![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Hand #1. 5-10. Passive table. I hold 8h8s in the BB. 4 limpers plus me see the flop of 8c5s9c. I bet my set and get raised by middle position. I reraise and he calls everyone else folding. The turn is the 4c. I bet, he raises, I call. The river is the Ks. I check and so does he!!. Did I miss a bet here, should I have reraised the turn or was I properly intimidated by the possible flush?
Hand #2. I'm sitting with Jc9c in the cutoff. Same passive table. 3 limpers to me, I limp, sb folds. 6 hands see Qs4c7c. It gets checked to the button who bets. 3 see the turn of the Qc. I bet, button raises. I reraise, button caps it. The river is the 8s. I check, button checks!. Should I have bet the river?
Thank you in advance for your comments.
On the first hand, what could your opponent have to raise your flop bet? With an over pair he probably would have raised pre-flop unless they were specifically pocket Nines. He is unlikely to have the case Eight for top pair. Therefore, a draw(especially a flush draw) becomes a real possibility. When the third Club shows up on the turn and you bet and get raised you should assume that he has a Club flush and you need to fill to win. When a blank comes at the river, it is perfectly correct for you to check planning to call.
On the second hand, when you make your non-nut flush I think you showed a lot of hair to re-raise with an open pair on board. You could even lose to a higher flush. It would be insane for you to bet the river in this situation. You should check and make a crying call if the button bets. The button is a complete idiot for capping it on the expensive street when the flush card comes. Maybe he had trip Queens but he still over played his hand.
You have to assume you are against sane opponents and that the previous betting action has some significance
Batholemew,
You said this is a passive table so I will assume the opponents involved are normally passive.
In the first hand, he put in an awful lot of action on a medium size pot. His betting pattern on the flop and turn was consistent with a flush draw and a made flush. I think you showed appropriate restraint. My guess is you got maximum action out of whatever hand he had.
In the second hand, you got four big bets in with a made flush when the board was paired. Your opponent capped the turn. You had to worry about the full house being out. My question is this. Would you even be wondering about lost bets if the betting went you bet, he raises, you call on both betting rounds?
I think you got the maximum on both hands. Trying to get one more bet out of either situation on the river after all that turn action will often result in the opponent folding some kind of combo draw/hand or being raised by the actual full. In other words, you will often gain no bets or lose two.
Once again, I will go into shock if Jim disagrees. But then again, I need the sleep (does shock help for sleeplessness?).
Regards,
Rick
In regards to hand no# 1,
My guess would be that he held something like A-10 offsuit, Ace of clubs.
I would have raised you too on the flop if I held the Ace of clubs with an overcard kicker, PLUS the runner-runner nut flush. His raise on the turn may seem a little wacky to some, but who knows what kind of read he had on you. Maybe he thought there was a chance of you dumping two pair, since his backing off on the flop gave him the look of a flush draw. And besides, if you don't dump, there is still the nut flush draw as a back-up.
The river is a blank for him, so he dumps his hand
[You asked if you should have re-raised the turn. Well, that's the beauty of "The Protected Raise", a term that I think was coined by Bob Ciaffone.(His book "Improve your Poker" is a must buy. There, he discusses the protected raise.) The scare card on the turn gave him protection from a re-raise by you(if you have anything less than a flush), while at the same time checking to see where he stands with you.]
-Don Martin
I'm going to guess what your opponents had in each situation before looking at the other responses. Let's see how I do.
Hand 1. I think he had an overpair, and the K on the end scared him.
Did you miss a bet? If this was a reasonable player in middle position, then he would not have raised with a flush draw. However, I've seen this happen by unreasonable players. His raise could not have been a bluff with that flop, since he should know that you will call with overcards. I think you should have at least bet the river. I would normally re-raise on the turn here, but if this player is wild and weak, then I could see calling.
Hand 2. Button has either a K high flush, or a Q in his hand. If he's a good enough player to know that he should bet his flush draw on the button, then he's probably not playing too many suited Kings to start.
However, it's not clear that he doesn't have an A high flush until he checks it down. At the point you are making your decision, you can figure him for a flush, or a Q. A lot of the flushes beat you. Unless he is a weak player, none of the Q's he could have beat you. I think you did the right thing by checking.
-steve
I posted this on RGP last week, and the positive responses were over-whelming. I thought I'd share it with you guys over here. I hope that neither the length nor the content are out of place in this forum.
Here it is:
WARNING: This is very long and very detailed. It is probably even tedious. And it's probably going to read like I'm tooting my own horn. Please understand that the point of this message is "what it felt like". What I'm describing is the most emotional night of poker that I've ever experienced. It was also the most thinking that I've ever done at a poker table. If you're not interested in following a player's thought process and stress levels, don't read any further. If you get frustrated by the detailed nature, I apologize in advance. You've been warned :-)
Like many of you, I've always wondered what a "live" no-limit game felt like. I've played in small no-limit tournaments, but putting in your stack is no big deal when your "stack" only cost $20. I figured that I'd probably never get the chance to find out. But lately a new trend is starting here in Las Vegas: small "big-bet poker". The Stratosphere has been spreading no-limit Texas Hold'em a couple nights a week, with $1 and $2 blinds and a $50 buy-in. The Union Plaza followed suit by spreading pot-limit hold'em with similar blinds and a $40 buy-in. Not exactly what we saw in "Rounders". But live big-bet poker has become affordable, so I thought I'd give it a try.
I went to the Stratosphere Sunday night. I figured I'd buy-in for the minimum, and give "the Cadillac of poker" a test-drive. There was one table going (the no-limit tournament going on was down from 5 tables to 3, so there were plenty of no-limit players in the room), and when I put my name on the list, they had enough to start a second game, which would be a "must-move" game.
I bought in for $60 (I just didn't have the heart to say, "soft-break, 50-10") and sat down. Most of the players bought in for $80-100, except for the player on my right, who had $300.
I immediately noticed the first of many things that I would learn that night: no-limit hold-em MAKES you pay attention. We've all heard a million times that we should be studying our opponents at all times, and not watching the ballgame on tv, and yadda-yadda-yadda. Well, from the moment I sat down, my antennae went up and started twitching. I noticed that the guy who bought in for $300 had his game-face on. I noticed which of my opponents seemed nervous, and were probably playing this game for the first time. I recognized two others whom I had played with earlier in the week in a small limit game. They seemed like the type who spent a lot of time in poker rooms, and I remember tabbing them with a "weak-tight" label.
I spent the first 10-15 minutes trying to get into their heads; which ones knew how to play, which ones came to gamble, which ones were sick gamblers who wanted to lose (there are a lot of them out there). These are things I usually consider, but this night I was INTENSELY concentrating on stuff like this.
(At this point, the reader should look into MY head, to see where I'm coming from. I usually play low-limit hold'em, and usually destroy these games. I've only played higher than $6-12 once, and that was a long time ago, and I got killed. I wasn't very experienced then, and I'm looking forward to putting together a bankroll and moving up. I've been away from the game awhile helping my wife out with the babies. But I've been playing part-time for a few months now, and that bankroll is starting to take shape.
I've read a ton of Sklanskly, Malmuth, and Caro, as well as some Cappelletti, Ciaffone, West, and Zee. While I'm deeply indebted to these men, there is one glaring omission from this list: Brunson. I've read and re-read all those books, and I don't know anything about no-limit hold-em!!!)
I am going to play strictly ABC. I am not going get committed to a pot unless I've got the goods. If my opponents pick-up on this and decide that they're not going to pay me off, that's OK with me. I really don't expect to make much money at this. I'm just here for the experience, and if it ends up costing me $60, so be it.
First hand: first 5 players pass, next player makes it $15 to go, all fold.
I guess this is going to be a lot different than no-fold'em.
Next hand I pick up KJ. I'll usually play this up front in low-limit, if the opposition is weak. But then I remembered being told that for years, the "Doyle Brunson" hand was not 10-2, but AQ. Doyle refused to play AQ, I guess because when it made the second-best hand, it cost a bundle. I folded my KJ.
It became apparent to me that hands like KJ, KT, QJ, or even KQ could lead to a lot of trouble in this game. Mark this down as the second thing I learned that night. I decided to dump these hands up front, and to proceed with caution, if at all, in late position.
Hey, I thought, I'm getting pretty good at this.
I fold my KJ. 5 people see the flop for $2. After the flop, a pretty girl in the #4 seat asks how many more cards will be put on the table. I immediately take note of how many chips she has, and imagine them in my stack. 15 checks later, bottom pair wins a $10 pot.
Well, this isn't very exciting.
Later, a few people call the $2, Mister Three-stacks-of-red makes it $20 to go, all fold to the big blind. She's young, pretty, and lost. She looks at the dealer. "There's been a raise," she's told. "How much to call?", she asks. "$20."
Her jaw drops. She puts in the $20.
I don't remember the flop. She checks. Mr. Bigstack bets $100. BB asks, "He can do that?" This girl had been playing $1-5 stud with her mother, and they both came over to this game at her mother's urging. It seems that she had no idea what the words "no-limit" meant, and she was finding out the hard way. It was becoming clear to her that yes, he bet $100, and that if she wanted to call, she'd have to put the rest of her money in. "Well that sucks," she said, and sadly mucked her hand.
As Mr. Bigstack was stacking his chips, she asked, "What did you have?" He just smiled. "What did you have?", she asked again, thinking that he must not have heard her the first time. He smiled and said that he was sorry, but he couldn't tell her. "Come on," she pleaded, in that persuasive womanly way. He laughed, but still refused to give in. "Asshole!" she cried, but in a good-natured way.
Next hand all fold to the Asian guy in the #1 seat (I mention his ethnicity for a reason. I'll explain why in a minute). He makes it $15 to go. All fold to the same pretty girl, who is now the small blind. She doesn't know what to do. She was not at all prepared for this kind of game. She looks at her mother. "If you have a good hand, call!", urges her mother. The player next to her mentions the one-player-to-a-hand rule. Daughter calls, all others fold.
