![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
I'm on the button. Fish to my immediate right folds out of turn. Player to the fish's immediate right now open-raises. He has just recently sat down in the game and is unknown to me. Not respecting his raise due to the out of turn fold, I 3-bet with QJ. WSOP million dollar champion 4-bets from the small blind. I've never seen him play this low before. He has just started, and we've never played against each other before. Original raiser folds, I call.
Flop comes AK6 rainbow. Champ bets, and I call with my gutshot.
Turn is a 9, board no longer rainbow. Champ bets. There are 7.5 BB in the pot, it will cost me 1 BB now plus likely another if I catch a queen or jack and am beat. I have the four 10's as outs, plus maybe one more effective out (out of six possible) for my pair draws, which might beat a pair like 88.
It's actually a close decision: take the pot size (7.5), add 1, divide by the number of bets we have to call (1), multiply by the number of effective outs (say, 5), and continue if the result (42.5) is greater than the number of unseen cards (46.) The pot size is actually little bigger than 7.5, due to the implied odds of getting extra bets when I win, but the cost is also bigger than 1 big bet when I catch a pair and still lose, reducing the overall odds. At the table, I did a rounded version of these calculations, and saw that with optimistic assumptions I could call. What tipped the balance to a fold for me was the fear of having to pay two bets sometimes when beat plus the 9 on the turn, which suddenly made it much harder for me to suck out on one of the plausible hands that beat me (99.)
I fold. Champ shows 76 offsuit.
This type of play is typical of world series champions, and so now you all know how to win the world series. I can't even necessarily fault him for it, as for all I know he saw my cards. It's not like he pulled that stunt with me holding AA.
I call it THE BATLLE OF THE GOOFS.
I'm heading out to L.A. for the weekend. I was wondering where the good pot limit HE games are. I am not a great player, so I'm not interested in the biggest games. Just games where I can risk about $2000 or so. Thanks!
One of the best games I ever played in is the $5-$5 blind pot-limit hold'em at Hollywood Park. Typically, with that stucture, if you raise to $25, you get one, maybe two callers. When I raised in that game I got as many as four callers!
There is a very fine line between brilliance and a seemingly bonehead play.
Bruce
And note he was still up 10K for the night in addition to making his opponent put in 2K with a terrible hand. I don't mind the play..he did put the guy on a lousy hand and was right.
Pot-limit hold-em three handed $10 and $25 blinds. I am in the big blind with A6 of diamonds. The button makes it $100. The small blind folds and I call. The button is a crafty, experienced pot limit player. He normally is an excellent player but has lost several big pots when the game was full when he was outdrawn on the river. He know I don't have much experience playing pot-limit. We both have around $3000 in front of us.
The flop comes Ax Qd 4d. I lead at the pot with a $150 bet. I have top pair nut flush draw. My opponent calls and raises the pot $300. I call. The turn brings a black King. I check and my opponent bets $700. I fold.
Comments appreciated. Was my flop call poor?
Bruce
Why wouldn't come over the top all-in at this point? The only hands I would worry about at this spot is KQ, JT or 44 and I would have good reason to think he has none of them at this point. If he had AA, KK, QQ, AK, and probably AQ I would put him in this spot: Pre-flop he is in best position playing a short handed game against an inexperienced player in the BB...I would just call hoping to extract some value out of the hand in a short game. Now on the flop, your bet would chase off a KQ most likely and he might not raise you with 44 prefering to wait until the turn to raise since once again this is a shorthanded game. He might make the semi-bluff raise with JT, but thats a gutsy move since you led with an A on the board and you are the inexperienced player here. So really I have eliminated most hands to fear. If you come over the top of him and go all in here with a decent draw to boot, he would almost have to have JT or a set to call. AK and AQ he might even fold since he thinks you fear him due to your inexperience and surely KQ would go flying into the muck. Just my thoughts...
Pot-limit dealer's choice - 3 blinds 10-10-25. This is perhaps my 5th hand at the table, I don't know the players, they don't know me, since I usually play at 5-5-10.
I am UTG with AA73 offsuit, I limp, 4 callers, including the blinds, pot 125.
Flop comes AA5 offsuit !!! I check, button player bets 100, I call, others fold, pot 325.
Turn 8 offsuit, I check, button player bets 300, I hesitate 4 seconds and call, pot 925.
River 6. He has about 800 left, I have more. I bet pot, trying to represent a bluff and hoping he has 55 or KK88, he thinks 10 seconds, looks at me and mucks.
What is the best move here: bet full pot, try for a check-raise or sell the hand with 1/2 or 1/3 pot ?
I am not a PLO player except in smaller tournaments, but wouldn't the best move here be make a raise on the turn since he has only $800 left? His call is getting him 1725-800 so if he thinks he has any semblance of a hand he would throw in the money. If he didn't have any kind of hand its unlikely he would have fired on the end with only $800 knowing its not big enough a bet to get you to lay down any kind of hand that you would have called on the flop and turn with. If anything else a bet on the end looks like like a slowplay of a strong hand, a check raise on the turn looks more like you are trying to move him off a hand and if he has something like KK or QQ he probably throws in his money. If I am wrong please tell me because I am trying to learn this game the best I can even though there is little chance to learn here in Vegas. I do wish they offered this game at "learner" limits such as they offer NL Holdem at 1-2 and 2-5 blinds.
I'm new to pot limit as well (in Edmonton we have a nice $1-2 half-half "learning" game).
I misplayed this situation once before in PLO. The key question is what does the other guy have when you have quads?
A. Nothing
B. Flopped a full house
In case A I would imagine you make more money by checking the river since how can he call if you bet into him?
Case B depends on the opponent's style and what he has. If he has a full house (especially the nut full house) he may just bet the river anyways. Then you can check raise his ass.
Hard to do when you have quads, but I think checking is better.
Jim Roy
Must be the Binion's version. No Discovery markings on the box. This one has Wilfred Brimley rambling on about who knows what, self-promotion by Binion's, and precious little of the final table action. A total waste of money.
Do you know where to find the Discovery channel version?
Thanks for any help.
Discovery Channel 1-800-544-1155
Based on this year's show, I wouldn't expect a lot of action from the '99 tape(I haven't seen it); mostly interviews, etc. Key hands are shown but there's no strategical commentary. Very professionally done, however.
The best action tapes are the '93-'95,'97,'98 ones, although Dick Van Patten makes Wilford Brimley sound like Doyle Brunson, and they almost miss the key Bechtel-Bonetti hand from '93.
Thanks BillM
I have the tapes you list. I agree. Dick Van Patten sounds like a kid at his first ball game. "Who do you think is going to win?". "How come he called without an Ace?"
The production values are pretty good though compared to the Binion's 1999 tape. It looks like a kid in junior high school did this one on his video camera for a class project.
But Wilfred was a complete and utter waste of tape. I hope they didn't actualy pay him.
The best of it.
Mick
"When he checks on the river what is my best course of action?"
Bet, you have a full house! :)
I think you played it right; what would he call with that you can beat? Now, what if he'd've bet $500 or $1K on the river?
There is almost no way anyone that would bet $500 on the end I would think. The mistake here is the other guy not betting the river. His bet, even if it was small is a strong representation of a flush, either he underbets because he has a small flush or he underbets trying to suck you in if he has the big one. When you call him and don't raise you are giving away that you either have no flush or medium flush. A weak or a strong flush and you raise him not wanting him to draw to a set if you have the strong flush and if you have a weak flush you raise him to move him off the medium flush. When the river comes nothing, he should make a pot bet to move you off that medium flush you might have and the pot bet also makes it unlikely you call a set. After all if he is a decent player he probably realizes you don't have a good read on him other than he hasn't shown any action so you are probably going to take him not to be likely bluffing in this spot.
Nine handed pot-limit hold-em game with $10 and $25 blinds. I am in the cutoff seat and make it $100 with 76d after everyone has passed. Both blinds call. I have around $900 left and the blinds each have over $3000 left.
The flop comes Ah 2d Td. It is checked to me and I bet the pot. I have a tight image and I am hoping to pick up the pot, but I also do have a flush draw. The small blind calls and raises another $600. The big blind folds. I call.
On the river I make a flush and win the pot. My opponent has AK. He was very surprised by my holding. I wanted my opponents to see me play a piece of cheese aggressively. I thought it would be good for my image and perhaps it would set the table for future plays.
Comments appreciated.
Bruce
I love to play this style of pot limit, but it will be more successful if you keep more money on the table. If the bring-in is $100, I would want a minimum of 4-5 grand.
With a short stack, this type of image will actually work against you unless you really plan to tighten up.
Well let's assume I have a big stack. When I get check-raised on the flop then how do I proceed? If I just call, and he leads on the turn, then I have to fold with one to come. Probably my best course of action is to reraise on the flop. I would then either check on the turn or make a big bet if I felt like my opponent could get off a hand assuming he checks on the turn.
Bruce
If you want to be short-stacked so that you don't have to play poker on the flop then don't play pot limit. And if you do, then certainly don't invest 10% of your stack on speculative cheese that is going to miss the flop 9 times out of 10. Your implied odds are just not there and you would be better to stick with big cards.
Looks like you played it about as well as could be played. The SB actually made the mistake by check-raising your draw, which made your call pretty close to correct. You got a price of 3-2 with a draw of just slightly worse than 3-2 (1.7-1). If the A-K had waited till the turn to move in on you, you would've had to fold.
Bruce
I don't think you played the hand badly. You raised BTF in the cutoff 100$ with 76s with the possibility of stealing 35$ in blinds. Not great but not terrible, depends on your assessment of the blinds and whether they would call. If they would, I would not make this play. Probably your steal attempt was the most iffy thing about how you played this hand.
