this game the blinds will call. they do. the button does as well. 6 players, big pot. the flop comes: 6h 7h 8d blinds check, utg bets, limper folds, i raise to 12, button calls, blinds fold, utg makes it 18, i make it 24 (capped), button calls. it should be said here that the button is also a complete idiot. he plays every single hand, to the river with any pair, he has a lot of money. people at the table are saying things to me like "you have the straight already?" the turn comes; Ad utg checks, i bet, button folds, utg calls. river is a 8c. he bets, i call, very sad to have my 6s couterfeited, but not trusting him to have an actual hand.
comments please. results will follow.
Based on what you have stated about this particular game, all your plays are good. I still don't like your cold-call pre-flop with Seven-Six suited but I guess it is right under the special circumstances you have outlined.
The real crux of your questions seems to be whether or not the call on the river was a good one. No question it was. With two pair and an opponent that might play anything, you have to call.
based on his passivity on the turn, I'd guess utg held 89suited or Ax of hearts or something like QJhearts. it's the latter possibility that mandates a call of his river bet.
i called his river bet and he showed K7o, true to form.
i did a double take at the board said "cool ace!" and turned over my 67s to split the pot. if that 8 hadnt come i wouldve won the whole thing!
In your book Gambling for a Living, you state how much a good poker player should win per hour at different games. Are the amounts listed before or after taking into consideration rake and tips?
i shouldn't say never but very rarly, and why should I, the rake is 10%, up to 5 dollars. every couple of drinks i tip the waitress
I don't agree with, but can understand your toking policy toward the dealers. But how does stiffing the cocktail waitress every other drink, tie in to the rake?
Kevin
I believe their estimates include what you win after paying for the rake or a collection. It would not include tipping because players tip different amounts.
Same reason why people tip a waitress, which you sound pretty chinsy at also, they depend on it for a living.
A, a good, aggressive player raises first in mid, B, a weak, calling station calls on button, and C a very good aggressive player three-bets from the small blind. A caps. After C 3-bets, the only two hands A will cap with are AA or KK. Flop comes K Q 6, two suited. C bets, A calls, B raises. B will only raise in this situation if he can beat AA. C folds his AA and after the hand says he should not have lead bet. A also says she mis-played her AA by calling B's raise and check-calling to the river. comments?
From C's perspective there is one way for A to have AA and 3 ways for him to have KK (I'm using your statement that A could only have these 2 hands). With a 3rd player involved I would check this flop and see what developed. I would fold to the raise.
In my opinion, A did not misplay his hand. He must also be worried about KK/QQ when a good player 3 bets out of the blind and then bets into your cap. A defined his hand pretty well pre-flop, yet C still leads out. This raises a big red flag. The only hand A could beat would be AKs.
A has a close call if he knows he is beaten. If he's up against 2 pair he has 3 outs on the turn, but 6 outs on the river but he may assume he has as many as 5 and 8 outs. I would check and call B down.
Of course A has to call B's raise on the flop because there's enought dough to draw to a 6. Same goes for the turn if it blanks. Can't call on the end, though. C is right about lead betting if A can only have AA/KK.
It's 3-6 game I am in the sb ,blinds are 3 and 1 .everyone folds to a loose aggressive player who is playing unusally tight .I would rate him a 4,7 in this game using schoonmaker grid.he raised and i had kj off suit i fold.
I think should have 3 bet him to drive out the bb and go head up.But he was playing tighter than normal that why I folded .this I feel is pretty dumb play lowering my E.V.
comments????????
uh k-jo, yeah that's three bet material. You might want to slowplay, for deception. Big ones like that don't come around often.
Sarcasm aside, don't feel bad about folding.
1. Your instincts said fold.
2. KJ isn't really a huge hand.
3. The rake diminishes heads up profit A LOT in $3-6. A large portion of that $3 blind you have your eyes on will be picked up by the dealer and dropped into the abyss.
4. You will be out of position in a heads up pot.
5. Maybe the blind has a better hand than you.
6. Even the 4,7 shoonmaker grid guy could have you licked.
So perhaps you didn't lose that much EV after all.
Now if you were big blind it would be a different story.
I am going to mississippi in a few weeks. I have never played there before.
Who has the best poker room?
Should I go to Biloxi or Tunica?
