PAHWM: A2s goes bananas
1/3 - call 5 only NLHE
This is the only room I know where a good 1/3 player could make a decent living. I do about 30 BBs
No, I get it. My dumb a$$ would just muck, tap the table, and say "nice hand." Giving him another $500 and hitting him with a zinger is much better.
I can't wait to see the look on his stupid face when he realizes we would have been dumb enough to call off the rest of our stack in a spot where he has no bluffs.
I'd feel terrible about it if I were V. Either he had it all along and failed to get max value (we'd have happily called AI on the turn), or he fished for a 2 outer and most of his calls were really bad even after accounting for the implied odds he got on the river. And yeah -
Agreed. I wouldn’t read too much into a weak passive player advising to try and lose the minimum rather than win the maximum vs an obvious table full of fish.
I do agree that I would just stay quiet and not needle but flop and turn are played fine. Sometimes you get sucked out on doesn’t mean you played the hand well just means you’re playing poker.
So few players even consider what the side pot is. They are betting relative to the pot. Pretty gross spot. I don't know how he's ever bluffing. It's probably a sigh-fold (we could be behind V1 now, too), but I know in game I make the sigh-call. I don't see any reason to jam.
I bet v1 shows something like JQo with J♥
V5 shows something like 67o with 7♥
They were all drawing on a 2 outer straight flush but since they play with offsuits and hit the straight on the flop they couldn't fold.
What most likely happen is that v5 might even chase after it even if you overbet jam the turn.
I’m not sure I like the initial flop check but I like the rest of the hand as long as we call now. At the described table I am expecting to lose quite a bit here but I am not going to abandon this pot. Calling and losing is not as big a mistake to me as folding and getting shown that V5 had KhJx or some other junk like that.
obviously dont fold the river
V5 donks river for 500... we think for a bit just to make sure we understand math and add up how much is in the pot and then call (not sure what I would've done if he had shoved)...
V1 shows Q♣ J♠
V4 says he had A7 no ♥
V5 has J♥ J♣
V5 donks river for 500... we think for a bit just to make sure we understand math and add up how much is in the pot and then call (not sure what I would've done if he had shoved)...
V1 shows Q♣ J♠
V4 says he had A7 no ♥
V5 has J♥ J♣
NH, I might quibble a bit about the flop check, but they did stab and did call your x/r so hard to argue with the results.
Curious if V5 thought he was value betting or bluffing. If bluffing he should have jammed, but it is very conceivable that H has TT or a straight with no heart that might pay and it blocks H from bluffing.
Raising to $80-$100 pre, probably wins a slightly smaller pot. V5 is obviously coming along and will stack off, the others probably fold.
Nice hand, sounds like a really good game.
Not surprised by the showdowns at all -- fish play monotone flops really badly. Funny that people were wondering how the villains could possibly have sets in a limped pot and then the nit just shows up with JJ that limped pre.
I had the thought of raising river in case V1 has a SF and V5's side pot is my only profit ... thinking V5 probably doesnt have SF for this size?
V5 donks river for 500... we think for a bit just to make sure we understand math and add up how much is in the pot and then call (not sure what I would've done if he had shoved)...
V1 shows Q♣ J♠
V4 says he had A7 no ♥
V5 has J♥ J♣
Well played. In games like this you play your strong hands as fast as possible and try to win the max, not lose the min like some weak passive regs were suggesting.
I had the thought of raising river in case V1 has a SF and V5's side pot is my only profit ... thinking V5 probably doesnt have SF for this size?
I think I would be results oriented if I said river is a raise. It's obviously never a fold and while I agree somewhat that a SF doesn't play river like this we're also not getting called by worse(after showdown I'm not so sure but I obviously didn't know this then).
Nice hand, sounds like a really good game.
Not surprised by the showdowns at all -- fish play monotone flops really badly. Funny that people were wondering how the villains could possibly have sets in a limped pot and then the nit just shows up with JJ that limped pre.
A little surprised it's QJ without a heart but not surprised their range is wider than just straight flushes. It's almost as if fish play really bad and make terrible calls. Who would've known?
NH, I might quibble a bit about the flop check, but they did stab and did call your x/r so hard to argue with the results.Curious if V5 thought he was value betting or bluffing. If bluffing he should have jammed, but it is very conceivable that H has TT or a straight with no heart that might pay and it blocks H from bluffing.Raising to $80-$100 pre, probably wins a slightly sma
He was just clicking buttons, buying cheap showdown. Also props to Bananas reads, most of us realized their ranges were far wider than just straight flushes because of the descriptions.