On the flop, semi-bluffing with your flush draw is a reasonable maneuver. There is 300$ in the pot BTF. You bet the pot, so that's 300$ more. Your opponent called your 300$ (making 900$ so far) plus raised you another 600$. You should have only had about 500$ left, so that's 900+500=1400$ in the pot to your 500$ needed to call, or 14:5 odds. Since the odds of making your flush are 1.86:1 and 14:5 is greater than this, (almost 3:1) you have to call. Got lucky on the river. Made a great image play.
The image you gained by making this play is probably worth the 100$ you tried to steal with, but might not have been worth it if you had not won the hand and lost 900$. Of course, this assumes that you will play against these players again.
Keep in mind I am not the top forum expert on big bet poker, but I like the hand anyway. Interested in seeing what everyone else thinks.
Dave in Cali
You're showing some speed! - Like your style!
But you made a bad preflop raise and got real lucky in my opinion.
My game is 7-stud but here no way to exchange opinions about stud then my question will address to real high limits hold'em players. Suppose there's a table at Mirage (or everywhere) of $100- $200 (for instance) with these players seated: - Lou Krieger - Abdul Jalib - David Sklansky - Mason Malmuth - Johnny Chan - Ray Zee - Huck Seed
These are among the best hold'em players in the hearth (sorry for any forgetfulness). But hold'em is not 7-stud where there are no community cards (every player can have full house or quads or royal flush showing only two good cards) and where the fantasy or other skills in my super modest opinion are more readables. Who will be the winner in the long run? I think after 3-4 months of playing every player is break even (variance should almost be destroyed). In your opinion, limit hold'em is a better test for real skills than 7 stud? I think that if these players would fight in the same 7-stud game it would there be more more variance in their results. That is, hold'em has less fantasy plays than hold'em? Hold'em is a closer game than stud? Thanks, Marco -
Well first of all the best limit hold'em players are guys you never heard of. None of these guys are regular high limit hold'em players. Guys like Krieger, Malmuth, and Abdul are middle limit players that feast off poor playing competition, although I would venture that they are no dummies and could hold their own against a good field. Seed is a big bet game player and his relentless agressiveness would do him no good in this game. Ray Zee is a H/L player and Sklansky is known more for playing Stud at high limits. So basically I would have to go with Chan since he plays almost exclusively high limits where the games are often filled with skilled players and a live one or two thrown in. However he is not usually playing hold'em since its rarely played at the limits he plays at so that evens it out a bit.
As for your question, I think hold'em at this level is clearly the more skilled game. Hold'em against a skilled field is about balancing out your plays and not playing hands in a predictable fashion. Stud at high limits has a lot higher luck factor and generally plays fairly straight forward without the number of moves you see in hold'em. Therefore hold'em would show more skill if you only could choose one game to measure it, but that is not how it works in the real world. Players have games in which their strengths and weaknesses fit better in and they tend to play those games more only moving to the other game when they can play in a soft game. To prove who has better overall poker skills you have to use a HORSE format or at least the format used by the TOC. In any case I don't think you will find every player to be even, it won't even be close.
It would help the egos of the players and the clarity of the questions if you assume the table is filled with 7 clones of Mason Malmuth.
-Abdul
Should we call Mason or David pros? There is a topic don't you think Abdul? I would guess they both make more money from their other pursuits and their business than from the tables...
They've played more hours overall than many pros and won more money overall than many pros, so call 'em pros.
In case it wasn't clear, I meant replace everyone at the table with clones of one player: if not Mason Malmuth, then anyone else.
You characterize me as one of the "middle limit players that feast off poor playing competition." A more fair characterization is that I'm a short-handed hold'em specialist, California $40-$80/$60-$120, who feasts off the weaker pros. My short-handed specialization started as a means of avoiding smoke. Unfortunately, my bankroll took a plunge from blackjack, and I find many fewer opportunities for short-handed play now that I'm in Vegas, so I wind up mostly in crowded-smoky $15-$30 and $30-$60 games.
-Abdul
Sorry but I didn't want fire a debate! Sorry In my opinion, the players I indicated are very very good boys (I learned many good skills than the players wildbill seems to know!!!!!!! Marco
I am sure Abdul knows the better players more than I do, I just associate with the poker pros a lot more than I play with them. Occasionally I get in the 15-30 over there at the Bellagio, but I agree with Abdul that they just are big smoky affairs overrun with a lot of weak-tight pros or wannabe pros with a few live ones thrown in. When I am over there though I see the same guys up top playing limits unimaginable to 99.9% of the poker playing population. Sure many of them are staked or playing on short bankrolls, but I guarantee you they are among the best players around for a live or ring game. If you don't believe me, just read what Mike Sexton writes. Simply put the best players around aren't writers, they aren't tournament players, they aren't guys whose names you have ever heard of. In fact you may rarely see them play, often during the WSOP and thats it. They play in private games around the country and make more money annually than all but a handful of tournament pros who cash big in the major championship events.
I met one such player last year. I was referred to him for some sports betting information when he was in town for the WSOP. He admits he isn't much better than break even playing sports but it doesn't matter because his average year he earns over half million playing poker. He plays mostly stud in private games around NYC and Boston where the limits are often anywhere from 1000-5000. Unlike a similar limit game in CA or NV, those games have 4 or 5 businessmen, mostly Chinese, that gamble it up and have no worries dropping over a million dollars over the course of a year. They all play in private because they all feel safer there than in a casino where they might get robbed for all that cash and also to keep Uncle Sam out of the equation. If the guys you mentioned were better players I can assure you they would be joining in on this action. Johnny Chan does play in such games on occasion, but he settles for the 200-400 game in Bellagio more often than not. This is not to say that the guys you mentioned can't play and they might be able to hold their own in these games, but I doubt they would have the edge enjoyed by a few of the best players playing this type of circuit. One thing is for sure, you will never hear the very best players giving you advice or writing a book as the last thing they want to do is kill the golden hen by blowing their cover.
Thanks for your very interesting notes; i totally agree with your last phrase. Marco
If those 7 players play 1-2 or 100-200 , the result should be the same . Me I play the same on a 5-10 , 10-20 or a 15-30. What could change the way I play ; it's the people at the table , if there are an average of 7 or 8 peoples who see the flop in a passive game , I will play 4-5suited under the gun but if the game is tight I'll throw it . If someone bet on the river , I will consider 4 things : The size of the pot , what kind of hand could beat mine , is the better a bluffer and is there other people allready in the hand in a later position . I will never think: "ok I call it's only 10 but I wouldn't have call 30 with the same conditions "
First of all, your list is very far from being the best hold'em players in the world. Of the seven you mentioned, I believe you would see three winners one break even player and three losers: 1.Huck Seed 4.Abdul Jalib 5.Ray Zee 2.Johnny Chan 6.Lou Krieger 3.David Sklansky 7.Mason Malmuth
What I find interesting, is that of the 7 players you mentioned regarding limit hold'em, not one of them is in the top ten.
Your rankings of the players listed by the original poster are somewhat surprising. Not that I can speak from experience, but I would think that Ray Zee and Mason Malmuth should be ranked higher. I have heard that Lenny Martin and Mickey Coleman are two of the best limit hold'em players in the world. Would they be on your top ten list? If so, who would be the other eight?
The best I've ever played with is clearly David Chui. As far as limit hold'em goes, Lee Salem, Ray D., Tony D., Mickey Coleman, David Oppenheimer, KMS, Shun Ujida, and many others that I can't think of right now. The high limit hold'em players in California are exceptionally strong aggresive players. In Vegas, Mickey Coleman clearly makes the most money in the 80 game since it started. I haven't played it in quite some time now, but I do remeber the L.A. regulars to be much tougher than those in Las Vegas, with the exception of Mickey Coleman, Shun, and sometimes Steve Yoon(depending on how much he drinks). The names I mentioned aren't a top 10 list or anything, they are just better than the most of the names at the imaginary seven handed table you mentioned.
What about Chip Reese, Mark Weitzman, and Howard Lederer? I have heard these names mentioned in discussions about who the best players are. I also noticed that Huck Seed was playing a lot of 80-160 when I was in town a couple of months ago. You were often in the same game. What happens when guys like Huck, who have played a lot of higher limit mixed games, usually shorthanded, play in limit hold'em ring games?
In Ciaffone's NLPL book Stewart Reuben talks about a huge, multi-way, multi-raised pot he won(going all-in pre-flop for over $13K) with 9-9-4-4.
Discounting the specifics of this particular hand, what are the basic concepts of playing two non-connected pairs(four gappers?) starting hands in PLO.
What about two strong pair; what're you hoping to flop(other than quads); say a hand like Ks-Kc-8h-8d? Even a hand like Ks-Kc-Th-Td, I don't think you'd want multi-way action on a Qd-Jd-Ts flop(a Kh-Qh-Jd is a lot better, but still dangerous).
FWIW I would certainly not call an UTG raiser with 9-9-4-4 under any circumstances.....
I might play 9944 with your money. I guess it boils down to the old implied odds argument. If your opponent is deep enough than supposedly you can play just about any hand because of implied odds and the possbility of busting him. I think you need to draw the line somewhere and if you start playing garbage like the above hand you are on the wrong side of the line.
Bruce
Actually, I think you want your opponents to have SHALLOW money when you play trash.
In the hand Reuben talks about, all the money went in pre-flop. Had the fellows w/A-A-x-x & K-K-x-x been deep, Reuben woulda hitchiked home wearing a barrel. He got the side pot(s) from the guys w/K-J-T-9 & 7-5-3-2. Board was A-6-6-x-x.
#1 - KJT9 rainbow; #2 - 7532 rainbow; #3 - 9944 rainbow. 100K deals: #1 - 48%, #2 - 27%, #3 - 25%.
Change hand #3 to 9944 single suited. #1 - 44%, #2 - 26%, #3 - 30%. (numbers rounded off)
Lord knows how much 9944's EV drops when you factor in add'l AAxx and KKxx opponents; as well as suited cards in other players hands.