Where are the comps the best? (meals rooms etc)
I don't play any higher than 6-12
Thanks in advance
jdoe
I would suggest Tunica if going mainly for poker. Tunica casinos are grouped in about three areas. The best, in my opinion, is either the Gold Strike (small room that spreads 3-6 and alot of omaha) or the Horeshoe. You can walk out the side entrance of the Gold Strike and be in the Horeshoe's room in 2 minutes. The Shearaton is less than 5 minutes away also. It has no poker but two or three good restaurants. Another choice would be Sam's Town. It is in a grouping with the Isle of Capri, Harrah's and the Hollywood. I think the hollywood has a small room but is the only other poker room. Late last summer, Sam's town was advertising free rooms for 8 hours play per day during the week. The Grand has a nice room but is not near any other facilities.
I am going to Mississippi in a few weeks.
Who has the best poker room? (comps etc)
Should I go to Tunica ot biloxi?
thanks
jdoe
grand biloxi biggest by far on coast and has pretty good action..imo....grand gulfport and treasure isle also have smaller rooms which have good action at times gl
Grand Casino Biloxi is probably your best bet. 21 tables, usually anywhere from 4-8+ 1-4-8-8 Holdem tables. You can almost always find a soft game. The only real attraction to Grand Casino Gulfport is the pot-limit dealer's choice game.
thanks,
thats where we decided to go. I will post how it went on my return
this was a hand at a very loose 6-12 game. 9 players. im on the button with AKc. 3 players limp and i raise. small blind calls and so do the rest. 5 players see this flop: 7c Qd Kh
everyone checks to me and i bet 6. sb calls and mid position player calls. 3 players see this turn card:
Jh
sb checks, middle player bets 12, i raise to 24. sb cold calls, mid players thinks for awhile and folds. sb is a major fish who plays nearly every hand to the river.
river comes 6d.
he checks, i bet 12, he calls.
what do you think?
Pretty bold turn raise given a board containing a K-Q-J. In this sequence, when someone leads right into you on the expensive street after you have shown all this strength,it should mean two pair or a straight. I think you should just call and not raise here. It is too easy for your opponent to have A-T,K-Q,K-J,Q-J, or even T-9. I don't think I would bet the river either despite the turn bettor folding. The cold-caller would still worry me. Will a worse hand call at the river? What better hand will fold?
Since you have position on the river I don't like your bet. I would just turn over big slick and see if he holds up.
on the river he checks, you bet:
if he mucks your no better off if he check raises your screwed if he can call he can win
Why risk a big bet for no payoff?
respectfully, jdoe
I like your play. The turn raise is a little risky because you might get 3 bet and have to call the raise because you still have a straight draw. But since this did not occur, there is a chance you have the best hand. You attempt to bet the river for value because of your knowledge of your opponent. As a rule of thumb, I would not bet here because I'm not sure of a call from a worse hand. But it seems to me like you got one here.
this was helpful to read these answers. this turn raise was a conditional one that i felt very confident about during the play of the hand but then later realised would have normally been wrong. i was raising a chronic bluffer fish who was holding ME in contempt for a hand i overplayed several hands before and we had had some words over it. that's why he bet into me, i knew if he reraised me i was in genuine trouble, he only liked to bluff when he could do it for one bet. the player to my left is the biggest idiot ever so i dont question my river bet. i knew he'd call with any pair.
anyways player on my left did call my river bet and he showed Q2h for Qs and a busted runner runner flush draw. he expressed verbal disappointment that the 6 was not a 2, i kid you not.
notice that even HAD a 2 (an apparent blank) fell on the river, this loony tune would have probably just called fearing a higher two-pair or trips or the straight. isolated against such a weak player, you can afford to bet for value more often.
I'm playing in a local, very straight-forward $3-6 game, where all players know each-other and most have played against the same bunch several days for months. Usually I don't have major second thoughts or concerns about my play in this game, I play tight-aggressive and do decent.
Tonight I lost a mere 7.5 BBs, but there are two pots that could've seen me leave a bit up instead.
First hand, I'm dealt TT next to UTG. UTG is on a major tilt and raising *very* liberally. This time is no exception, and I'd like to try to isolate him, so I raise. Only the button call my three-bet. The button knows I will only three-bet with AK to TT, maybe, just maybe, AQs (considering the raisor). Maniac in UTG position caps it. We both call.