Pre is an interesting debate and I'm not sure what is best. I have a feeling raising to 80-100 pre in this game is suicide even though it would almost always be my default.
Wow, huge pot at 1/3. Lots of implied odds with Axs and no one even had a flush. I guess that is what Sklansky meant about limping in wide as they will make big mistakes postflop.
I had the thought of raising river in case V1 has a SF and V5's side pot is my only profit ... thinking V5 probably doesnt have SF for this size?
Meh. He can't/shouldn't call w/ worse, and I'm OK w/ his size. Good effort by him, though. This is where image pays 😉
I had the thought of raising river in case V1 has a SF and V5's side pot is my only profit ... thinking V5 probably doesnt have SF for this size?
I think the more important thing about the size is that the price means you don't have to win very often for the call to be correct.
Agreed tho that sizing tells are rampant in ssnlhe. In a tougher game this player might have shoved with the str8 flush blocker but as it is he bet 1/4 pot bc he had a weak flush.
I had the thought of raising river in case V1 has a SF and V5's side pot is my only profit ... thinking V5 probably doesnt have SF for this size?
The bet size relative to the pot is less of a sizing tell when the pot size and bet size get big for the game. It may only be 1/4 pot, but it's $500 in a 1/3 game, which is a big bet. It's also kind of big considering that the side pot is small relative to the main pot, and you showed so much aggression on the flop and turn. If the all-in player has him beat, he's risking $500 to win $90.
If our read is that he's loose PASSIVE, he should only have SF's here. It's a spot where even aggro players aren't going to have many, if any bluffs.
Not looking to beat you up, Banana, but once again, the reveal doesn't really align with the reads you gave in your OP. Opponents who are "thinking", or "semi-aware" and "loose-passive" aren't typically going to stack off here with straights or turn weaker flushes into bluffs, given the action on the flop and turn.
Happy for you that you won the hand. Sounds like an amazing game. I'd caution you to avoid the mistake of over-playing your hand in super-multi-way, super-deep, limped pots, when you're OOP to most of the field.
The bet size relative to the pot is less of a sizing tell when the pot size and bet size get big for the game. It may only be 1/4 pot, but it's $500 in a 1/3 game, which is a big bet. It's also kind of big considering that the side pot is small relative to the main pot, and you showed so much aggression on the flop and turn. If the all-in player has him beat, he's risking $500
It's interesting that most in this thread understood what type of villain we're playing against, except for you? Is it perhaps that when you're playing 1/3 the EXACT description of fish doesn't matter because lets be real, 1/3 players are just awful at poker in general? Including regs.
Just an idea.
I'd caution you to avoid the mistake of over-playing your hand in super-multi-way, super-deep, limped pots, when you're OOP to most of the field.
This is good advice if you want to stay a 1/3 reg for life.
It's interesting that most in this thread understood what type of villain we're playing against, except for you? Is it perhaps that when you're playing 1/3 the EXACT description of fish doesn't matter because lets be real, 1/3 players are just awful at poker in general? Including regs.
Just an idea.
This is good advice if you want to stay a 1/3 reg for life.
Easy enough to gloat when you turn out to be right. It'll be interesting to see how quick you are to admit you were wrong when that appears to be the case.
Easy enough to gloat when you turn out to be right. It'll be interesting to see how quick you are to admit you were wrong when that appears to be the case.
Funny coming from the guy who doubled down after he was very wrong. But sure, lets pretend it was the fault of Banana's description of villain(s).
Didn't realize I was doubling down. The reveal was surprising, and not just to me, it seems. I'm certainly not the first or only person here to note Banana's reads can be misleading. But if it adds to your enjoyment, I'm happy to admit I was wrong, especially since I did say I'd be quick to admit it if so.
Pretty clear folding would be a big mistake when 3 players turned up with unreasonable hands. No one even had a flush or set. So obviously folding the nut flush afraid of a straight flush would have been really bad.
The result also shows the huge EV of playing Axs 6-way and deep in a limped pot, even though you don't make a flush also. That is also why small pps have huge EV in this situation, even though they don't make the nuts.
I was kinda hoping the guy who “wanted to fold the turn” had J7hh