Reuben obviously knows his stuff; it's a good book; but he played cheese here and got very lucky.
I remember reading in that section Reuben acknowledged that passing the hand would be a better course of action. Two pair such as 99 44 in my opinion might be worth calling a raise in a heads up situation from a person who often raises up front with big pairs and then leads at the pot on the flop if small cards come (a common trait among inexperienced players). For a minimal raise u can often win a sizeable pot and it is a relatively easy hand to get away from. I would agree that it is a major trouble hand in a multiway pot like the one described in the book.
Nine handed pot-limit hold-em with $10 and $25 blinds. The game is fairly loose. Four limpers and I am in the cutoff seat with 35s and I call. Both blinds call.
The flop comes Q83 rainbow. We all check. On the turn comes a Five with a flush draw. Everyone checks to me and I bet $175. The small blind passes and the big blind raises the pot another $400. He plays fairly well, but he is overly aggressive to a fault. One other player calls $575. He is probably on a flush draw or maybe even a straight draw. He is an extremely loose player who thrives on giving bad beats. He is worth around 50 million dollars and the money really means very little to him. The competition of playing poker and beating the boys is his primary motive for playing. I call the raise.
On the river an Ace comes. There are no possible flushes. Both players check to me. I bet $600 and the big blind calls. My two pair wins the pot.
Comments appreciated. Should I have reraised on the turn? Should I have made a bigger bet on the river or perhaps even just check on the end?
Thanks,
Bruce
Wow.
I hated your bet on the end. When I bet the river, I'm thinking what hands that are worse than mine will call, what hands that are better than mine will fold, and, of course, what hands are better than mine and will call. You also need to factor in the check-raises.
When you add this up, in a PL game, it amazes me that your opponent called the $600 and couldn't beat bottom 2-pair. Basically, looking at the list I made above, I would have guessed that there were just about no hands worse than mine that would call, and few hands better than mine that would fold, so why bet?
But, if you know your player, that makes the difference. Against generic opponents, it seems like a bad bet to me.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I agree that my bet on the end was risky. There were a few motivating factors. When I was checkraised on the turn I thought my opponent was making a play at the pot. He knows I play tightly and I thought he was trying to steal from me. If he couldn't beat bottum two than he really didn't have much of a hand and my assessment was true to a certain extent. Secondly I wanted my opponents to see me make a questionable value bet on the end where I don't have the nuts. I thought this would be very helpful for my future image and would help me get more action down the road.
Bruce
Yes, you should've reraised the turn. Two bottom pair is a scary hand to let anyone keep drawing (I can't imagine you enjoyed seeing that Ace come on the river).
My guess is your opponent had a Queen. With the presence of the cold call of $575 on the turn, I would have re-raised on the turn to make both players pay to beat me. A $1500 raise would have been my choice.
Pot-limit Omaha with $10 and $15 blinds. The game is fairly loose. There are four limpers and I check in the big blind with JQ23.
The flop comes J22. I flopped a baby full house. I bet the pot and I get two callers. We all have around $3000 in front of ourselves. Both callers are very lively although not overly aggressive.
On the turn an Ace comes. I bet $350 and both players call me. I still think my hand is good. There has been no raise and it is unlikely I am up against pocket Aces or Jacks. I am somewhat concerned about A2 lurking out there.
On the river a Jack comes. The board is J22AJ. I check. I am now very concerned about a possible A2 or AJ in my opponents hand. The next opponent checks and the last opponent bets $450. After much deliberation I finally call. The other player folds. I lose to AJ45.
Comments appreciated. Should I have called on the end?
Bruce
Against most opponents, yes, you should have called on the end.
You've been betting, and they've been just calling. Then, when what should be a good card (if you haven't been bluffing) for you comes on the river, you check. I would think, more often than not, that my check just induced a bluff from my opponent (he's put you on trip 2s with no full, and figures you'll fold now), or that he is very likely betting trip 2s or Js for value.
You only lose to AJ and AA, and given the way the hand has been played, those don't seem too likely.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Pot-limit Omaha, nine handed game, with $10 and $15 blinds. There are five limpers and the button makes it $100 to go. Everyone calls including both blinds. I was in the cutoff seat and had passed.
The flop comes K23 rainbow. Everyone checks to the raiser who bets $600. The only player who calls is the first limper. There is now $2000 in the pot. Both players each have around $10,000. The limper is a very loose player who is fearless. The preflop raiser is an overly aggressive player who frequently attempts to runover the game.
The turn brings a Six, with no flush draw. The initial limper checks. The preflop raiser bets $1500. The limper calls the $1500 bet and raises the pot $4000. After much deliberation the initial raiser calls.
The river brings a Ten. The limper makes a pot sized bet and the preflop raiser folds. The limper has JT45 and the initial raiser had flopped a set of Kings.
If you were the preflop raiser how would you have played the hand on the turn? Would you have bet or checked and why? If you bet and were raised the pot would you have folded?
Comments appreciated.
Bruce
I would have checked the turn behind the other guys check because I would have to call a check-raise but wouldn't like it. That 6 is a scary card. Given that there is only one big card on the flop, the limper must have a big straight draw or combo hand like 5678 or 2345, or a baby set. He sure played it more like a draw, as a fearless loose player would have probably raised a set on the flop.
I don't see how the guy could have made a pot-sized bet on the river if he started the hand with only 10k. By my count, they each put in over 6k on the flop and turn. That would make over 12k in the pot and only 4k left. I would think the aggressive guy might have to make a crying river call for 4 to 1 odds on the off chance that the loose guy had some garbage like AK66 or 5667.
The amount of chis left in the stacks would also influence my play on the turn. If I knew I would have to call the river anyway, I may have gone ahead and moved all-in instead of just calling.
PLO is a brutal game! When you get a couple of aggressive players with lots of money, it becomes very dangerous.
(1) I would never limp in UTG with JT54; now that is gambling.
(2) However, once the flop comes, I think (UTG) played it perfect.
(3) The turn is very dangerous; he could only call with a small run down 6543 or a baby set. When the flop comes, he sure isn't likely to have a king.
(4) The raiser could check behind on the turn and fold on the river. If the made straight wasn't possible on the turn, I would bet the pot with my set and try to make him lay it down or hope he calls and miss the straight draw.
I am going to Vegas the morning after Thanksgiving, (for the weekend) and would like to play in some small NLHE and/or PLHE live games. Is the Stratosphere the only game in town? Any input would be greatly appricated (i.e. "play the slots you have more of a chance") Thank you in advance, eric
PL is played at the Plaza a couple times a week, I forget which ones. I think its listed in Card Player what days and times.
There are two definitions of skill: (1) the advantage a better player has, (2) the strategic complexity of a game. These are not necessarily the same. "I think after 3-4 months of playing every player is break even (variance should almost be destroyed). In your opinion, limit hold'em is a better test for real skills than 7 stud?"
7-stud is the more complex game strategically. That said, better players have more of an advantage in high-limit holdem. The reason is that mistakes in stud are less critical - it's usually closer between calling and folding than in holdem so your exact decision doesn't matter as much. Because of the upcards, hands where one player has a substantial advantage often end early. So hands that continue to the river tend to be fairly close. Also, the high-ante structure in high-limit stud means that you more often have odds to call someone down. In holdem, the community card nature of the game usually gives the better hand a major edge on the flop. In high-limits, the pots tend to be small relative to the bets, making incorrect calls critical errors.
In mid-limits the reverse is true. Since the ante structure in mid-limit stud is moderate, you get fewer automatic situations than in high-ante games. Tight play is more exploitable in stud than in holdem. The greater variety of situations in stud gives a significant edge to a player who can adjust well. The difference between an expert and an okay player is greater in stud than in holdem. (Extremely high antes erode that difference, while the moderate antes in mid-limit games do not.) "I think that if these players would fight in the same 7-stud game it would there be more more variance in their results. That is, hold'em has less fantasy plays than hold'em? Hold'em is a closer game than stud?"
David Sklansky brought up an interesting point recently, which is that when high-limit half holdem/half stud games were spread, they broke up since the holdem experts won all the money.
"David Sklansky brought up an interesting point recently, which is that when high-limit half holdem/half stud games were spread, they broke up since the holdem experts won all the money."
I play more hold-em now than stud, but I have a lot more years at stud. The main reason all the hold-em experts won all the money is because the game is so much faster and plays about 1/2 again as big. A lot more money goes into hold-em pots than into most stud pots. There is simply more money to be won at hold-em.
The lower "ante" (blind) ratio in high-limit hold'em does give the good players a bigger edge over bad players than in Stud in that respect. However, I am not so sure that this applies to the better players against the excellent players. In High-Limit Stud the good player's edge against the bad players is diminished, but I wonder if the great players do not still have more of an edge against the good players at this game than they do in Hold'em. Once someone is a tight, good solid player in Hold'em it is hard to beat them for much, but I know that in medium-limit Stud this is not the case. Whether this effect of an excellent Stud player being able to significantly outplay a merely good Stud player spills over into High-Limit Stud is what I am wondering about. My feeling is that it does--and significantly so. This is because there is just so much more play to the game.
The above and below thoughts are my take on this question. I do not yet play High-ante Stud, so these ideas are definitely not set in stone and I would appreciate further analysis and ideas:
While chasing in Stud becomes more correct with a larger ante, the opportunity for expert plays still exists, I feel, to a larger degree than it does in Hold'em because so many more unique situations arise. The Stud expert can still extract extra bets from a good player, and he can have a better sense for when to play aggressively. A great Stud player will also be a much better reader of hands than a good stud player.