Flop comes Jack-rag-rag. She checks, he bets about $20, she looks at her mother! Mom re-iterates, "If you have a good hand, call!" Mom gets lectures from everyone at that end of the table, including the dealer. Daughter check-calls all the way, calling all-in on the river. Board still Jack-high. Asian guy shows J6!! Daughter shows KJ, takes it down!!
"My God, these are some bad players!", I think.
Asian guy buys more chips. The reason I think his race may play a part in this hand is as follows: aren't women supposed to submit to men in that culture? I know this may sound bigoted, but I've seen this act before. I'm not saying ALL ASIAN MEN WANT WOMEN TO BOW DOWN. It just MAY have led this guy to over-play his weak-ass hand.
Next hand Asian guy comes in with a raise, Cocky Kid (who hasn't played a hand yet, and is one of the "weak-tight" players I mentioned, but talks a good game) re-raises to about $30. Cocky Kid loves to hear himself say the words "come over the top", and now he does it. Asian guy calls, they're heads-up. Flop is Ace-rag-rag. Asian guy bets about $30, Kid goes all-in, about $50 more, Asian guy calls. Kid show A8, Guy shows A9. Neither improves, Kid is busted, Kid quits. I was expecting some tough competition in this game. These guys just put all their money in on hands that I couldn't play!
Later, I discussed this hand with a friend of mine. He said that he knew Cocky kid, and thought that he was excellent at reading hands. If Cocky kid put Asian guy on Ace-no-kicker, he would put it all in with a hand like A8. Since Asian over-played his 6-kicker the prior hand, I guess Cocky kid expected to see the same.
Now pretty young daughter quits. She's not having any fun, even though she's winning. She's very nervous, and she wasn't nervous at $1-5 stud. She picks up her chips and heads back to the stud game.
Three other players follow her. Or should I say, they follow her chips.
This game is on its last legs (and I KNOW that this story sounds like it's on its last legs, but it gets better). Fortunately, my name gets called, and I "must move". I get up, not having been involved in a pot with more than $5 in it. I'm about even. I can't recall the play of any hands, but I think I picked up the blinds a couple of times. I'm about even, maybe down about $5.
I sit in the main game. This line-up looks quite a bit different. They all look like grizzled poker veterans. A lot of Orleans jackets and Binions caps. I fold the first dozen hands that I'm dealt. Very few flops are put out. Some one makes it $8 or $12 to go, and all drop. Tough to get a line on anyone's play, because no one wants to play a hand. I do notice that there is a LOT more money on the table. I'm the only one with less than $200.
Finally, I get to play a hand, and what a hand! Pocket Aces!!
I feel a rush of adrenaline the moment I see what my cards are. I mean a REAL rush!! My heart is thumping. This is a dream-come-true. I'm playing no-limit hold'em, for real money, and I've got Pocket Aces under the gun!!
I quickly recall the only strategy tip that I've ever heard about no-limit: in early position, limp in with a big pair, and if it's raised behind you, come back at 'em hard. I call the $2. Fold, fold, fold, raise-make it $6. Fold, button calls, blinds fold, up to me. There's $17 out there. Winning $17 is not my dream-come-true. I'll keep slow-playing, for now. I call.
Flop comes 9d-8d-2c. I check, raiser bets $10 (I'm disappointed that it's not more), and the button calls. Now there's close to $40 out there, and the board could get real scary, real soon. Slow-playing time is over. I move all-in. The dealer announces, "Raise, make it $50 and all-in." Both of my opponents raise their eyebrows. They muck their hands without hesitation.
(I don't have any idea if I played this hand correctly or not, and I don't think that I have any poker acquaintances who have opinions about live no-limit hold'em that I could respect. I went out the next morning and bought the Cloutier/McEvoy pot-limit and no-limit book, so I suppose I'll find out soon.)
I start stacking the chips, and I think of a roller-coaster. You know how you feel when you step off of a roller-coaster? You've got your feet back on solid ground, and you try to catch your breath, and your rapidly-beating heart starts to return to normal? I know that sounds like a lot of hype, but I'm being sincere when I say that's really how I felt after moving all my chips in, and not getting cracked.
And that was it. No more big confrontations, no more drama. I play for another 30 minutes, and it was rather boring. These guys just weren't giving away their money. I noticed that Mother and Daughter were playing $1-5 stud at the next table. The pots were bigger over there than they were over here. I took my $68 and move to the stud table.
(The no-limit story isn't over. The good part is still coming!)
I know some of the people who work in the room, and I chat about the experience. It was interesting, and I made eight bucks. I probably won't play it again, though. I sit down at the stud table. On the first hand I see, one player is betting his hand all the way, and has 3 callers all the way. He bets the river, fold, fold, now it's on the guy in the #2 seat, who from now on will be referred to as the Fish (I told you the story would get good soon). The Fish announces that even though he has absolutely nothing, he would never fold and let someone win a pot this big uncontested. He called, and was shown a real hand (I didn't notice what it was). The Fish turned up his hand, proving that he really WOULD call with no-pair.
I played at this stud table for about an hour, and watched the Fish squander the remainder of that rack, then another, then another! $300 in a $1-5 stud game in a little more than an hour? I don't think I could do that if I TRIED TO! And the remarkable thing was, he was PROUD of the amount that he had lost! He bragged about calling with nothing, because he "came to Las Vegas to GAMBLE!" When he had the low card, he'd bring it in for the max, $5. And if you raised his bring-in, you'd better keep some chips handy, because he was gonna re-raise in the dark. It was really something to see. And he'd keep making announcements like, "I call. I'm down over $200, but I don't care." After a while it was, "I'm down over $300, but I don't care." It was as if to say, "Well, you guys might play poker better than I do, but even though you've taken a few hundred dollars, YOU CAN'T HURT ME, NYAA-NYAA-NYAA."
Meanwhile, the no-limit hold'em game was breaking up. It was close to midnight, and they were playing short-handed.
I guess the Fish realized that he had no chance to get even in a $5 limit game (and he was less interested in playing after Daughter called it a night), so he picked up his chips and moved to the no-limit game. At the time, there were just 2 guys playing heads-up. The Fish took the #3 seat and pulled out $200. I wasted no time. I jumped into the #4 seat (where else?), and decided that I wanted more than $60 on the table. I was sure that if I made a hand, the Fish would pay me off. I pulled out another $100. As the dealer was selling chips to Fish and me, three more players from that stud game followed us to this game. The two guys that were playing heads-up looked at each other in amazement. They tried to keep from laughing out loud, but were unable to do so. One of them pointed to Fish and said, "This guy sits down, and suddenly we have a game again."
First hand: a couple of limpers, then Fish makes it $50 to go. I don't even know if he looked at his cards. All fold. Fish chides the other players. "No one wants to play? I thought this was Vegas! Let's gamble!"
Fish ran over the next few pots, too. If he didn't overbet before the flop, he would on the flop. He'd usually pick up a little pot, sometimes get caught by a real hand. I noticed that the people holding the real hands were too timid. I didn't fear any of the players who came from the stud game. Most were playing ABC. One of the original heads-up guys was, too. But the other heads-up guy struck me as a solid player, one to be aware of.
Soon a new player sat down. His name was Knox. I don't know if I'll ever learn as much from a book as I learned from watching Knox play.
Knox was a chatterbox. He would talk to no one in particular, but could be heard by all. He was NOT annoying. He had this down-home country accent, and a good sense of humor. He would talk between hands. He would talk on the flop, talk some more on the turn, and usually be respectfully silent on the river, and then start talking after the hand was over. His chatter and humor actually relaxed the rest of us.
The game got a lot looser after Knox got in. Knox would also raise every pot. Not much. Instead of $2 to go, he would make it $5 to go. Every time. The players who had to act before him got into the habit of calling the $2 blind by tossing in a $5 chip. That way, after Knox would enthusiastically raise, they could point to the chip that was already out there and say, "call".
What he was doing was two-fold: the extra money in before the flop loosened up everybody (myself included); and since he could out-play just about everybody in the game after the flop, he made sure that we all put some money in.
And it wasn't long before Knox went to work on Fish.
Fish was still in the habit of splashing chips in before the flop. Knox would usually be the only one to call. And Fish won some pots. But more often, Knox would show him a better hand, or bet enough to drive him out of the pot. Granted, Knox had a good run of cards. But it wasn't long before Knox's original buy-in of $300 had swollen to two racks of red ($1000), and almost all of it came from Fish.
Fish would get busted, buy $200 or $300 more, and get busted again. One time an Ace hit the flop, Fish had Ace-rag, and Knox had Ace-king. Busted again.
Fish bought another $200. He was steaming after that one. He thought that getting out-kicked qualified as a bad beat.
Knox made it $5 to go, as usual, Fish makes it $60. He's steaming pretty good.
I look down and see that I have the button, and I've got Pocket Queens.
First thought: does Fish have Aces or Kings?
Second thought: Fish has 2 random cards. Period.
Third thought: if I move all-in, Fish will not give up that $60 without a fight. He will not fold.
Fourth thought: I hope no one else calls. if they do, I’m in trouble.
Last thought: I haven't played a single hand yet, and they all know it.
"I'm all in," I tell the dealer. I push out about $150.
Everybody dumps, except Fish. "I call," he says, and proudly turns up his Pocket Nines.
I feel a slight sense of relief, but I remind myself that it's not over. I note that my Queens are black, and his Nines are red.
The dealer burns a card, then counts off three cards face down. She grabs the face-down pile and turns them face-up. But I relax before she spreads them out; the top card is a Queen.
Fish doesn't improve his pair, and I've doubled from $150 to $300. This is pretty heady stuff. You don't pull in many $300 pots when all you play is $1-4-8-8 hold'em.
Fish buys $500 in chips now. He's no longer boasting about how much he's losing. In retrospect, I think it stopped being fun for him after he crossed the $1000 mark.