Flop is K-J-5 rainbow. UTG bets out. I'm seriously considering raising him here (my only alternative to folding I think), maybe making him lay down QQ or AJ (though not likely). I lay down, button calls. Turn card is of course a Ten. I was getting 13.5:1, probably 14.5:1 (if button calls too) for the turn card. Of course a straight is not out of the question either. I figured it was an OK laydown, and is not upset. Until button raise UTG with the little he has left on the turn. Button shows 99 for a pair and an open-ended straight, UTG shows As3s for, well basically nothing. River is a blank and button takes down a nice pot with a hand worse than mine all the way...
Other hand, I'm holding 6s4s in SB. UTG limps, sane but loose-aggressive player raises, maniac from the previous hand cold calls. I figure I'm getting 17:3 for 1.5 small bets here, and BB and limper are likely to call as well. I make my questionable pre-flop call, and are right BB and UTG. Flop goes: AsQs6h!! If you ever get a dream flop with 6s4s this must surely be it. UTG checks, pre-flop raisor bets out, maniac raises, I just call, knowing I'm behind at this stage (but possibly with 14 outs), I don't want to drive the rest of the crew out. Well, BB and UTG folds. Turn card is 9 of hearts. Pre-flop raisor checks, maniac bets out, we both call. River card is 9 of diamonds. It's checked to the maniac, who bets out AGAIN. Once, again the semi-bluff possibility flies through my head. I may actually somehow have the maniac beaten here, but at the same time I know I'm beaten by pre-flop raisor, but a raise or even just a call from me will maybe drive him out here.
I lay down, grumbling about a 'broken draw with pair'... 'So you have a broken draw with pair, too,' pre-flop raisor says, 'I've got the pair of queens'. It's looking like he'll fold it to. Then it just pops out of me 'Wouldn't you consider calling HIM with that (looking at maniac) taking into account the way he's played tonight?' Pre-flop raisor immidiatly does. Maniac shows down KT for a broken gutshot straight and pre-flop raisor takes down a monster pot which seemed to have been forgotten by all and everyone. It's not often before I've seen three draws fight it out over a pot this size (11 BBs before the river). It's so easy really to lay down a draw when you know you've played with the right pot odds all way through, that to even consider your opportunities once all your dreams go down the drain... This is definitely a pot I would've taken down with a raise at the river. Is this purely co-incidental, or is it worth putting in 2 BBs to try steal a pot of 14 BBs (including my bluff raise bets) here?
I don't know what pre-flop raisor would do with a pair of Aces here, but then again, I also figure he'd re-raise the flop with AK or AJ, considering who the raise came from. My only problem is that the river doesn't excactly produce a scare card. Who is putting money in for two nines on the turn and the river (ACTUALLY, UTG limper had both the missing nines for folded quads)?
The interesting thing is that both times, doing what would've been the correct thing to do went through my mind? Could this have been things I picked up sub-consciously, or would any of you just based on my description of the hands and players involved consider these moves?
lars
first hand: good laydown. dont start thinking about (and telling us about) what came on the turn. it doesnt matter at all. good fold.
second hand: i think you had a possible check raise on the flop. this couldve slowed down some of your opponents, got some of them to fold. it's tough to bluff raise your busted draws on the river against multiple opponents. usually not advisable. heads up, do it every time.
First hand: The laydown of the TT was correct no matter what the results were.
Second hand: I would not have played it. It is only good for a flush draw or a straight draw both of which could lose to a higher flush or straight if it hits. It has no high card advantage. For a call of $2, I might have seen it, but these kinds of hands can suck a lot of chips away. Save your first 5 bucks for a better hand.
I was playing 5-10 with a kill tonight, when I ran into an interesting situation where I picked up a small read and acted on it. However, in retrospect, even though it was successful, I'm not sure it wasn't out of line given my hand. I was stuck about $125 for the session, the kill was at 10-20, and I'm in the cutoff. I had AdTc, and I limp after the kill button checked. That was a bad move, because the button and small blind were loose, and I avoid ATo multiway, but I was getting bad cards for a long time, and, well, I called, hoping it would fold to the big blind. The button called, the small blind called, and the big blind raised. The kill button and everyone else called. Pot = $100.
Flop KhTh6s
Big blind bets, fold, I call, fold, fold. I feel the pot is large enough to peel one off, although still marginal, because of the hearts and the big blind pre-flop raise (AA?).
Turn 8h. He reaches for his chips, looks at the board for a split second, and then bets. What I felt he noticed were the hearts. Therefore, realizing my hand is total garbage at this point and I have no way of winning, I say, "I raise," and put forty in front of me. Also, I have a tight image. He mumbles to himself while throwing in the other twenty.