So while in one sense there is less play to the high-limit Stud game (chasing is more correct), in several other ways there is more play to the game than in Hold'em (reading hands, playing aggressively at the right times, getting extra bets, unique situations, and the art of combining myriad factors when making certain decisions). While there is more information available in Stud, correctly combining all this information and coming up with the best play can be more complicated than in Hold'em. Also there are more pivotal plays in Stud with the potential for compounding advantages or errors--for instance what may seem like a tiny difference early in a hand may be very significant. Even the timing of ante-stealing becomes critical, and such things are sometimes like walking a tightrope.
Summary:
High-limit/Medium Limit Hold'em = good players have bigger advantage over bad players
Medium Limit Stud = Excellent players have bigger advantage over good players
High-Limit Stud: Good players have lesser advantage over bad players; Excellent players have bigger advantage over good players than in Hold'em, but lesser advantage over good players than in medium limit Stud (unless the "good" players cannot adjust to high ante in which case they are in big trouble).
Occasionally the opportunity for very creative high-level plays comes up in Stud. An example would be Mason's Hand to Talk About from an old archived post where he had buried fives against open fives. The opportunity for such creative high-level plays just does not arise in limit hold'em. This element of Stud adds to the expert's advantage over merely good players.
Summary:
I am a highly creative stud?
Here's a PLO hand that cost me some sleep. 25-25 PLO, loose game, I overcall opener middle position with Ah Qh Jh 3s, 5 people see the flop.
Flop is Kc 10s 2h. I have broadway wrap, with nut backdoor flush draw. Blinds check, opener bets 100, I raise 300 hundred, all fold except opener, who calls.
Turn is ugly for me--Kd. Opener checks. He is a loose player, but I think he respects my play, and we really dislike each other. I hate the card, but I don't think he's happy either.
I bet 600 and he calls. I think he hesitated because he was thinking of raising not folding, but again I'm not sure.
River 7d, a blank if ever there were one. He bets 300 into the pot. I want to raise him 1500, but that's almost my entire stack. I think about it for a while, and fold. He makes some comment like "good fold" which is basically meaningless. Your comments, please. . . My analysis will be provided later.
Fold preflop. There's no reason to get involved here in a multiway pot with a flawed hand. This hand is much weaker than it looks since the straight potential of AQJ is small.
Why did you raise on the flop? Do you want to knock out a weaker version of your draw?
On the turn, don't fall into the trap. A tricky player would check-raise if he thinks you would play at it. Unless he has the same draw as you, the card hit him and you're done with the hand. His call here clues you in to his hand - only a moron would call here with a draw, and if he has any skill at all he has to have some made hand. Your flop raise represented trips, so now that the board paired, either he has you beaten or he is a total idiot.
On the river, his small bet is also a probable trap. Since there is nothing you can beat, your options are a raise-bluff or a fold. To raise-bluff, you really have to know your opponent, and you have to be believably representing a better hand than you know he has. This isn't an ideal spot for that play, since he could easily have the nuts in this spot, and since his turn call indicates strength that the river card doesn't change. This is a clear fold.
So I played NL for the first time tonight, the 2-3-5 10 to go game at Artichoke Joe's, california. Lots of fun. Really different than limit games.
A couple of hands came up that I wasn't sure how to handle.
1) I'm on the button with AKs. Loose player in middle position raises to 40, I make it 140. BB raises all in for another 400. Original raiser thinks for a long time, then calls all in for around 300. I have 600 or so left, the pot is around 900.
What should I do here? My thinking is that I'm up against at least one pocket pair, in which case I'm either a small dog or a very big one. I lay it down. Loose player in first has AQo, the BB had TT.
2) I'm in the small blind with KK. Player early raises some small amount with about 600 behind. Several callers, and I raise about 300 of my 550. Early player goes all in, I call. He has AA.
At which point do I lay down KK before the flop? I feel like I played this ok -- I was pretty pot committed there, and he could have lots of things, but it made me wonder at which point I fold KK in a money game.
This NL thing looks fun.
- target
Hand 1 - Original raiser thinks for a long time. For most players, that means he does NOT have KK, and of course he doesn't have AA, unless he is capable of acting like that to suck you in behind him. Most often, he has a smaller pair or AK, AQ. The BB is your main concern. Could he have AA or KK? Of course. The real question is how likely it is. If you can read him for a smaller pair than kings, then you probably call here, as you're getting 2:1 for most of your money where you'll win more than 33% of the time. However, you need to be pretty sure (>~90%) that the BB doesn't have KK or AA.
Hand 2 - He's put in a small raise, the bring-in is $10, so I'm guessing that the raise is like $30. Why do you raise to $300? If he has AA, you're pot-stuck. If he has KK, you're tied. If he has anything else, he's folding. Unfortunately, against most opponents, you've guaranteed yourself to win a small pot or be a big dog in a big pot. I prefer to make proportional, or about pot-sized, raises. If he made it $30, you make it $90. When he goes all-in, you now have room to read the player and maybe make the good laydown. If he has less than AA, it is more likely that he will call with his AK or whatever, and you're in position to win more money, on average, than a big raise would typically have garnered.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Hand 1. Of course if you put the original bettor on A-Q (or worse A-K) type hand then at least one of your six outs is bad so your odds a bit worse against a pair than normal. If the original bettor is a real player he is probably trying to figure out if you have AK or a small pair (to see what outs he has).
Secondly if you give BB either AA or KK, he will have KK about 75% of the time (as opposed to AA) - so your 2 outs give you about a 10 to 1 dog (my guess Greg has the number I am sure).
So, you are either a dog (more so than normal against a pair as one of your outs is probably not there) or a big dog (against a KK) or a dead duck against a AA.
In my view the hand is not playable.
I almost came down last night! Maybe see you next Sunday.
Hand one: I'd call, mainly because I come well funded. I don't think there's anything wrong with mucking though if you didn't have any more (or much more) in your pocket, and you wanted to wait for a better spot to get all in. If you had, say, $1500 to $2000 more in your pocket, then by calling you might not only win a good pot, but send a couple players on tilt for a while. That happens a lot in that game, so much so that the residual effect of busting someone can tip the scales on close decisions, that is, assuming YOU don't tilt after rebuying, and that you've got deep pockets that day.
Hand two: I agree with Greg that your preflop reraise was too big. I think the most important thing in that game is knowing your own pot-stuck threshhold, and also the threshhold for all other players at every point in every pot. Be careful though. Some players might start a hand with $800 and become pot-stuck and committed in their mind even though they've only put $200 in the pot so far.
I've only laid down pocket kings before the flop twice at no-limit. Both times there were FOUR players involved, not just two. Someone limped, someone raised, I raised, and then another player came over the top all in. Both times the all-in amount was about four-times what I had raised and I had that much on the table. And both times I thought, "Do they have Queens? No. Ace-king? No. Had to be aces, given the players. Both times a short stack went all in too so I got to find out that I was right! Whew!
So the real question is, if you had put in, say, 1/5 your chips, and the other guy shoved all in, would it be right to call? The answer is, I have no clue. It's a feel thing. There are plenty of players who will shove in with less than aces for $500 to $800 or thereabouts. You need to know who has deep pockets and who is on scared money, who likes to gamble preflop and who likes to shoot 'em in the nest. Those things are least as important as the cards in that game.
Tommy
Hand 1: I usually smooth call with AK here. Remember, any pair has you beat at the moment. But, on
the all in by the blind, you have to fold.
Hand 2: I usually re-raise 4 times the previous raise,
this way if someone jams me, I can get out.
However, if I'm low on chips (lets say I
have $500 and raise $300) I will move the
rest of my chips to the center with KK
I am just sitting down at a pot limit hold em game and I am in the big blind. The minimum buy in is 300 and that is what I have in front of me. A late middle position person raises the pot...all others fold to me and I look down and see AQ hearts. I think for a minute and raise the pot making it 160 to go. He looks at me and the dealer and says, "Put him all in" and I called.
Was this a good or bad play on my part given my limited stack in front of me? Results later.
I think you're pot-stuck once you make it 160. You're going to be getting about 3.5:1 on the call, so you have to be sure he's on KK or AA to fold here. Since you're new to the game, and presumably don't know this player, a call is in order, rather than a save of $140. Plus, if you put in $160 and then fold for $140, you'd better quit the game, because you're going to be pressured all night long if you keep playing.
I wouldn't have reraised the player. Just call and see the flop.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
I would have prefered a smooth call BTF and then move if you hit an Ace, Queen, or a flush draw.
My first trip to Vegas was not without it's excitement. I started off well enough winning about 600 the first day and a half, but gave it all back and more in a brutal string of bad beats in a 10-20 game at the mirage. Such is life. I did try out the no-limit game at the Stratosphere on Sunday night, though. This was my first experience with live no-limit and I had a blast. There are two hands that I'd like oponions on. I have KK in late position. I raise to 10 and get one caller, I think she was on the button. The flop comes K 8 3 rainbow. I check figuring that I want my one opponent to catch up on the turn, and there are very few cards that can hurt me. The turn comes an Ace. I like this card because there's a good chance that she made aces. I decide to bet 30 which she calls. Now I'm fairly certain that she has an ace. The river blanks off. I'm fairly certain she has an ace, and I'm 99% certain I have the best hand. How should I handle the river. Should I bet a small amount, hoping to get raised? Should I bet a substantial amount, hoping to get called? Or should I check, hoping that she's overcommits herself to the hand, thus letting me double up? Results to follow. The second hand I have AKo in middle position. It's raised to 7, then re-raised to 30. I just call and early position (EP) calls. EP is a fairly new player, but something about him tells me he plays very aggresively. The flop comes Ace rag rag. EP checks, the re-raiser is visibly upset about the Ace flopping, and I immediatly put him on Queens. He checks. I bet 40 and EP calls. Re-raiser folds. The turn comes a Queen. EP checks, I bet 60 and he raises all in for 120 more. I had a feeling that he was making a play at the pot and I also thought that the most likely hand that he had that I couldn't beat was AQ. But having put the original raiser on QQ, I thought that was unlikely. How often do you make this call? I know it depends upon the player, but against a typical, aggresive opponent, do you call? Results to follow.