Meanwhile, Knox continues to feast on Filet-O-Fish. Fish comes in for $50, all fold, Knox re-raises $100 more. Fish calls.
Flop comes J-8-7 rainbow. Knox bets $200. Fish calls.
Turn a 6. Knox says "I'm all in," and pushes four racks of red forward.
Fish has about three or four hundred left on the table. He thinks for a minute, then folds.
Knox says, "I'll tell you what, I had the stone bananas that time," and turns up his hand: 4-3 offsuit!! He bet $2000 on a hand that couldn't beat the board.
To his credit, Fish tried to control himself. But he was visibly shaking.
The VERY NEXT HAND, I've got Q9s on the button. A few limpers, Knox makes it $5 as usual, Fish just calls (not as unusual as it would've seemed earlier), I call. Small blind (the solid player) bumps it $20 more. A lot of callers to me, and no chance of a re-raise behind me. I call. About $150 in the middle.
Flop comes Jc-Tc-3s. I got the straight draw, but if this guy makes a huge bet at this $150 pot, I can't draw.
Surprise: he only leads into it for $25. Limper folds, Knox and Fish call, I call (in limit, I love raising in this spot, trying for the free card. Here, a raise would be suicidal! Another lesson learned.)
Turn card: the lovely 8 of spades. I would've preferred a red 8, but I guess I got the nuts, and the button, and $250 in the middle, so I shouldn't bitch. Small blind leads out again, this time for $30. I don't have any idea what he could have, and I'm not sure that I care any more. Knox calls, Fish raises to $100!! Again, he could have anything! This raise causes me absolutely no concern. I've got him! He loves his hand. And after being beaten by a huge bluff last hand, I'm convinced that I will get paid if I put my money in the center. My only decision is whether to put it all in now, or be cute and try to make a few extra dollars.
I look at the board. It's scary as hell to a guy holding the nut straight. Two clubs on the flop, and two spades after the turn card. It's not inconceivable that someone has a set or two-pair, which means there could be more than just flushes drawing against me. There's $400 out there. Like Alec Guinness telling Mark Hamill, "Use the Force, Luke", I hear David Sklansky's voice telling me, "Win the big pots NOW, Bobby!" I remember that slowplaying is OK if you can't get outdrawn, and if the pot is small. Well, since this is the biggest pot that I've ever played for in my life...
"I'm all in," I say solemnly and quietly. Small blind quickly folds, Knox quickly folds, Fish quickly calls.
The dealer puts down the burn card, and I say, "Red card, please." Actually, that's what I WANTED to say. What came out of my mouth was, "RED CARD!!!"
Phew! It's red.
And it's doesn't have too many pips, so I don't think it paired the board. I should be safe.
It's a Seven. A safe, harmless Seven of Diamonds. Victory is mine. I can relax.
Or so I thought.
I hear Fish say proudly, "I have a straight!"
Oh God, no. You mean I didn't win that pot? I might have to split it?
The board shows J-T-3-8-7. Fish turns over T9.
"Nine makes a straight," the dealer said gently.
I turn up my hand. "Queen-Nine makes a higher straight," she announces.
Fish wound up and punched the tabletop. Hard. I was surprised that neither he nor the table suffered serious damage.
Now I had five stacks of red, two coarse C-notes, and some assorted white chips and coins. This was looking like the biggest score of my young career.
And Fish bought more chips.
Now it was getting close to 4 AM. I was on my 3rd beer. I never drink when I play cards, but Knox ordered a beer when he sat down, and after he won a nice hand, he said, "The beer sure tastes good in this place, don't it?" I gave in to the temptation, ordered a beer, and it DID taste good. I haven't used the expression, "I need a drink" since my high-stress military intelligence days, and I didn't even realized I felt that way, but that beer provided some relief of the tension I was feeling. It didn't seem to take away any of my concentration. It just seemed to take the edge off. The second beer, too.
Most of the weak players who followed us from the stud game had busted out. They made some terrible plays. One called $100 all-in with nothing but a flush draw on the flop, and not much more that $20 in the pot.
The next hand that I played: AK in the little blind. Knox made it $5 to go, I made it $30 to go. I get 3 callers (but not Knox. He mucks).
The flop is Kh-9s-5s. I have no spades. I’m first. Do I bet out, or try for a check raise? There is $120 in the middle. I’ll bet at it, and if no one calls, fine. If someone raises, I’m putting it all-in.
"I bet $200," I announce. I gotta tell you, the next morning, I laughed out-loud every time I pictured myself pushing two stacks of red and announcing that I was betting $200 on a hand that wasn’t the nuts. Remember, for me, heavy action is when I get to say, "Re-raise, make it $24."
Solid Player to my left takes a while to think it over. This makes me a little nervous, but I don’t sweat it. I’ve already decided that I’m committed to this pot.
Knox is still chattering. He points to Fish, and says to me, "This boy’s got 9’s and 5’s. Can you beat 9’s and 5’s?"
I smile. I can see what Knox is trying to do. He knows Solid Player. They’re the only two pros at this table. I’m not accusing Knox of anything, but I believe that when he’s chattering to a player that’s in a hand, he’s trying to guage reactions and pick up tells. Knox isn’t involved in this hand, but he might be trying to read me now, to help him later. But he knows Solid Player by name. It is possible that he’s trying to induce a tell out of me to help Solid Player NOW.
I turn to answer Knox’s question. I’m about to agree with him that I’m in trouble if someone flopped two-pair. But as I inhale to begin speaking, I notice that I don’t feel steady at all. I know that if I try to speak, it’s not going to come out smoothly and naturally. So all they get out of me is that smile. It’s a little bit forced. I’m rather upset that I’m sending out tells like a broadcast beacon, and I’m trying to hide it by smiling, and this quasi-phony smile IS the tell!!
Solid player folds, then everyone else follows. I pick up the $120 in the middle, plus my $200 bet, and I thank the table for folding. I tell them that calling would’ve been OK, too, but folding is fine by me.
Of course, I gave away far too much information with all this chatter. But I was pretty nervous with the kind of action I was involved with that hand, and had a lot of tension to release.
Another lesson learned: you need more than skill and a bankroll to play this game; you need BALLS.
The next time I had the button, I picked up A9. Fold, fold, Knox makes it $5 as usual, Fish calls as usual. I feel pretty sure that I have the best hand (three beers ago, I said I wouldn’t even PLAY a hand like A9!), and that if I put in a good sized raise I would either win right there, or be heads-up with Fish. I make it $30.
The blinds fold. Knox calls and Fish folds.
RED ALERT! RED ALERT!
THIS is not what I wanted. I wanted to milk Fish. I didn’t want to tangle with THIS guy. I look at the tower of full racks in front of him. I’m feeling a fear that I’ve never before felt at a poker table.
Flop comes A-Q-2 rainbow. Knox checks. Knox hasn’t checked very much all night. If he’s in a hand, he’s usually betting or raising or folding. He’s just about never checking or calling. But I know that Knox is paying attention. He’s already made a few comments about how tight I’m playing. He probably has put me on a much bigger hand than I actually have, and he doesn’t like the flop one bit. I’ll bet and give him a chance to drop. I put in $60, about the size of the pot.
Knox calls. I smell a rat. A big one.
I look at his stack of chips again, and I look at my beautiful stack, and I fear the worst. At this point, I’d rather be somewhere else, doing anything else. I decide to get away from this hand.
The turn card is a blank. Knox checks. I take a few more seconds to think about it, then I check behind him.
River is another 2. Board shows A-Q-2-x-2, no flush. There’s a little less than $200 in the pot.
Knox thinks about it for a moment, then bets $100. I’m still puzzled. Why is he playing this hand so differently than all the other hands he’s played all night? He hadn’t checked twice in a row all night. He hadn’t bet as little as $100 at a pot this big all night. What gives?
Of course, he had been playing against Fish all night, and not me. Maybe he was as unhappy to be in a pot with me as I was with him (not that he was afraid of my skills, but rather the fact that if I’m putting money in, I’ve got a hand). Maybe he’s worried, too.
He didn’t reach for his chips until I showed weakness and checked on the turn. Then he bet $100. It sure seemed like a bluff to me. I could also imagine that once he decided to bluff, he didn’t want to lose too much if he got called (or raised). And even though I was playing super-weak-tight, he didn’t know if I could lay down a decent hand when there was now $300 out there.
What if it’s not a bluff? What hand could he have that would beat me? When the board paired on the end, my kicker got better (now I have Aces-up with a Queen). If Knox had AK, I think I would’ve heard about it before the river. If he has AQ, I’m in trouble, but it just doesn’t seem like he’d play it that way.
I figure he either has Ace-rag (which would be a split pot), or he’s bluffing. Either way, I’ve got an easy call.
Knox seems surprised that I call so quickly. He says, "I can’t beat an Ace. If you’ve got an Ace, you’ll just have to take the money." I turn up my hand. "I can’t beat an Ace," he repeats, and mucks his hand. Since he has acted like a classy gentleman all night, I don’t ask the dealer to show us Knox’s hand, so I can’t tell you what he had. He did look upset with himself though, and when his chattering started again I heard him remark, "Boy, I made a mistake there."
The waitress brought Knox another beer. "I didn’t order this," he said. She just assumed that he wanted another one, as he had been drinking them since he got there. Knox pointed to me. "Give it to him," he told her. "I don’t want no more beer, but I know he does." I was thirsty. I took the beer. It tasted good. Doesn’t beer always taste better when you’re happy?
Knox quit the game a few hands later. He was not nearly as jovial after the hand he played with me. He must’ve decided that the beer might have hindered his play. I couldn’t believe that anyone would quit a game that Fish was playing in.
But maybe Knox noticed something that I didn’t notice until much later: Fish was actually playing tighter. He had screwed down, and I hadn’t noticed (do you think that the beer was starting to hinder MY play?).