River: 2h. He checks, I bet. He thinks for about ten seconds, then lays his AA (no heart, of course) face-up on the table.
Question: Was my raise on the turn in response to his hesitation a good, marginal, or bad play? I realize that this play is much better if I had a hand that might improve. When I left, my friend asked me if I had A,anything with the Ah when I raised on the turn, because he knows I would make that play, and he couldn't believe what I had when I told him. He said, "Well, I guess that was a good move, bold, but it worked!" However, with a pot that big, and considering what I could have been up against, should I just have folded the turn? I like creative plays, and I feel it is often the essence of the game, acting on reads, winning with the second best hand, as long as one doesn't overplay with any regularity. I'm sure this play would not have worked if I did not act as quickly as I did. Any thoughts?
wow, well from how you describe it sounds like you had a great read and you did what you could to win the pot with little care for how it might hurt your bankroll. in a word: AGGRESSIVE! awesome.
that said, your preflop calls were marginally bad and very bad respectively.
since this is really a 10-20 game you shouldve posted this to the medium stakes. im sure youd get some better replies there.
Hi all,
After a couple of months hiatus, I've been easing myself back into the $3/$6 Hold'em games in the local casinos. One casino I hadn't played in previously has been very good to me the last couple of weeks---the games are incredibly good!
At any rate, I was not entirely happy with my play of a couple of hands. I'll post one where I may have got a bit out of line here, and post another a bit later where I'm sure I played a bit too passively.
PREFLOP
At any rate, this hand finds me on the button with KQo. 4 limpers to me preflop, and I limp along as well. Both blinds call.
7 players, 7 small bets.
FLOP: K73 rainbow
Small blind bets. To listen to him, you know he's read some poker books, but his play does not reflect it. I've been very unimpressed with his play. The big blind raises. The big blind is a young arrogant player who thinks each pot is a dick comparing competition. He has some skills, but generally lacks patience, and at present is on full blown tilt. One cold-caller, an older gentleman who has been playing anything and everything and hitting cards left right and center.
I raise. This is the first play I find a little dubious. KQo makes such a nice second best hand, and I'm wondering whether I'm asking for trouble if I regularly make this play here.
However, in this particular situation, I'm reasonably certain that all three of my opponents would have raised preflop with AK, so I'm very certain I have the best top pair at the moment. Comments from any of you at this point?
At any rate, I raise, SB caps, and both BB and the cold-caller now fold. (For some reason, I get an inordinate amount of respect in this game ... my raises appear to be the only ones that fold people.)
So, going into the turn, I'm heads up with the SB, with 19 small bets = 9.5 big bets in the pot.
TURN: 4d (two diamonds now on board)
SB checks. I bet. I probably muck to a check-raise here, but SB just calls. Agree with this course of action, or should I check, take a free card, and maybe induce a bluff?
11.5 big bets in the pot.
RIVER: Td (making a runner, runner flush possible.)
SB bets. I call. I'm reasonably happy with this, as I doubt diamonds, and I'm getting 12.5 to 1 on a call.
I get shown KhTh for 2-pair on the river. Oh well, excrement happens. Nice hand, sir.
So, in summary, the two plays I want critiqued are the 3-bet on the flop, and the turn bet, with the intention of folding to a check-raise. Would you guys play this differently?
Thanks for the input,
Dave
"TURN: 4d (two diamonds now on board) SB checks. I bet. I probably muck to a check-raise here, but SB just calls. Agree with this course of action, or should I check, take a free card, and maybe induce a bluff?"
sb's cap is so so gawdawful it makes me want to cry. that is a REALLLLLY good game there. fish city. congrats in advance on all the money you will continue to make there.
that said, everything you did was probably right on the mark cause you have reads on all the players like they are open books. beautiful.
if it was a little more of a typical game and i didnt have a read like you did i wouldve been scared by the flop cap and wouldve checked the turn. i think if your plan is to bet the turn and then fold to a check raise you might as well just check the turn and call him down on the river. especially in a loose fish tank like this. a checkraise wouldnt have been a surprise from this sb and a fold to any sort of bet a player like this makes is a big mistake. you will win with your decent hands too often. your best offense on the expensive streets against his ultra bad semibluff is a good defense: check/call.
in the future i would suggest posting the results seperately in the same thread about a day later.
You did fine. Never give free cards in a game like this because the majority of your opponents will chase the board. Y