Thanks for any responses and sorry for the length.
Questions for hand #2: what was the re-raiser's reaction to the Q on 4th street?; how many players started the hand? what is the blind structure in this game?; how deep are you?
PM
Sorry, I guess I should have provided more information. There was no visible reaction from the re-raiser which I wasn't particularly happy about since he was visibly upset about the Ace. It was a full table of ten, the blinds were 1 and 2 dollars and I had about 400 in front of me at the start of the second hand.
If it's early in the session, I call here against an agressive player. Pounding with AK can get you broke in NL, but an image of being someone who plays AK hard can may make money for your big hands later in the game. Plus, it has a good chance of being the best hand.
NL is such a people game, it's hard to say without being there. What happened?
please mike..results! Great post!
The first hand is the hand that I've thought about the most from the session. I obviously won the hand, but I think I could have gotten more out of it. I ended up pushing all in fairly quickly on the river. I knew that this player would not call without a really strong hand, so I think I made a mistake. She didn't call and she showed me an Ace. I'm not sure if checking or betting a smaller amount trying to sell the hand would have been correct.
The second hand was very nerve-wracking for me. I thought about the call for about 5 minutes. I'm not a man with tremendously deep pockets so losing this pot would hurt. Finally I decided that he was making a move and I called. My AK was good. He didnt' show but someone said something about him have a pair of threes. I guess he thought I would lay it down.
Overall, my experience in live No Limit was some of the most exciting poker I've played. The stratosphere is a great place to get your feet wet since the blinds are small and it's hard to lose a tremendous amount of money.
Good post!
Overall, my experience in live No Limit was some of the most exciting poker I've played. The stratosphere is a great place to get your feet wet since the blinds are small and it's hard to lose a tremendous amount of money.
This was the prevalent form of Hold 'em in the late 60's and early 70's. It's a lot of fun. I've seen a $50 buy in turn into $1000 in three hands. Be forewarned: it is addictive.
A full game at the Stratospher is 9 handed not 10 handed.
I think that you should have bet a moderate amount of money (under $50) on the river with your set of kings. Women players have a tendency to call with more hands than they will bet with.
As for the second hand, I think you were out of line to call a re-raise in the first place. Typically a re-raise in no-limit means a big pocket pair. Also I most likely would not have called the all-in raise with only one pair because you can pretty much only beat a bluff.
But hey, what do I know; its been a while since i won in either no-limit or pot-limit. I'm glad you beat the game.
Falcon
Hand 1: I would have bet about $80 on the river. Hand 2: Calling a re-raise with AK is a very bad idea.
Having done this, once you hit an Ace or
King, you are there all the way.
Regarding your AK hand, I would probably be inclined to bet more than you did on the flop. With $93 in the pot and two opponents, I'd probably bet $70 in hope of winning the pot immediately. Why did you only bet $40?
Hello I am very new to pot limit and I think Im making a lot of fundamental mistakes. Here is a question I have about a hand I played last night. The blinds are 5 and 5 and Im in the small blind. Someone in middle position raises to 20 and there is a caller. I have pocket Jacks and 330 dollars in front of me. Everyone at the table has much more. I called, but perhaps raising is correct? I simply dont know. There was 1 more caller in the BB, so we saw the flop 4 handed. The flop came T43 with 2 clubs. I bet the pot at this point which was 80 I believe. The button, who had called preflop called my bet. The turn brought an ace of hearts. How do I play now? One note about the player is he slowplays a VERY VERY LARGE amount of the time. Also he makes horrible calls preflop with hands such as 62 offsuit in that situation. I had 210 dollars in front of me on the turn with a pot of 240.
Given your stack size, I like just calling here. If you raise the pot, you'll make it 90 to go. At this point, you'll only get called (most likely) by hands that are ahead of you, or that are almost even with you (e.g., AK or AQ). Importantly, you'll be out of position.
Now, if the flop comes with any one of A, K, or Q, what do you do? If the opponent has top pair, you probably lose. But, if you check-and-fold, you're asking to be bluffed out. If an A comes, that might be just the perfect card for you to use to bluff out KK or QQ, but you won't know it.
This is why I would call in your spot and see the flop. You then have room to play the hand, and get away cheap if an overcard falls.
I like your bet on this flop. Make AK pay to draw, but be prepared to lay your hand down if raised. I typically bet somewhat less than the pot, like $50 or $60 in your example, but always betting the pot everytime you bet is also good.
That A on the turn really does suck. Hopefully you had decided, as soon as your opponent called, what you would do when an A, K, Q, or J fell, so that you could do it decisively. You have to read your opponent here to know what to do. When they called, did you put them on overcards only, a T, an overpair (thus, almost certainly better than yours), or some sort of strange draw (e.g., 56s)? If you put them on an overpair, then bet out on the A, as it just gave you room to bluff them off KK or QQ. If you put them on overcards, check-and-fold. If you put them on a T, check and judge them. Do they have AT or some other T?
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Is this Greg Shahade, the chess player?
How many Greg Shahade's could there possibly be :) Also I checked and folded when he bet the pot. Thanks for the response.
My pokerexperiance is limited to reading, homegames, softwares & 5 card Draw turnaments ( potlimit ).
And now i will try out a Omaha, Texas Dealers choise, cashgame(potlimit). Blinds at 10,10 and 20 for UTG if he choise to. My experience of those guys are, Some of them are Swedish champions but most of them are Swedish boneheads (loose aggressive).
I´m mostly in this game for experience......
Questions:
1)How much money should i bring to the game?? 2)´which Starting hands should i play???
For 10,10 blind PL, the buyin would typically be a required minimum of 300-500, maybe 1000. If you aren't prepared to pull 2000 or more out of your wallet, I would recommend not playing.
As for starting hands, you're asking for too much information. You need to buy and study the right books. I recommend the Ciaffone book on PL and NL poker. It has sections on PL Omaha and PL HE, both of which are very good. The Brunson book "Super System" is also good for NL HE, which translates mostly to PL.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Here's a hand that bothers me.
I'm playing $1-2 pot limit Omaha. I'm still relatively new to pot limit and it's perhaps a stretch for my bankroll. But the players are VERY weak and I have been really dominating (thus really beefing up my bankroll). I buy in for $200 and am prepared to lose $400-$500 before I take the rest of the night off (I can take that kinda hit but losing a G-note in one night would rattle me). The game is generally quite passive so losing $400 is tough to do (most of the time players are sitting with about $50-200 in front of them).
So I've worked myself up to $1500. Wow. Now that you know the context here's the hand:
Small blind raises (can't remember how much, it was fairly small) and I call with trash. I know he has "pocket aces" or kings and tends to overplay them for Omaha.
The flop is 7d 3c Qs. I have 456 so I take off a card to his $20 bet (I am now sure that he has an overpair). One caller behind me.
The turn is the 5c. I have 4c 6c for the current nuts and a straight flush draw. The raiser bets $40 and I raise the pot which is about $150. To my surprise the button calls. Raiser mucks.
The button is the most Dangerous on the table and he bought in for $1000. It is difficult to put him on a hand. I am dissapointed that he called because I just don't want to lose that kind of money in one hand.
The river is an offsuit eight for a board of 3578Q and I check. Mistake?
Mr. Dangerous immediately bets the pot ($450). Now I ponder.
I think back to a hand he was involved in with another player a few weeks ago where he raised before the flop in holdem. The board is Js7h2h and he check calls the flop. Turn is say a 3c. Flop better makes a substantial bet on the turn which is called by two players (one very bad player). River is Ah and Mr. Dangerous bets the pot (very big, like $500) into the flop better. Mr. Dangerous pulls out a cigarette and looks at the ceiling. Flop better had AJ so after a couple minutes deliberation he calls and defeats Mr. Dangerous' KsKh.
As I'm thinking about this Mr. Dangerous pulls out a smoke and is watching the TV. Hrmm, a tell? Another thing you should know is that Mr. Dangerous will often call with incorrect odds to the nuts. He may also already have had the nuts on the turn or simply a busted flush draw/set. Perhaps a flush draw with the 69?
If the bet was smaller I would easily call. But I promised myself that I wouldn't get involved with $500 bets unless I had a monster. Normally in ring games I will take a slight increase in value with increased variance no problem but pot limit is a different story.
I decide that the tell is not very reliable and that he probably has 69 or 46 (his most likely holding being 46 for a chop). I'd say that the hand breakdown guesstimate might be 60%-46 20%-69 20%-busted-draw. I'm thinking that risking $450 to win $225 is not enough for me and I lay it down.
Given my situation was this correct? I know that I am giving up a lot of potential profit to protect my stack.
I find out the next day that he actually had 46.
Comments welcome.
Jim Roy
A couple days later I raise with JJ on the button and get about 4 callers (including Mr. Dangerous).
Flop is 6 8 10 rainbow and it is checked to me so I bet just a little bit under the pot. Two players call, Mr. Dangerous and another suckout artist. The turn is a 4 and they check again. I decide to bet since they love to suck out. I bet $45. Mr. Dangerous puts me all in for $200. I deliberate and he pulls out a smoke and looks at the ceiling. I muck and he shows everybody 57o. Whew.
So the smoke tell is not reliable at all :(
He would have raised on the turn with the made straight plus a redraw (either to a bigger straight 9654 9864, a flush Ac7c64 or a full house 7764).
So either he has the made straight without a redraw (64 dry) and hopes for a blank at the river, either he has a combination of 2 strong draws (straight + flush Ac8c76) or a combination of an inferior made hand (2 pair or trips) and a strong draw (AcKQ7c).