A little later I get Ah-Jh in the big blind. Solid player UTG limps, a player whom I haven’t seen play a hand ALL NIGHT limps, a new player (who bought in for the minimum and got broke twice by Knox and now has about $11 left) limps on the button, Fish calls from the small blind. There are 5 of us at the table, and everybody wants to limp in. I make it $12 to go. All call (new player is all-in before the flop).
Flop comes 8h-7h-2c. There is about $50 in there. Fish checks.
I bet $50. I hope no one calls, but if someone does, I still have a chance.
Solid player UTG says, "I’m all in." He’s got about $700. I have about the same.
Now what do I do?
I decide immediately that I can’t call him heads up. This $700 I’ve got on the table is a significant portion of my fledgling bankroll. No sense taking silly chances.
Mr. Super-Weak-Tight-Hasn’t-Played-A-Hand-All-Night is next to act, and asks for time. He takes at least 3 full minutes, and no one says a word, nor acts irritated. Now if he calls, can I call? He’s got about $300 in front of him. No, I guess I can’t. Moot point anyway; he mucks.
Fish folds. I sigh. I fold. I wonder what would’ve happened if I had called. Would I have caught that heart to make the nut flush? Ah, to sleep, perchance to dream.
The dealer was counting the rack or something, and lost track of the action. "What happened?", she asked.
"It’s over," I told her. "Give him the pot."
"Wait, I still have a hand!", cried the all-in player. I forgot about him.
The side-pot was awarded. The remaining cards were dealt. The turn card was the 4h. D’OH!!!!
"Why did you have to show me that? Why did you have to torture me?", I asked in vain.
Solid player shows his 72s to take the main pot. He had flopped bottom two-pair.
Of course, my initial reaction was: 72??? Oh yeah, it was SUITED!!! Nice hand sir. WELL PLAYED.
Upon further reflection, though, I decided that calling a small raise with 72s wasn’t a bad play at all, as long as you thought that Fish was going pay you if you hit a hand.
A little later: I’ve got Pocket Sevens on the button. This strikes me as a better hand for no-limit than limit. New player limps, Fish limps, I make it $10 to go (note that since Knox left, there is always less money in the pot before the flop, so the raises have gotten smaller. Before, it would take $20-30 to limit the field. Now $10 does the trick).
Solid player in the SB folds. Mr. Still-Haven’t-Played-A-Hand-All-Night is the BB and makes it $30 to go. New player folds, Fish quickly calls. I need 7-1 odds if I want to try to flop a set. I’m getting 7-2 now, but the sky’s the limit later. I think that BB has a huge pair, and if a seven falls, they’ll BOTH pay me. I call.
Flop comes something like Kh-Th-9d. Not what I had hoped for. Oh well, better luck next time. I’ll fold.
But I can’t. Mr. Weak/Timid checks, Fish checks, so I check.
Turn is the 7h. The good news is I made my set. The bad news is the three hearts on board, not to mention a million straight possibilities.
But before I get a good chance to think this through, Mr. Tight bets $50 into this $90 pot, and Fish moves all-in for a total of $98.
Now the dealer is looking at me, waiting for me to act. "Time, please," I say, "and this’ll probably take a few minutes."
(When I tell this story to my friends who occasionally play poker, I ask them what they would do in this spot. I get the same answer every time: "I don’t know." I always reply, "Well, I don’t know either, but everybody at the table is looking at me, so I have to do SOMETHING.")
I quickly decide that I want to call Fish. He could very likely have a stupid hand. He could’ve put it all-in with the bare Ace of Hearts, drawing to a flush, or an 8 for a straight draw. And if he does have me beat, he’s not gonna get any more money out of me on the river.
What worries me is Mr. Weak. He checked the flop, but bet when the 7h fell. I just couldn’t put him on a hand, because he hadn’t shown a hand all night. I felt that he was only gonna call here, whether I came in or not. Unless he held the nuts, I didn’t think he’d play back. And if he did play back, I’d put him on the nuts, and decide whether I wanted to draw for the boat.
Oh yeah, I might be beat at this point by a straight or flush, but if I am, I have outs! I get to call! I hope that Mr. Weak just calls.
How much money do I have? I’m up $600? Well, since I’m playing with their money, I’ll make a loose call (when I press my friends for an answer besides, "I don’t know", they usually say, "Well, it depends on whether I’m winning or losing. If I’m way ahead, I’ll call." I tell them that this is a terrible reason to make a call, and that sure enough, I used the same reasoning to reach my decision).
I call. "I just don’t have the good sense to lay it down," I mutter aloud. Mr. Weak calls.
River is a blank. He checks. Fish can’t wait to turn up his hand. I’m probably beat for the main pot. Should I bet my set for value on the side?
There is currently $0 in the side-pot. If I bet and I’m called, I’m in trouble. I decide that no good can come from betting, so I check, too.
Mr. Weak flopped a set of Nines. Fish showed 86. He hit a 2-out gut-shot (remember I had 77 in the hole), and went all-in despite the hearts on board.
I immediately began to dissect my play of the hand, and decided that I was a chump. Calling close to $100 with bottom set, when the board is showing straights and flushes, with the possibility of a substantial re-raise behind me, may have been the single worst play that I’ve ever made since I figured out how to play this game. Maybe I’m being too hard on myself, but I doubt it. And another thing, meat-head: do you think those beers may have played into your decision to be Fearless Man??
I looked at my watch. It’s 4:30 AM. My wife is gonna kill me. I rationalized all night that when she heard my Fish Story, she’d go easy on me. Well, that may have worked at 2 AM or 3 AM, but the sun will be up before I get home. I cannot believe that I’m quitting while Fish still has money, but I’m tired, I’m too drunk to play for this much money, and I might just blow it all if I stay. I started with about $160, and I cash out for about $500. I guess I shouldn’t feel too disappointed. But I do. It was like a really great movie, that had a really crappy ending.
But playing that hand wasn’t the end. Cashing the chips was the end. So I guess there was a happy ending after all :-)
But the sequel doesn’t look very promising. I’ve played low-limit poker 4 times since that night, and I’ve booked 4 straight losers. I’m playing way too many hands, and trying way too many bluffs. I think I’ve been trying to duplicate the adrenaline rushes I felt that night. I’d better straighten up and fly right real soon.
I’ve been back to the Stratosphere since. It’s all tough players again. No Fish.
But the experience was unforgettable.
Bobby Choquette
Las Vegas
(Disclaimer: I am employed by the Stratosphere Poker room.)
UPDATE: Since the original version was written, fish HAVE been spotted in the Strat's no-limit game. They may not bring a few thousand dollars to the table, but the still leave broke almost every time.
Next time we play, I'll annihilate you you racist pig!!!
I liked your story. But, now you see that it is impossible to feel the same excitement playing limit poker. Now, you know why.
I immediately noticed the first of many things that I would learn that night: no-limit hold-em MAKES you pay attention.
1. ABSOLUTELY true.
2. On your AA hand, I would have moved all in after
the first raise because you had more than one opponent.
3. Good all-in with QQ, knowing the Fish was the key
to this one.
4. Good fold with the AJs hand.
5. Yes, the beers impacted both Knox and your play.
6. Only in America can you play N/L hold em with the
Fish and the pretty girl who is lost.
Bobby,
GREAT report. I noticed the ads in Card Player for both the Plaza and Stratosphere games, and after reading Ciaffone's stuff, I finally got to pay big bet poker at reasonable limits on vacation in LV the week before last.
I didn't have a Fish that bad in the game, but I still had a great time. Since your stack is always at risk, your awareness is heightened; you see things, and hopefully, you begin to think like a poker player.
Every decision becomes more important. It's hard to go back to limit poker after my big bet sessions. I hope these games thrive and are still there when I get back to LV in ttthe fall. I'd also like to see a lot more discussion of big bet hands in this forum. What a great game.
Fat-Charlie
Great post.
For the record, I think you did fine on the hand with AA UTG. When the two suited flop came it then became time to go all-in.
Dave in Cali
Hi there. I am a fairly new player playing at the Canterbury card club in Minnesota (just opened up), and i was wondering something while re-reading HEFAP. It says the different hands to call/raise/fold in different positions, but what if i am in a loose passive game where the players are really bad?
*If* there is a raise pre-flop at the 4-8 table, there always seems to be at least 4 callers. So my question is this: how low on the S&M chart can you go and with what position?
characteristics of many Canterbury players from my experience: -Ax is keepable, by some players it is very raiseable -position and pot odds are not even thought about -*anything* suited is playable -players with few chips try to raise in an effort to buy the pot
i just feel bad folding my 76s in early position against a raise (and sometimes a straddle!) because someone has AX and they feel they must raise it...and then the pot has 4-6 players calling.
Fistdantilus
Fistdantilus,
I believe you are in a game that is very tempting to lure players into making poor plays because they see the garbage everyone else is playing and the frequency with which they are playing it. Playing hands for raises and hands out of position are a sure fire way to burn through a bankroll.
In regards to cold calls of raises, this is a pet peeve of mine. I just finished re-reading John Feeneys book and I agree 100% with his assessment that you can basically get a good feel for opponents by watching how many times they cold call a raise. From my experience, players who cold call raises with any frequency are usually poor players and do not last very long in the games. Do NOT fall into the trap of cold calling raises.
In regards to position, do NOT fall into the trap of playing hands like 6-7 suited up front where you are at great risk of having to call a raise and then be in crap position for the entire hand. You are giving up very little by not playing hands such as these but are risking a lot when you start playing hands such as medium suited connectors in early or middle positions.
Starters and position in holdem are crucial elements of the game. Just because others fall into this trap, I assure you that consistent winning players do not. I would suggest practicising self-discipline and exercising patience and waiting for a situation where you have premium hands or very strong hands with position and then invest heavily in those situations. Just my thoughts, hope they help.
Michael D.
I need some advice on playing short handed. I'm talking about 6 handed, 5 handed, 4 handed... these are how the games at my club usually slowly break every night. I am a skilled ring game player but it seems I dont have as strong a grasp on short handed play. If anyone can offer help I would be greatly appreciative.