But it is difficult to construct a hand which contains 96 and justifies a call on the flop (9776 ??)
So you have to check and call at the river, hoping for a bluff (missed draw) or a tie. If you are sure he wont bluff you in this spot, it is even better to bet full pot at the end since he may release 64.
.
i think i call. i shouldn't be giving pot limit omaha advice to anyone, but i promised mr brier and i am a man of my word.
i can't think of many hands that will call the flop bet with 96. 9865 and 9776 and i think that's it. but i know nothing about this game so don't listen to me.
scott
see ya tomorrow.
scott
The above analyses is excellent. I think a call is definetely in order for the above stated reasons. One thing that bothers me about your post is it appears to me like you're playing scared. It's very difficult to beat a pot limit game on scared money. Your more attuned opponents will run all over you.
Bruce
In a way you are right I am playing scared. However I am demolishing the game because the other players are typical low limit players (who believe that this is a low limit game because of the tiny blinds) who are playing more scared and are also just bad and easy to read. The exception is Mr. Dangerous who buys in for 5 times the amount that anyone else does and thus he makes it a bigger game.
But despite the huge mistakes like the one I mentioned I am doing very well at this (because of the bigger mistakes of others or maybe just blind luck). Still I'm new and I find myself making mistakes every session. Pot limit seems like a difficult game to master but that's why I like it.
5-5-10 Pl hold-em. In BB with Ah-Jd. Cost 40$ to play. Flop is J-10-x with two hearts. player A checks original raiser makes it $150, I call, smooth caller (A)calls. Player A is playing only nut or near nut hands. Two players are making $40 straddles, which he never calls. When he hits he gets little action due to his tightness. Therefore, he goes down 2 0r 3 hundred over several hands then when he hits gets it back, but no more. Heart on the turn. Player A bets $600, raiser smiles and folds, I come over the top for $2400 (Actually I just glide my stack out there) I just started playing PL at last years WPO in Tunica. Given the type of player he was I thought this was a no brainer.
Comments please
You know your opponent can't have the nut flush with you having the Ace of hearts, so this certainly does create a big semi-bluffing oppurtunity. I think this type of play works better at Omaha where it is more likely for two players to have a flush. If your opponent can get off of a hand this is a good play. If he is stubborn or is more skilled than you give him credit for, save this play for another time. A lot also has to do with his impression of you and the psychodynamics of what is going on at the time, ie. is he on tilt?, etc.
Bruce
Agree with Bruce
From your description of this player I'm assuming he folded unless you have displayed these kinds of moves to him already. If he truly is so tight that he can hardly get action on his hands, then he's definitely too tight to call a raise like that without the nutflush. Unless you've made moves like this on him already and been caught, I'll bet you took this hand down.
natedogg
My guess is he busted you with something like KQ of Hearts.
Thank you for all your insight. He showed 78 suited and mucked.
The weird thing was that he worked his way up to about 3k, made nut straight with KQ for what he did not know was a tie, but then backdoored 4th suited card and scooped for a double through. Said he had to get to Memphis for a flight. Everybody wished him well and I even offered him a ride on my way back to Jackson. I guess Vegas table manners have not reached Mississippi yet :-)
What is a typical buy-in to a 1 2 PL game? thanks,Josh
100 wouldn't be far off a typical buy in. you may want to buy in for more or less depending on your style of play.
scott
$50 is the norm, but I think you should buy 100.
No one replied to this on "Small Stakes" so I am trying here. Just pretend it was a lot of money. I might have a modest BR, but I still want to make the right decisions. Thanks.
Playing in a .25-.75 blind, No Limit HE home game last night. Everyone bought in for $25.00. At this point I have about $35.00.
I am in SB. Folded around to me. I see AhKd and raise 5.00. BB calls.
Flop: 9h7h3h
I bet 5.00, my opponent raises 5.00. I call.
turn is a rag, maybe 5s.
I check, my opponent puts it all in (15.00).
I think for a long time and fold.
Should I have folded? What does he have?
KJS
you are getting about 3 to 1 for your call. if you think that you may win with your high cards or can catch and ace or king or a flush you are only about 2 to 1 dog so you should call. if you think you need a flush to win fold. not enough info to figure what he had but it sure looks like he may have an overpair or a pair and a heart. unless he is a tight player and wouldnt come in with smaller cards for such a big raise preflop.
ray,
Our thought process was the same. (That makes me feel good).
I hemmed and hawwed, trying to figure if either my A or K was a clean out if no heart came. Unfortunately, at the time, I thought I he had the flush already. I should have known that he was pretty tight and would not called ~5 times the blind with KhQh or lower. That was my major error. If I would have eliminated KhQh at the time, that still leaves AA and KK, which I don't beat without a flush and QQ, JJ, and AxKh, which I can beat/tie if my overcards hit. As you said, eliminating the made flush makes it a pretty clear call, unless I know from his play he would only call pre-flop with AA or KK. He was tight, but not that tight.
He had AxKh.
In this situation, I think whichever of us had to think about whether or not to call would have folded, due to our relative inexperience.
Should I have pushed all-in on the turn?
Kevin
when you get or your opponents gets a big % of their stack in early as you two did, it becomes hard to flod with any chance of winning. and that chance goes way up since you both put so much in early it becomes too hard to give the other credit for a good enough hand to make you fold. pushing all in may have worked but since he showed some strength you can figure most times to get played with. the decision is whether you have the best chance and whether you will play anyway if he bets and the chances he will fold a hand that has value.
HEY kevin, you just thought about it to hard. I would have at least called steve....he aint that tight.ps...I was there. Peace Brother.
J,
You are right; I did think about it too long. More importantly, I didn't ask myself the right questions.
Revenge will be mine!
KJS
I think .25-.50, .50-.75, or .50-1 would be better, i.e. encourage more action. It sounds like you guys play with a maximum buy-in($25), which is a good idea, probably the best way to get big bet home games started.
People get freaked by the huge stack differentials they see on broadcasts of the WSOP. Doyle once wrote that $1-2 NL is a smaller game than $30-60 L. Of course, when someone gets down around $15 or so, they should be allowed to add on another $25.
I used to play in a .25-.50, $20 buy-in home game where we'd alternate rounds of NLHE, PLO and NL2-7. By far the most enjoyable, exciting poker game I've ever played in.
For him to only call, not re-raise, that big of a pre-flop raise, he almost certainly doesn't have AA or KK. With that flop I probably would bet out all in, and would certainly have re-raised all in.
Check-raising all in might even be the best play. It's hard to think of many free cards that help a hand that he'd call before the flop and check behind on the flop with.
As both Ciaffone and TJ have written, in situations like this you're either a monster favorite or a tiny dog(he would've raised all in w/a set of 9's or 7's), and going all in prevents you from being outplayed or outthinking yourself when a blank comes on the turn.
Some statistics from Probe(which Doyle has also said is a good tool for analyzing NLHE headsup/all-in situations). Against red Q's or J's you're about a 49-51 dog. Against black Q's or J's you're about a 52-48 fave(the J's actually do about a 1/3 of a % better than the Q's here; slightly more straight possibilities).
Against any combo of AK, 2/3 of the time you win, the other 1/3 you chop. He's got no wins.
i think you shuold have bet the turn. or raised all in on the flop.
scott
You are getting 45-15 on the turn. It looks to me your opponent has either 3 aces, a flush, or a straight. I think your fold is correct.
There's no Ace on board, plus he surely would've re-raised pre-flop w/AA; AND would've gone all-in on the flop with a (non-nut)flush.
Very unlikely he calls pre-flop and/or on the flop with 86 or 64.
Now a set of Nines is possible, but I think he'd've gone all in with that kinda flop.
Your right, good point. But it looks like a flush or straight to me.
You're thinking limit poker. The raise was almost 7 times the BB. If you're calling that big of raises, headup, with suited one gappers, you'll get broke quick.
Of course, in THIS particular game, maybe they were.
This is a re-post of my response to your post on 'small stakes'.
Before I answer the questions you asked, I will suggest that you look at the way you bet in a no-limit game. Your initial bet of $5.00 is very large when compared to the size of the blinds. First in, I would tend to raise less than this, perhaps as much as $3, but not more than that. Second, on the flop of rags holding the nut heart, when you bet, you should have bet more. There was $11.00 in the pot and you bet $5. Under betting the pot by this much is a dangerous practice. Your opponent makes an odd play as well by raising $5. I probably would have moved in on him.
However, your question is should you have called, and what did he hold. You were getting 3:1 on your call, so my question to you was, when you were thinking, what were you thinking about? I don't mean that as a criticism, but rather, what was your thought process? The decision is purely mathematical based on what you believe your opponent to have. My guess is that he held something like pocket jacks with the jack of hearts, but without knowing the player that is very speculative. However, if I were there and I read your opponent to have something like jacks with the jack of hearts, I would know that I had 14 winners. Since 30:14 is smaller than 3:1 I would call.
I would like some thought on how to play pocket aces or even kings when playing with a large stack relative to blinds in a live no-limit game (against other large stacks). My problem when playing these hands is not getting married to it...I know how much profit I have made when playing against an obvious big pair and hitting a flop hard with my hand. My question is what do some of the more experienced players out there do with their big pairs...there's a fine line I think between maximizing the value you get from these premium hands and setting yourself up to getting busted if you can't put your opponent on a hand. If I raise my hand too much I only take the blinds...if I don't it is hard to lay down an overpair against opponents who may not put you on an overpair with their betting. Any thoughts?
You have two options.
1. Limp with AA or KK and hope someone raises behind you. If this happens, you can move everything in with AA or even smooth call BTF and check raise on the flop if it's ragged. If the flop is bad and you were not able to raise, pitch the hand into the muck.
2. The standard raise is about 4 times the BB. I would use the same standard regardless of your hand. For instance in a 10-10-20 game, bring it for $80. If
there is money in the pot other than the blinds,
bring it for $150. If raised in front, raise 4-5
times the original raise. If 'A' makes it $80, go
350 or 400.
By the way, I like the second option better.
Doyle Brunson's Super System covers exactly this subject in depth.
We played Omaha/Hold´em Pl last night, Blinds 1 - 1.
My two opponents are two wild guys who likes big pots.
Player 1, calls.
I raise the pot with AKo.
Player 2, calls.
Flopp: Kh 2h 7s
PLayer 1, check.
I raise the pot.
Player 2, fold.
Player 1, calls.
The pot is right now 36, i think my opponent are trying for a flush.
Turn: Kh 2h 7s Kc
Plyer 1, check.
I bet the pott.
PLyer one thinks......... I shows him my K and asks him if he whanted to call.......He folds.
Comments please...
Ouch! Don't do that.
While your opponent MIGHT have been thinking whether to go for his flush or not, he also might have been thinking you're bluffing, and he's going to call you down with his second pair. Why make the second decision so easy for him?
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
Never show your hand unless it's a showdown (or maybe to set up a future play, especially in tournaments)
Unless he already has the boat you don't mind him to call.
He only has 7 outs and you are giving him 2 to 1 odds on the call. (if he is on the flush draw) And you likely won't give him the implied odds he needs.
If he has something like pocket Ts it's a lot worse for him.
If he does calls and sucks out, then that's poker but at least you had the best of it.
ThePrince
you want him to call because you are making money on a flush draw. Plus he probably didn't fold a flush draw.
No-limit home game. I'm on a huge rush. I get Aces in the hole... bet it strong, win. 10 hands later, Aces in the hole again... bet it strong, win a big pot.
2 hands later? Yep, Aces in the hole again. I bet it fairly strong... this jackass kid I know calls with 7-2 due to an inside straight draw. I bet strong on the turn, which was a 7, he calls again. River is a 2. I lose to his crappy two-pair. Oh well, bad beat.
Next hand... no joke, Aces again. 4 times in about 15 hands.
This is where it gets really ugly.
Pre-flop, I bet 5 times BB, one person calls.
Flop comes A 3 3.
I'm holding Aces full... I bet 8 times BB. Get re-raised 8 times BB. Re-raise. Re-raise. Back and forth. My opponent, (a friend) after about 4 re-raises, goes, "He must hold A 3." As soon as he does, I get a huge sinking feeling in my stomach. If he said that, it means he must hold pocket threes. If he really thought I had A 3, that would have meant the best hand he could have was also A 3, so he wouldn't keep re-raising. He obviously couldn't have pocket aces since I did, which meant he has pocket threes. Needless to say, on the next bet he went all in, and I called.
Yep, he had pocket threes. Terrible, Terrible beat. The question I have for you... should I have laid down my aces full? I still ended up with a profit for the night because I was playing ridiculously well with insane cards all night, but this definitely took the wind out of my sails. I knew him, and I knew he had pocket threes. Do I not call his final bet, and save myself half my stack? Or do I have to call anyway, almost out of principle?
Thanks....
Max
I think laying down A's full is a bad move. The pot odds were in your favor and there is only one hand out there could beat you. Unless you are 110% sure your friend has pocket threes you call.
It is never a mistake to lay down the second best hand if you KNOW it is the second best hand. In this situation it is tough to know for sure.
Derrick
Max,
I once had exactly your hand, with exactly that board, and me and 8-9 others were rooting furiously that the other guy had 33. Reason you ask:
It was at the old LV Hilton mid-floor poker room, the HE jackpot, A's full or better beat, well it was about $45k and I would have won $22.5K, the other guy would have won $11+k, others a lot too. Needless to say, HE didn't have 33, nor -- for a big talking pro jerk -- did he have much of anything. I won a big pot. But not THE big pot.
Mark
That's pretty funny Mark! My second response to this hand (after my initial annoyance) was "Damn, I wish we had been in Vegas" so we could have won the Bad Beat jackpot. Heh.
Can anyone help me, i need a good book on Pl holdem and omaha.
.
no limit hold em home game. min. buy in $200. Blinds 5 and 10. been playing for about 5 hours......i am up about 150. i havent gotten a hand in about 45 minutes. decide to throw some variance out, i am under the gun w/ 3h5h. (game is 6 handed at this point). I raise to $30, everyone folds up to bb who calls.(tight player) Flop comes k 3 5 rainbow! I check, bb bets $20, i think and then call. Turn is a 9, still rainbow. I check, bb bets $60, i call again. River is a J. BB has about $70 left in front of him.......I bet $20, he raises all in, i call. I felt bad, becasue I knew I had him beat, and he is my good friend, so before he flips his cards over, I apoligize to him. He turns over Kq. I show him my 2 pair, and he flips out! Everyone at the table then proceeds to bash me for bad play, but i tell them all to screw because I took down the pot. Was I wrong for raising with 3-5?\playing it at all?? any comments/suggestions apreciated...-Mike
it's your money mike, and of course you got lucky with that nice flop, but I like your play for the following reasons.Your up 150 for the evening and haven't seen a flop for 45 minutes and raise UTG, IMO the late tight player has to assume he is facing a pocket pair and is a dog here going in.I think he should have folded to your raise myself, as he is a big dog to even AK, a very likely holding on your part.Then he flops a K and totally overplays it.IMO he makes mistake after mistake.Your play on the other hand, especially after the showdown will garner you action for your good hands for many sessions to come.If the flop misses you, like it usually will, just fold and you're still up nicely for the evening (unless you feel the bluff is worth continueing)I probably would have put him all in on the flop myself
naah. once in a while it's ok. but the stacks weren't deep enough to make this actually correct. the deeper the stacks the more deception is worth.
scott
Mike, if you raised UTG, how could you check to BB on the flop? He bets first.
You were very tricky with your bottom 2 pair and nicely got him to commit his stack. Question: would you have gotten off the hand if the river paired the 9 or he showed unexpected strength after another big card hits?
Fat-Charlie
You took a risk, but it paid off well. 53s is clearly a hand your hoping not to get reraised with. Once the flop came, I would have moved in with my 2 pair because your friend had a good chance with top pair to pass you up. Your tight image allowed to make this work.
I only started playing a couple of months ago, and never anything other than 3-6. I played all night the other night, and finally our 3-6 table broke with me up about $250. I had a friend playing over on the 1-2 pot limit table, so I went over to see if he wanted to grab something to eat. As I walked up, the dealer announced "last hand", so I asked if I could sit down, thinking it would be fun to say "I sat at the pot limit table".
I slide right into the big blind, of course, and even more, I find out we are playing omaha (I have played on paradise, so I knew the rules). My friend raises my big blind to $4 with a smile, and then a few players later, it gets raised to $20. I have A-2-3-Q, with the Q suited; I can't just fold out or there will be no story to tell later, so I call.
The flop comes: A-2-2.
Checked around to the guy to my right, who bets the pot ($100). Dealer looks at me, and I say "What are my options", to which he responds, "You can put $100 out or you can give me your cards", and me, Mr Poker face asks "What if I want to raise??". After all the players pipe up immediately, I finally get that I can raise anything between $100 and $200, so I raise $100. All fold to a sick looking guy on my right, who calls all in for his last $35.
Turn comes: A River comes: J
I didn't know what to think of those cards, since my opponent was all in and the dealer was whipping them out there too quickly for me to think. Anyways, he turns over an ace, and I show my A-2, and win the pot.
I don't have any question, although if anyone has a comment, I'd love to hear it. I just thought it was a funny story about my adventure in pot limit (I went back to 3-6 the next night..)
David
If it was high only, your A23Q belonged in the muck.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
High only, but I was pretty much planning to play almost anything to see the flop, barring the preflop getting out of control. I just wanted the experience of playing a pot limit game for one hand at least.
I haven't played much omaha, but I agree that that hand is not particulary good for high only.
David
"I agree that that hand is not particulary good for high only."
If brains were trains there would be alot of cabooses running around off the tracks. Now that I think about it there are.
ukw
Surely this story would be more interesting if the all in player had held a pair of Jacks :) !
Well I'm not about to chastise ya for playin a trash hand. After all I got the jist exactly as you meant it. You are a low limit player. Nothing wrong with that. You knew it was one hand only. Nothing wrong there either. AND you knew what you had but wanted to "play" A, just one little ole BIG BOYS hand. That's fine too! Hell I'm happy for ya. I took it in the context it was meant. I don't think you believe you're ready for high limit. BUT you get tosay you did it. RIGHT ON!
Nice story.
ps please dont do it when i'm in the game(I don't play NL tho);')
1-2 blinds. I have $150--late position. EP (early position) limps. MP (middle position ~$150) makes it $8. I call with QsKs, blinds fold, EP calls.
Flop comes Q84 two hearts. EP checks I bet $25. MP doubles it EP folds I call.
10h is the turn. I go all in. So the question: Is this the move? The result: he mucks. Thanks,Josh
Maybe he has AA,KK or AQ , Maybe he was putting you on on a hand like 10-10 or 9-9 , he checks , what let you think he has AK . Before to make a move like that , you need to know well your opponent , it could be expensive to make a move on an unknown player . And suppose he has AhQx or AhAx , he would have call you all the way.
I think this is a situation where if you go all-in you'll usually get called when you have the worst of it.
As JPP has stated if your opponent has AhAx or AhQx or worse AhQh or KhQh (you didn't specify if the Q on the flop was a heart or not), then he'll probably call. Even with KhQx.
Granted you may get KK or AA with no heart to lay it down sometimes but this is hard to do for the majority of players and I don't think usually going all-in is the best move. Unless you know this opponent very well.
You need aggression in NL, but I just think this was not the best time.