Thanks.
Read the shorthanded section of HFAP 21st. It's very useful.
The optimal strategy in ring game fullhanded play is tight aggressive. The optimal strategy or "gear" in short handed play is loose aggressive. Once the game starts to breakdown and go from fullhanded to shorthanded, take advantage of those players who are stuck in ring game gear by quickly shifting gears from tight aggressive to loose aggressive. Stop playing small suited connectors because these hands go down in value (due to the lack of implied odds) in shorthanded games. Shorthanded play is a big card game. If the game has as little as 4 players or less, you can raise with any As or Ks or even Qs. Because in shorthanded play no one is liable to have good cards, it's imperative that you raise, bluff, and steal with any hand, especially if they have a big card (or two big cards) in it. Be a maniac in shorthanded play and try to run over the rocks. Be a warrior, gladiator, carnivore, as opposed to merely being a player, or worse, a grinder.
B.F.--Can you give examples of starting hands for 5 handed, 4 handed.....Thanks
Don't play the hands. Play the players. If the table is full of weak tight players, raise every hand. If the players are maniacs, leave.
Much of the wisdom touted on this forum is to never give free cards to drawing hands when you have a good but beatable hand. "Make them pay through the nose to draw", Jim Brier is fond of saying. You don't want to give them infinite odds on their draw. Does it follow then, that if you have a draw you always want a free card? (Unless of course you're going for a semi bluff)
No it doesn't follow.
Some draws are strong enough, if there are enough callers, they gain from the extra betting and even putting in the raises themselves.
I think the confusion is this. With just one or two opponents you don't want to give any draws a free card. With many callers, they can't all be on good draws so you don't want to give the weaker draws a free card. You will share the EV with the really good draws though.
D.
Here are a couple examples: 1) Lets say you have the nut flush draw on the flop and there is no pair. One guy bets and 6 other guys call. When you raise you are getting more money in the pot compared to the odds against making the flush. If everybody calls the raise you are getting 6to1 on a hand that is less then a 2to1 dog. If it were heads up your reason for raising would be for a free card as you are now only getting 1to1 on your almost 2to1 dog.
2) Another example of where you would definetely prefer the freebie is when you have a gut draw. If you are getting 18to1 from the pot you would have to call the bet which reduces your odds from infinite, to a mere 18to1. You see the difference between the two?
You should bet a super draw like an open ended straight flush draw, or a flush draw AND a straight draw, or a flush draw AND two overcards, or a flush draw AND a gutshot, etc. When you have 12 or more outs with two cards to come you should usually bet since you are frequently a mathematical favorite to make a winning hand. As others I have pointed out the number of opponents makes a big difference as well.
Not to be nit picky, but a number divided by zero isn't infinity, it's undefined. Of course, when expressed in terms of odds I use the term *really good* when drawing for free.
Betting a draw is one of the most flexible weapons a poker player has. Each situation needs to be analyzed as to the effectiveness of a bet, raise or check-raise. I don't think that Jim was indicating that you should only wait for your >12 out hands to bet! These hands are not mathematical favorites to make a winning hand except in specific instances, but they are usually favorites to earn money.
I think the best coverage of these hands is in Sklansky & Malmuth's Hold'em for Advanced players. There is also a good section in Hold'em Poker (sklansky).
Most importantly, when you have a strong draw, you try your best to manipulate the size of the pot so that you get the best return on the equity you have in the hand. John Feeney points out (in his book) that he often sees players bet draws into sure raises, and in the situations to which he's referring, it has exactly the opposite effect of what you would want.
If a player bets what you *know* is big (top) pair with a good kicker and you're in a multi-way pot, why would you raise a medium flush draw if you're next to act? If you had a good overcard to the board (say the flop is 9 high) you might have a valid reason to raise even if you had a small suspicion that your opponent flopped a set.
If you have no way to improve your chances of winning more money with aggressive action, generally it's better to take the draw as cheaply as possible.
Low-Limit hold'em,
You've got something like A-4 offsuit in the Big Blind. Actually a pretty loose game, but there are only two callers and the small blind folds. You don't raise(mistake?)and the flop is: A-7-A, no two flush. You have a fairly conservative image, so if you bet the other two will most likely fold. Besides, the last guy to act will almost always bet, especially with a scary flop. So, you check and the notorious bluffer doesn't let you down.
How would you milk this guy from here on?
I only called the flop, and the third guy dropped. On the turn I check-raise him(I think a 9 hit)and he dropped, so I think this was possibly a mistake. The thing is that I wasn't too confident he'd bet the river if I checked again since I'd been calling him all this way with SOMETHING.
On these not-so-common occasions where you it's just you and a bluffer who happens to be acting last, plus you're pretty sure you've got him beat bad, I'm never sure how to go about getting that second big bet from him(not counting his flop bet or pre-flop bet).
-Randy
I think a check-raise on the turn is wrong. When you get a free play in the big blind and catch an Ace (or two), and you have a weak kicker, you basically have to play check and call. If your opponent has an ace, you're most likely beat, and if he doesn't let him keep betting at the pot. Maybe he'll catch a king or queen that pairs him on the river and he'll bet it or call if you bet.
Pre-flop, A-4 is not a raising hand out of position against two opponents.
I think a check-raise on the turn is wrong. When you get a free play in the big blind and catch an Ace (or two), and you have a weak kicker, you basically have to play check and call. If your opponent has an ace, you're most likely beat, and if he doesn't let him keep betting at the pot. Maybe he'll catch a king or queen that pairs him on the river and he'll bet it or call if you bet.
Okay, I can't say I agree with this at all. There's a big difference between flopping a pair of aces with no kicker and flopping trip aces with no kicker. Once you've flopped trips there's only one more ace in the deck. Even if the whole table took the flop you're not likely to run into that case ace, and if you do, who's to say he's got a kicker (that beats the board) either?
What you recommend in the above paragraph is reasonable advice with just a pair of aces against an overly aggressive bluffer, but with trip aces it's extremely unlikely that someone has anything better on a board of AA97 rainbow. It may not be wrong to check-call the above opponent, but your thinking here is very weak-tight.
FWIW, I think the original poster played it just fine, if he was concerned about the bluffer not betting on the river.
Pre-flop, A-4 is not a raising hand out of position against two opponents.
Obviously not. A4 isn't much of a raising hand at all, except to steal. But what does that have to do with this situation?
Me: [regarding the out-of-position A4 raise] But what does that have to do with this situation?
I didn't see this part of the original post: "You don't raise(mistake?)" which prompted Andy's comment about not option-raising with A4.
Yes, it is indeed less likely an opponent has an Ace when there are two on board. But since your opponent knows this too, he is much more likely to continue his bluff. I still don't like a check-raise on the turn; see Rick Niebolo's thinking on this below, with which I agree. I still think it's better to wait until the river if you're going to make a move here.
And, yes, my comment about not raising with A-4 was in response to poster's question.
You would not want to be raising out of your big blind with Ace-little offsuit. In fact, if someone else had raised you should fold unless it was a steal raise from the button.
One thing to keep in mind is that just because you bet and your opponent folds does not mean that you made a mistake. If your opponent does not have anything he probably was going to involved with the hand anyway. One tactic might be to just check-call the flop and then lead on the turn. Many opponents will try to buy the pot on the cheap street but freeze up on the expensive street and just try to check it down. However, an habitual bluffer will sometimes get suspicious when you suddenly lead on the turn after a blank falls.
Randy,
I would not even consider raising two loose game callers out of the blind with Ace small offsuit.
The best way to milk the guy is to check-call the flop, check-call the turn, and try for a checkraise on the river. If he checks behind on the turn you might again check on the river as he may bluff off his hopeless hands and bet some that will call your raise yet be beat.
Regards,
Rick
You played it fine. Your best bet with top set against a constant bluffer is to wait for the river, unless he'll tend to give it up when you don't drop on the turn. In this case, however, the problem with waiting for the river is that you're out of position. If you check on the river and he's picked up a litle something, he'll check. But if he gives up the bluff and you bet, he might call if he's spiked a pair.
Another alternative is to represent a counterbluff. Let's say, for example, that there were several players between you and the bluffer. On the flop, your best bet might be to checkraise -- quickly now -- in the hopes that he won't believe that you'd try to isolate him with top set. In effect, you're daring him to show you that he's not bluffing while suggesting to him that you're bluffing. When it works, it's incredibly profitable.
I raised early with Ac Ah and was 3 bet by a very solid player in middle position. All fold to me and I called.
The flop came Jc 5d 3c
I bet, he called.
The turn was the 6c
I bet, he raised, I re-raised, he called.
The river 5s
I bet, he called with the Kh Kd
I wonder if I played this too fast. When he called my flop bet, I figured he was planning to raise the turn. And when the 3rd club fell and he indeed raised the turn, I felt I could now re-raise with impunity since he could not re-raise again because I held the Ac. This also allows me to bet the river for value (even if I am beat by a flush or set) without fear of a raise. However, I wonder if he mis-played his hand given the clubs. Comments?
I wish that my only problems playing poker were whether or not I extracted as much money as I could from my opponents.
I don't know how you could have played the hand any better. I think your opponent made some tactical errors not necessarily due to the clubs being on the turn. He probably also made a "reading" error in that he put you on Queens (which you elicited by not 4 betting before the flop).
I probably would have raised you on the flop with my Kings rather than wait until the turn. I do this largely because this approach gives my game balance, but also because I need to give your bet some consideration on a flop like this, and I believe the hand is easier to play if I control the betting for one raise. If you 3 bet the flop, I will *know* that my Kings have run into a serious threat. In other words, I would rather lose 3 small bets than 3 big bets if I'm beat. Your opponent thought he had trapped you by representing over-cards on the flop, and pulling the trigger on the turn, but he only trapped himself. (Had you been raising with hands like A-J from this position?) I think he's pretty committed to going to the river with this hand head's up, though.
Pre-flop your smooth call of his 3 bet in this heads-up situation is okay but I would rather make this move when I have position over my opponent so my preference is to 4 bet and simply take control of the hand. I want to make sure I collect something on every street.
On the flop your lead is fine and I think your opponent should have raised your flop bet with his Kings. He needs to get a better feel of where he is at on the cheap street. Had he raised, you would of course re-raise to extract maximum money otherwise you lose your market if an Ace shows up.
On the turn, your play is fine and his raise is not at all that bad because he has the King of Clubs giving him a flush draw as well as his big over pair. At this point, based on the action so far he has no reason to believe he does not have both the best hand and the best draw.
I think you played the hand well.
Hand #1
6 handed game. Solid player raises 1 off the button, I call in the BB w/ 6s 5s. Heads up.
Flop= Ts 5d 2s
I check, he checks.
Turn= Th
I bet, he folds.
Does anyone think it was reckless to bet the turn? What about the call pre-flop? What if this same situation occured in a full game?
Hand #2
Preface: I had been going through a stretch of raising pre-flop only to have to lay down my hand on the flop or turn. I also made a big laydown against this player earlier.
I raised 1st in and was called by a loosish aggressive player in the sb. Heads up.
Flop came Tc 7h Th
He checked, I bet, he raised, I re-raised, he re-raised (capped), I called.
The turn was 3d
He bet, I raised, he mucked.
Aside from the fact that I didn't feel he would've played a ten in this fashion, I thought it was time to make a stand. I never show bluffs, but this time I turned my AKo face up and made a joke about being tired of getting pushed around. I also received action from him for the rest of the night. Did I play this whole hand foolhardy or are there times when it is correct to play a situation/player in this manner?
It would be easier to comment if I knew the limits you were playing at. With regard to the first hand, were you planning to check-raise the flop? Personally I'd have bet the flop. Solid player may well be on a steal, particularly as it is short-handed and you have a flush draw and middle pair - that is plenty to be betting with, and maybe even check-raising. On the turn he would have probably bet the flop if he had top-pair so feel free to bet the turn when another ten falls. All in all I'd say you weren't 'reckless' enough.
As for the second hand, if you had a good read on the player then by all means play the hand as you did. A lot of people would slowplay a T (although this is less likely when there are two of the same suit showing). However, he could well have a 7, or a pocket pair. Your aggression on the flop didn't buy a free card on the turn, so I'd have probably checked and called turn and river. But like I say, you know the player better than me.
Keyser.
Keyser-
I apologize. The ten and two were cubs not spades. I don't have a question if they were spades. I posted in a hurry. Sorry.
I apologize for my carelessness. The T and 2 were clubs not spades. I did NOT have a flush draw which of course makes a huge difference and is the reason for my question. Sorry....
I would be inclined to bet the flop. A check raise doesn't work as well here because if he's got over-cards he'll pull off a card for the extra bet and your hand may become difficult to play because you're out of position. Since you didn't bet the flop, betting the turn is designed to take the pot. Against an aggressive player that won't check twice, you might check-raise here.
Second hand: It sounds like you played the guy off of a small pair by representing a big pair. Good play, but I don't know that I would have shown my hand. Now you've basically made it impossible to use the same play later against anybody at the table. I don't know what kind of a player your opponent was, but it sounds like he was playing you for something like A-K, but was convinced by your betting action that you had him drawing thin. You likely stole a good sized pot with a 6 card out. I wouldn't want to give up on that option by showing my hand.
First Hand:
"I would be inclined to bet the flop."
Even with no hand? Isn't there too much of a chance that an aggressive player will raise with just overcards? Now you must fold. (remember I made a mistake in my original post. I did not have a draw) On the other hand, I would have folded the flop had he bet. But then I don't lose any more. His check surprised me. I thought he is either trying to trap or he made an out of line pre-flop raise. When the top card paired, I figured there was a good enough chance that a bet would win. (I could have been going for a check/raise on the flop).
"A check raise doesn't work as well here because if he's got over-cards he'll pull off a card for the extra bet and your hand may become difficult to play because you're out of position."
Agreed.
"Since you didn't bet the flop, betting the turn is designed to take the pot. Against an aggressive player that won't check twice, you might check-raise here. "
Again, are you saying that it is sometimes correct to make these plays with absolutely no hand?
Second Hand:
"Good play, but I don't know that I would have shown my hand. Now you've basically made it impossible to use the same play later against anybody at the table. "
You may be right. But I do not often put in 4 bets on the flop then raise the turn without a hand. This was purely a muscle play because I thought I was being muscled. In addition, I thought it may alleviate any weak/tight image that may have been fostered due to the cards I was getting and the way I had to play them because I was not hitting flops. I thought eliminating this weak/tight image was in my best interest. So my question is, does this make it correct to show this hand? I usually do not.
If I recall the first post, didn't you flop a pair of 5's? Head's up in a six handed game, that IS a hand. From the description of your play, I don't think you have to worry about a "weak-tight" image much. If you are folding in a head's up pot, in a short handed game, you are giving up too much. I'd read S&M's "short-handed play" section in Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players 21st Century edition.
If you fold on the flop shorthanded when you flop middle pair with a bunch of rags you're giving up way to much.
All good points. I'm assuming the first hand was heads up-- which makes it an O.K. pre-flop call (but not a no-brainer). If he's the type of player who will just call the flop with overcards, then a bet here is automatic whether you flop a pair or not. If he WILL raise with overcards then it's almost assured that he's also the type of player that will BET his overcards, which makes a check raising a nice play for two reasons-- first, you know where you are if he three bets (he probably has an overpair, since almost all players will slow down with nothing on the flop), and second it allows you to take it down on the turn.
As for the second hand, this is one of those plays that probably break about even in the long run. Sometimes they have something, sometimes they don't... I probably would have just called the flop raise and then two bet the turn, since you should be able to get him to lay down on the turn if he has nothing, and if he DOES have something you save money by not three betting the flop.
The first play was good. You should probably check-raise the flop if he bets, and bet about any card on the turn. This type of play will usually make your opponent fold overcards. But a bet on the turn is pretty standard good play. On the second hand, i think you overplayed it a tad. You put a lot of money in the pot hoping your opponent would eventually fold (after the 4th or 5th time you raised, he finally folded). It worked this time, but i wouldn't make a habit of this type of play. But given your read of the situation, it may have been a better play than it looks like on paper.
I won't look at the ohter replies... before posting.
I think your preflop call depends on what is happening at the table, is everyone raising before the flop? Or it is the case the raiser is playing as if he was playing a full game. I would prefer to be getting better than 3 1/2 to 1 but I think calling is ok.
I would bet the flop, you might have the best hand, and you have a great draw. And I like betting the turn, although you pbly have the best hand. And if not you most likely have 11 outs. The only reason to not bet is to try and induce a bluff. But I think you shold bet the flop, as in a short handed situation you can't give your opponent credit for a big hand. (Were you planning to checkraise the flop?)
In the second hand, I wouldn't have gone that far (was it still 6 handed?). Who is this player in the second hand?? Has this player /the table been overplaying hands??? I think if this is the case maybe making a play like yours isn't bad, for the long term perspective...
I have to apologize to all who took their time and responded to this post. I must have been half asleep when I posted this hand. I described the flop all wrong. I did not have a flush draw or a pair. I had absolutely nothing on the flop. When we both checked the flop I made a pure bluff bet on the turn when the board paired. My question was is this a reckless play?
Again. I apologize for taking the time to those who responded to my incorrect post. I will be more careful (and rested) in the future when I post hands. Sorry.
Steven H
[Also posted today to RGP]
Critique my theories on gutshots, then add your own...
We all know that since you're 11:1 to turn a gutshot, your pot odds or implied odds need to be at least that. Typically, I'll take a card off with a gutshot even if I'm getting as little as 6:1 or 7:1 as long as I figure there'll be two opponents seeing the turn with me, as making 2-3 big bets on the turn and river makes up for taking a short pot now. Heads up, 8:1 will do fine since the fact I'm against only one opponent may mean I have pair outs in addition to straight outs.
How about gutshots on two-suited boards? You now have 3 outs to the nuts, so your odds of turning the nuts are about 14.7:1. So, if you're getting 11:1 on an immediate call with two opponents seeing the turn with you, you're doing okay. Of course, just because the flop is two-suited doesn't mean there's a flush draw out there. You can't play hold'em constantly fearing the nuts, so maybe you don't quite need odds as good as 11:1. So what kind of odds would you typically chase on the flop with? 10:1? 9:1?
If it helps, assume here that you have the top two cards of the straight draw, but that there's an overcard to your hole cards. (e.g. you have JT, flop is A87)
When would you chase a gutshot on a paired board? Assume an ugly paired board like 664, not one where you very well could be drawing dead, like T99. Would you ever chase a gutshot on a paired, 2-suited board? -- Terrence Chan http://www.sfu.ca/~tchand
"It profiteth the wise, to be deemed a fool." -Oceanus, Aeschylus' _Prometheus Bound_
IMO,
"2-3 big bets on the turn and river makes up for taking a short pot now". This sounds about right, I might be a bit more conservative against tough opponents. You should be careful about raises behind you, though.
Against a suited flop you will have to pay off a flush if you hit the wrong out. Even if you hit one of your 3 good outs, a flush draw has a 9 out redraw. This, in effect, gives you less than three outs against a flush draw (you would need > 15:1 to take one off). If you are against many opponents who all appear to be calling on the flop, I would want more than 10:1 to take one off.
Greetings,
Here are some hands where I wasn't sure if I went to far or not. I'll note where I think I made a bad mistake. Please tell me what you think and if I went too far. All of these are from a 10/20 game which had a few players I wasn't familiar w/ and a few I hadn't played w/for months.
1)I have QQ in early position and raise. 2 cold call and BB calls.