I'd check it on the turn to induce a bluff and call on the river.
If you are beaten you'll lose it anyway.
BTW, don't take this too seriously, wait until Fossilman responds then do what he says.
ThePrince
I can't respond. I don't know what really happened.
Somehow our poster in late position is acting prior to his opponent in middle position. Until I figure out that part, I have no advice.
later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
see Fossilman's post.
You said :
EP checks I bet $25. MP doubles it EP folds I call.
How can you bet before MP ? I interpreted it as MP check-raised you after you bet 25$. EP folded after you bet.
ThePrince
No, the move was to go all-in on the flop since you are the favorite over any hand he holds. What were you going to do if you missed the turn and he moves all-in (when you were no longer the favorite)?
No. MP "doubles it" on the flop, meaning he raised to $50. Instead of calling, you should move all-in then.
Earl,
I don't think you mean to bet $142 into a ~$26 pot, do you?
PLH $10 and $25 blinds. I am UTG with pocket Aces and I decide to limp. There are three callers. The big blind, a WSOP Champ, makes a pot sized raise. I reraise the maximum. He calls and pushes in another $500. I call. Everyone else folds. He has pocket Queens and my Aces holdup. I along with everyone else at the table was shocked. I thought we both had pocket Aces, but I have no problems accepting early Christmas gifts.
Bruce
easy. he thought you would incorrectly fold K's. would you?
scott
World class players don't try to muscle opponents off of big hands for an extra $500 into larger pot.
He more likely put bruce on AK, which would also be making a bad fold here. Or he isn't a world class player.
He more likely put bruce on AK, which would also be making a bad fold here.
Do you mean bad fold because the BB only had QQ, or do you mean folding AK here against an unknown hand would be a bad fold?
Fat-Charlie
Folding AK against pocket queens would be a bad fold here. Folding AK against most typical players would probably be a good fold since they are more likely o show you AA or KK than QQ.
Just wondering...
Why does everyone say, "WSOP Champ" instead of just saying who it was???? I really don't get this. Do they need to be protected? Are we not supposed to point out when a "WSOP Champ" makes a bonehead play?? They are playing poker in a public casino. It's not a secret!!! Just say "Huck Seed", or "Johnny Chan" or whomever!!!!! If anyone disagrees with this I would love to hear an argument.
OK, you win. It was Hal Fowler.
n/t
A reason not to name the specific person is that you don't want the word to get out that he's really a terrible player and just gives his money away in the side games. You can keep that little secret to yourself.
The big blind, a WSOP Champ"
There is no sense embarrasing McEvoy, but what was he doing in a pot limit game?
i guess by your post you mean that when you reraise someone after limping you must have aces. he must not have played with you enough to know that and figured you could have a range of hands. also the money was not very deep and he may have decided to play the hand and just put it in early as he was out of position.
How is the late raiser out of position as he acts after the under the gun player (who was bruce)?Do you mean in some other context that I'm missing? As in the position of a semibluff re-raise? Please help, your reply has confused me.
The raiser was in the big blind, and would have to act before bruce on the flop.
... I'll sign off now before I lose all credibility with you all.
Pot-limit Hold-em $10 and $25 blinds. All fold to the button who opens for $75. I have pocket Kings in the small blind. I call. The big blind raises another $225. The button folds. I reraise the maximum. The big blind eventually folds. All three of us had around $2000. The big blind and button both play reasonably well.
My thinking was that the button with his raise probably had very little. I did not expect the big blind to call so I was willing to slowplay my hand and see the flop and play accordingly. Now when the big blind raises and there is $450 in the pot I can play more aggressively. I also wonder had I just called the big blinds raise would I have had a better oppurtunity to double my stack. Comments greatly appreciated.
Bruce
Although doubling up would be nice, there is quite a nice pot in front of you. Letting him in cheap and then seeing an ace on the flop is going to suck! I like the way you played it, especially if you didn't show your hand.
Dave in Cali
Blinds: $10-10-$20, $40 minimum open.
I'm in the BB with king-queen of hearts. A good player in exceptionally high gear opens for $120 in middle position. His range of possible hands are 4-5 suited to AA. We both have over 4K, so I call and we see the flop heads up.
Flop comes: A-J-10, with two hearts. Wow!
I check. He checks.
Turn: Blank.
I check, he checks.
River: Blank.
I check, he bets $200. I make it $500.
At the split second that my five chips hit the table, his cell phone rings. He answers the phone, and the VERY first words from his mouth into the phone are, "Should I fold? Okay."
lol
Then he folds, as expected anyway.
As to analysis, my checks on the turn and river were super smooth and unreadable. He might have got a read that I had something when I checked the flop. I don't think I gave anything away, but you never know. I was playing extra snug at the time, so the mere act of calling pre-flop probably had some slowing-down effect in his mind.
He would not have checked the flop if he had a piece of it. That's a near certainty, since my most likely holding was a pocket pair that I would muck without flopping a set.
The only hand I could hope to nail him with was if he had an under-pocket-pair and he hit a set on the turn or river. I think I got the max on the hand, as it turned out.
It's not much a hand, really. I just thought the phone call thing was cute.
The player was Bobby Hoff.
Tommy
Nice stress-free holdem hand, holding the nuts all the way thru with redraws to higher nut. Lucky he made a play on the end for you. If you are sure he won't call your raise is it ever worth just calling his 200 so you can see what he raised on pre-flop? Or would this be wrong because you are just giving away information how you played as well?
Sorry about your (our) Buckeye's on saturday :o(
Hillbilly,
I wasn't sure he would fold to my raise on the river. I just thought it was likely. You never know, he might have hit a set on the river.
But let's say I knew for sure he would fold. Your idea of just calling to get info is interesting. I can imagine some scenarios where it would make sense, but I don't think this is one of them, because I already know what sort of hand he would have opened with and checked all the way, but he might not know that I was capable of a triple-slow-play with the nuts. In other words, as you suggested, he would gain more info than me.
As to the Buckeyes . . .
I got four emails from back home, all singing the blues. From 2000 miles and three years away, I gotta admit, it don't hurt as bad.
Of course, when we win, I'll be a true blue fan again! lol
Tommy
I was pulling for OSU, and I'm from Ann Arbor.
I think the entire free world would be wearing silver and scarlet on game day if they had to deal with UM alums every day of their lives.
Uh, GD? Nice sentiment.
But ...
(it's scarlet and grey)
Well... Huh. I guess you can tell how in tune I am with Big X football. It does look like silver on T.V., though, you have to admit. If you ever really want to grate the nerves of a UM fan, say you've never rooted for the "yellow and blue". They just hate that.
I maybe overbet the flop to make it look like I am trying to buy it checking the flop wouldn't be an option here I maybe just bet a 100 or so but no checks here checking is jsut to obvious at this level.
But you are probably right about getting the most out of the hand.
5-10 Pot Limit game.
I am UTG with pocket 9's.
Three of us see the flop for $45 each. Flop is 9-5-3 all hearts. I check, modestly weak player who raised pre-flop bets the pot and the aggressive button raises it the pot making it $540.
After consideration, i fold the hand, putting the modestly weak player on the nut flush draw the the aggressive button on a made flush which held up. My read was correct all around. The button had a redraw for the straight flush.
However, after the laydown I thought that aggressive button would play a set of fives in exactly the same way and that I may have made a bad laydown.
Any comments? I am pleased with the outcome but not sure of the play. I was pretty certain the initial flop better would call but he did not have enough money to cover the raise. Both I and the aggresive buton had about $1000 left (if i had called his raised). In any event with a blank turn I would have been with faced with the same decision on the turn as the aggressive button would bet pocket 5's or a made flush if checked to him.
z
What was your plan? Did you check on the flop hoping to see a free card? Sometimes that's hard to do with three players and a pot worth stealing.
Hoping to check raise? If this is the case, it sounds like the button stole your play. Did you put the pre flop raiser on a call? How much did he have in front of him? It sounds like he went to the river
Did you consider leading out betting the pot? I like this play against certain players when there's three in the pot.
Correctly, you didn't seem to have the button on an out and out steal even though he was in the steal position, but I like the check raise plan, too, depending on what your image is at that particular moment. Some of the pro's might correct me on this. So much depends on stack size. If the weak player is all in, I don't think it's worth it.
I think if you were planning to check raise, then dropped it, that's OK, but if you were trying to see a free card, that's a little too passive with top set.
Who made it 45 before the flop? This is important in order to analyze the hand.
I'm having a pot limit home game this Sunday night. I'm not sure how the structure should affect my general play.
We'll be playing $1/2 blinds (or in Stud games a $1 dealer ante and a $2 force bet) with a $100 buy in. Additional buy ins will be allowed when chips are below $100.
We will be playing dealer's choice. I expect a blend of Omaha, Omaha8, HE, Stud, Stud8, 7 Stud declare, and some non-standard flop games. We will play a round of each game, eliminating any potential dealer advantage.
I have played about 20 sessions of PL. I have read all of the poker literature I can get my hands on regarding NL and PL games (Cloutier, Ciaffone, McEvoy, Brunson) and articles in Card Player and Poker Digest. They deal primarily with higher stake games where players will not frequently be going all in.
I've done fairly well so far by playing very tightly against a mixture of good passive players and very bad, passive players. I suspect that there will be a couple of excellent aggressive players in this game.
In this game, I imagine that nearly every hand will be putting someone all in. The structure is designed from letting anyone be much deeper than a couple of hundred dollars. With a PL structure, even with the relatively small blinds, that benchmark will be pretty easy to reach.
That being the case, what are your general thoughts about how to approach such a game.
I should mention one other thing. Three or four of the ten players who are expected are absolute rank amateurs who have never played PL. They are likely to be playing loosely at first and may very well bust out in the first hour or so. Two are very experienced and, presumably,