The flop comes j 6 2 rainbow. Check I bet 1 st folds, 2nd calls, BB checkraises, I 3 bet other cold calls and BB calls. (At this point I was pretty sure I had the best hand, and thought AJ was in one hand and maybe other other had two pair... and the action on the turn should definitely clarify things).
The turn is 8. Check I bet call call. (Hard to imagine they have a hand that can bet me as BB is fairly aggressive but respects me, other player I ve never seen before and hasn't played many hands in the 20 mins at was there...)
The river is another 8. Check, I bet call call. I turn over QQ, BB says chop it up, and late position player turns over KK. I was drawing dead from the flop (and pretty thin before the flop). They all seemed to think I had JJ or AA. Did I go too far?
2) 1 player limps (new fish to the table) I raise w/ KhKd in mid position. 1 cold call as does BB and fish. FLop comes
Td 8d 2h. Check fish bets, I raise, BB (tight player from first hand w/ KK, who rarely plays anything) cold calls, fish calls.
Turn is a small diamond. They both check to me. Now since I had Kd I thought a bet was correct even thoguh I strongly suspected the BB had diamonds. Low and behold BB checkraised fish folds and I call.
RIver is Ah. He bets and I fold. (Sick and tired of paying off on the river). Almost anyone else Ill call but this guy hasn't raised anything. If he bluffed me out I'll tell him congrats.
3) SB w/ Qc3c, 4 limp fish on the button raises (as he was doing every other hand) and I looked to the left and saw all were planning to reluctantly call. Expecting something like 11 1/2 to 1 1/2 I call which I wouldn't had a)This been a legit raise b) the infrequency of limpreraises at this table. They all called.
The flop comes Q T 9 w/ two spades. I check BB bets all call so for 18 to 1 I call.
The turn is Q still no flush. I check (mistake), BB bets 2call, I checkraise all call.
The river is an offsuit 7. I bet and get called in 3 places. BB has KQs.
Thought the checkraise seems a bit much on the turn I have a good chance of having the best hand, and even if someelse has a better Q (or straight) I have 6 outs which will chop (if we aren't chopping already) w/ the other Q and 3 which give me a full house. And with all these probable straight and flush draws paying .
There were a few more but I think that this is pbly long now.
All commments appreciated!
Thanks alot.
#1 and #2 look like decent play to me. QXs is a piece of crap that will drag your sorry ass down more than one way. It can also make 2nd (and 3rd) best flush. Dump it next time.
-Fred-
Nothing wrong with your play on #1 and 2. If you are going to play #3, which probably is a bad play to begin with, you should muck on the flop. You need to hit the flop perfectly or you're through. I don't care if you have top pair. You have no kicker and you are up against straight and flush draws. As it turns out on the flop you are drawing real thin.
Bruce
Your plays on the first two hands are reasonable. On the third hand it is okay to call a raise from your small blind with Queen-Jack suited, Queen-Ten suited, and maybe even Queen-Nine suited but never Queen-shit suited. I would have bet the turn having made trip Queens rather than going for a check-raise that may not work since the turn is a scare card to anyone who does not have a Queen and may want a free card to a flush draw on the expensive street.
Thanks for the replies. Seems the first hand was much less remarkable than I thought. (It is a very unlikely event that 2 people ahve the same pocket pair, and another has an overpair...)
I knew no one would like the call w/ Q3s. Does everyone tighten up even if the raiser is a ridiculous one? Certainly Id play this hand if it wasn't raised, and expecting no reraise thought not a great call it wasn't bad. As for folding on the flop, I'm getting something like 18-1 on my call. There is areasonable chance I have the best hand, and even if think I need to improve it is reasoable to assume I have 5 outs (though this wasn't the case here but it usually is as if the Q comes out the probability someone else was dealt a Q is 18/47). Indeed I could have stayed out of alot of trouble by folding preflop, or even the flop!
3 limped and I raised with Ac Qc in late position. 1st limper re-raised all called and I capped. The flop came Qd 9s 3h
Checked to me and I bet, 2 call.
Turn= Ts
Checked to me I bet, and first player raises, next folds. I thought he may have a pair with a spade or straight draw. I re-raised, he called.
The river was a blank
He checked, I checked in case he did limp re-raise pre-flop with AA or KK. My Queen was good.
Questions:
1). Was my re-raise pre-flop Ok for deception purposes?
2). Was my re-raise on the turn correct?
3). Did I miss a bet on the end?
Thanks. I appreciate any help with how I played this hand.
1) Nothing wrong raising with AQs pre-flop. You probably have the best hand and you'll buy the button and after getting reraised why not raise again to take the initiative on the flop. It only costs you one more bet. You still may have the best hand and if not you can certainly make the best hand.
2) I don't like the reraise. You may be drawing dead at this point. It's a big pot and by calling on the turn and river you will see your opponents hand. What happens if your opponent reraises you? You will have a difficult time calling and if you do it is going to cost you two more bets.
3) I would check the end if I reraised on the turn. You can't beat AA, KK, or a set.
Bruce
I think you over played your hand. With regard to your questions:
1. You should not cap it with AQ suited. Your initial pre-flop raise was good but when you get 3 bet by a limp re-raiser who will usually have AA or KK I think you should just call.
2. You should not re-raise on the expensive street with a pair of Queens since the betting usually means you are up against AA or KK. Keep in mind that whenever you raise you run the risk of a re-raise and you are risking 2 bets to win 1 bet. You already announced a good hand when you capped and then bet the flop.
3. I would check it down like you did since you have already over bet your hand.
Post deleted at author's request.
But Badger, even if the guy only has AK you are seriously dominated. While I am no big fan of limp re-raising my observation is that the vast majority of the time it is done the limp re-raiser usually has AA or KK. Occasionally it is done with AK suited and sometimes with AK. But all of these hands are much better than AQ suited. I have yet to see anyone, even a flake do it with a pair of Jacks or AJ suited but then I don't play in Southern California much.
Post deleted at author's request.
So is the concesus that you should never re-raise the turn without the nuts??? I thought this person may be check/raising with a pair and/or a draw. Since I was willing to call his bet on the river (2 more bets to me), I decided to get both bets in right away in case he was drawing and I had the best hand. If he 4 bets the turn there would have been little doubt I was beat and would've mucked. If I was beat by AA KK it cost me the same $$$ since I checked the river. Is my thinking flawed?
1) I like your preflop cap due to your last position and the two probably weak limpers trapped in the middle.
2) Your reraise on the turn was overly aggressive IMO. If your hand is beaten, you are wasting money by reraising. If the guy was semi-bluffing, he might have bluffed again on the river had you not reraised.
3) You could have bet the river for value had you not reraised on the turn.
1. I don't think that any deception you may have gained BTF would be worth the extra bet. I find that when someone limp-reraises up front they usually have AA or KK, but I have seen some AKs limp-reraises too. Actually, I will occasionally limp-reraise with AKs in a very loose game with typically 5-8 preflop calls.
2. reraising the turn was not that bad since you had picked up a flush draw, but I think I would not have done it. There is too great a chance that you are beat by a big overpair and you don't want to put more $$ in as a dog.
3. I think checking the river was OK. There was lots of $$ in the pot and you didn't want to get check-raised.
Overall I think you overplayed it though. Good post.
Dave in Cali
3-6 game at Mohegan. Table is comprised of calling stations, one or two decent players, and a complete fish who has a strong affinity for bluffing (sitting directly to my right).
Big blind, I pick up 93d. Uncharacteristically, there is only one limper, fishboy throws in two-thirds of a bet from the small blind, and I check.
Flop comes K32 rainbow. Fishboy bets out. While it's possible that his hand is legitimate, it's more than likely he's betting on any two cards, an Ace, or bottom pair. After playing with this guy for about 2 hours, I have a pretty good read on him.
I raise, both for information, and to knock out the other limper, who has routinely folded to aggression. Sure enough, the limper bows out, and fishboy tanks for awhile before calling. I'll note here that he had and would reraise with top pair here, so the only thing I'm worried about is being outkicked on middle pair.
Turn comes another king, fourth suit. I'm positive the one hand that my opponent does not have is three kings here. He checks, and I bet out, hoping to pick up the pot. Opponent tanks once more, and calls (even more reluctantly).
River is an 8. He checks, and I check behind him, just in case he's paired the 8. At the showdown, he turns over J2o for kings and twos, and I display my hand for kings and threes.
The table gapes at me, open-mouthed. I suddenly start getting a lot more action, and I end up having a great session.
So, was all this pure lunacy/luck on my part, or did I play any of it legitimately?
The fact that you had such a perfect read of the table makes what you did extremely good poker. Congrats.
Well played. Just because you have crap preflop doesn't mean you can't play it agressively after the flop.
Bruce
You played your opponent rather than your cards and got a good result. If you are this proficient at reading players, you should consider playing big bet poker like pot limit or no limit. The late, great Stu Ungar was the best at reading his opponents and got spectacular results.
Good read. I think I would consider betting on riv just in case he *did* have a bigger kicker, picked up an eight, or had a pocket pair bigger than 3's. Makes a tough call for him when you've been betting the Kings all the way.
IMO, you played this hand just fine. You observed the playing habits of your opponents and made plays based on their most likely reactions. Your raise on the flop was a calculated risk that paid off. Reading your players allowed you to take a marginal situation and turn it into a winning hand, where you otherwise would probably have folded. Your thinking here shows that you are paying attention to the game and your players and applying what you know. Good post.
Dave in Cali
Hey people,I take exception to your bashing of Roy West as I am his student and have been for years.I was with the Master and had the privelage of witnessing this lay down in person.Several major points have been omitted in the previous posts.We had just gotten orders of pizza nachos and bbque'd chicken nuggetts delivered to the table,also leftover potato skins were on our immediate left(LOPS),Dr.Browns Root beer on our right,(DBRB),and 5 or 6 callers which meant it would be several minutes before the hand was over.This was a no brainer,an easy fold.Dont forget to kill your bankroll on the way out.
Oh, man. We forgot to consider the Root Beer factor.
I, for one, feel properly chastised.
I've been playing and studying Poker for a year and a half now and I recently made the big step into playing outside of my friendly home poker game. Got the nerves to go to the nearest casino and played 5-10 Hold'em. I would have liked to play a lower limit but this is the lowest available. My bankroll can handle it. Anyway the games are good: usually I'm the player with the best knowledge of the game with most being loose/ average. A very beatable game.
I've been playing with Sklansky/Malmuth starting hands from HEFAP. I found them easier to remember when I started. I modify them to suit the lower limits : tighter in early position for example. I play the flop/turn and river according to Jones. I also play according to Jones if there is a pre-flop raise in front of me.
I haven't been playing for long so I know that the short term effect here can't be conclusive but I've been loosing so I was wondering if my overall play was ok or if I should adjust it now or maybe just learn the Jones starting hands.
Any help appreciated...
theprince
Who is Jones? Can you give us an example of how his post flop advice would deffer from S & M ?
"I play the flop/turn and river according to Jones."
I think this is an indication of your problem. You need to play "poker" from the flop on. I don't believe Lee Jones suggests a specicfic way to play at all times.
You need to learn what your various opponents are doing and how to read hands. Then you can make better decisions about what actions to take. Both Lee Jones and HFAP will be valuable to give you ideas that you can use at various times.
As far as calling raises before the flop, both books have the right idea, don't call legitimate raises with something like an AT and you will be on the right track.
Also when you may want to provide some numbers about your results before anyone can comment on the signifigance. Also reading the 2+2 literature on the bankroll, variance, and getting into the long run will tell you how to evaluate your results.
D.
the prince00:
Move beyond the books. Instead of playing "according" to Jones or S&M, try playing according to your opponents. That is, focus on what works and what doesn't against the particular styles and habits you're up against. So muck AJ on the button against the tight early raiser and (sometimes) 3-bet with AT against the stud trying to run over the table. Note who bets out upon spiking their second pair on the turn or river and who likes to check-raise. Learn exactly which range of hands each of your opponents can have upon raising particular flops. Understand how they react to losing and what they think of you and how you can use that against them. These are some of the real problems you'll need to confront in order to beat the game because anyone can play big cards in position and calculate drawing odds. You might not want to believe this, but your opponents who are playing inferior starters preflop but with better instincts postflop are probably outplaying you overall.
At the table, constantly think about the range of hands your opponents could be playing and what it means for what you should be doing. You do this not because you're trying to learn exactly what they have -- obviously you can't -- but to keep the range of possibilities at the front of your mind.
If you're interested in a different take on starting hands, go to "Abdul's PosEV Page" in the Favorite Links part of this website and print out "Hold 'em Preflop Strategy According to Abdul." Read it many times and think a lot about the issues he raises. Contrast his approach to playing against preflop raises with Jones and decide for yourself what works best and why. IMO, Jones' (admittedly cursory) advice about calling raises preflop with trouble hands is wrong or at least incomplete.
BTW, if your 5-10 game makes a dent in your bankroll, there are a lot of 2-4 and 3-6 games online.
can I find Lee Jones starting hand requirements anywhere on the Internet???..../gen
Thanks a lot Chris...
I was playing $15-$30 at Hollywood Park and I got the pleasure of meeting Rick Nebiolo's student that he has been tutoring. Despite having only played a short time she plays an excellent game and is definitely a favorite in this game. However, there was one hand I thought would be instructive to post. In California they seat 9 players. The student is in Seat #1, the big blind is in Seat #4, and I am in Seat #7 with the AhQh. #5 limps in, #6 folds, and I raise to $30. #8 and #9 both fold. The student cold-calls the raise. Everyone folds to the limper who calls. There is $115 in the pot and three players.
The flop is: Jc8h6d
The limper checks. I bet $15 with my two big suited over cards and backdoor nut flush draw into two opponents. The student calls. The limper calls. There is $160 in the pot.
The turn is: 9s
The limper checks. I check. The student checks.
The river is: 5c
The limper bets $30. I fold. The student raises to $60 and the limper calls. The student wins having the 7h7d for a straight at the river. The limper mucks.
I have 3 questions about the student's play on this hand.
1. Pre-flop, was her cold call of a bet and raise having pocket Sevens in the cutoff seat correct?
2. On the flop, was her call of the flop bet correct given the presence of a pre-flop raiser who is betting into her and the two over cards on the table?
3. On the turn, was she correct it checking and taking a free card?
Preflop
This hand should normally be folded particularly if Student intends to routinely fold on the flop after the preflop raiser bets (which he generally will do). A call might be the proper play if the button and/or the blinds play loose and are likely to call (giving her 4 or more opponents).
While reasons can be given to 3 bet here, I generally don't like doing that with medium pocket pairs particularly when there is a limper before the preflop raiser (i.e. the isolation 3 bet may not work).
Flop
I don't like the call. I would usually fold. Not only can Jim have an overpair or AJs, Student has very little info concerning the limpers' hand i.e., his check may not mean much if he is in the habit of checking to the raiser. In short, Student is really acting under the gun here if one were to assume that on the flop, the limper would automatically check and Jim would automatically bet.
If I were to play with 77, it would be with a raise given that I only have 2 opponents.
Turn
Having just called the flop, a bet on the turn here is I believe mandatory. Jim's hand is likely marked as being AK or AQ. So, Student should know that her hand is better than Jim's hand at this point. While the limper may have Student beat, he sure has not done anything to indicate that he does. Besides, even if Student is trailing the limper, she has some outs on the river.
In any event, there is a good chance that Student's hand is tops at this point. She should bet and protect it.
Another important reason to bet is that it may cause someone (like Jim) to fold a Queen. Thus, if Student goes on to hit a 10 on the River, she avoids the "drawing dead" syndrome.
skp,
You wrote: "Preflop this hand should normally be folded particularly if Student intends to routinely fold on the flop after the preflop raiser bets (which he generally will do). A call might be the proper play if the button and/or the blinds play loose and are likely to call (giving her 4 or more opponents)."
She is not big on routine folding ;-). But in this game, she should have gotten the button and one blind most of the time. So in retrospect I won't argue with the call before the flop.
"While reasons can be given to 3 bet here, I generally don't like doing that with medium pocket pairs particularly when there is a limper before the preflop raiser (i.e. the isolation 3 bet may not work).
This game was not one to make isolation plays in.
Flop: I don't like the call. I would usually fold. Not only can Jim have an overpair or AJs, Student has very little info concerning the limpers' hand i.e., his check may not mean much if he is in the habit of checking to the raiser. In short, Student is really acting under the gun here if one were to assume that on the flop, the limper would automatically check and Jim would automatically bet. If I were to play with 77, it would be with a raise given that I only have 2 opponents.
I thought the call was wrong for the reasons stated in the first post I put up tonight. But now that you mention it, I wonder if a raise would not be a bad idea. She knows enough about Jim to realize that he probably won't three bet without an overpair and maybe not even then given the dangerous middle card board.
"Having just called the flop, a bet on the turn here is I believe mandatory. Jim's hand is likely marked as being AK or AQ. So, Student should know that her hand is better than Jim's hand at this point. While the limper may have Student beat, he sure has not done anything to indicate that he does. Besides, even if Student is trailing the limper, she has some outs on the river. In any event, there is a good chance that Student's hand is tops at this point. She should bet and protect it. Another important reason to bet is that it may cause someone (like Jim) to fold a Queen. Thus, if Student goes on to hit a 10 on the River, she avoids the "drawing dead" syndrome."
I agree with this logic 100%.
Regards,
Rick
RERAISE - "Pump it or dump it" - Under no circumstances would I call in this situation. I may easily have the best hand against two face cards. Raise or fold.
By 3 betting you will likely: (a) buy the button (b) knock out the blinds (c) May knock out original limper and get it heads-up (d) Put you into a guessing game.
If I were the student, I would continue hammering you until you fold or pay me off with a better hand.
The only way I would just call would be if there were 4 players already in the pot. RIGHT or WRONG - This is my style, very aggressive or sitting on the sideline.
Bob,
This was not a Wednesday afternoon game at the Bellagio. This was Sunday afternoon at Hollywood Park. Three betting before the flop would have resulted in three opponents on the average (although maybe not this particular hand).
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
Post deleted at author's request.
Why, when the enemy suddenly shows weakness, do you want to now play scared and check on the turn? When neither player bets on the expensive street, you could have both the best hand and the best draw. Against only two opponents, there will be a significant percentage of the time when you will win without a fight by just betting out. If you get called, you have 8 outs in case you do not have the best hand.
I am mystified by a playing strategy that has you cold-calling raises pre-flop against a small number of opponents in situations where you are a huge underdog about half the time and a marginal favorite the other half. Then you find the guts to call flop bets when you fail to improve, two over cards to your pair show up, and you are being bet into with the possibility of getting raised from behind. Now having shown all that courage you suddenly get cold feet on the turn and want to check it down. Is the strategy here play loose pre-flop, play loose on the flop, but freeze up on the turn just in case you were wrong on the first two streets?
Post deleted at author's request.
She doesn't have the best hand on the turn. Why bet then?
Steve,
Her player reading skills are very advanced at this point. She may have world class potential here. Knowing why she is making a play needs work, and of course many plays are debatable. That is why this is fun.
This is her read on the limper: Very loose before the flop, unaggressive on the flop to the finish, seldom checkraises, will play middle cards up front, and will call down with most pairs.
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
I do agree with Badger about the check on the turn. The limper showed weakness on the flop by checking, but now he called the flop . Thus the 9 on the turn is almost bound to hit partially his hand unless he is a total fish and called with something like TA. A bet is in order if it is positive he would fold a pair under a jack with no draw but this would be a very rare player (and then you should raise the flop)
I would fold preflop.
I would raise on the flop in most cases. 77 is almost even money to be beaten by you at this point if you would raise preflop and would raise on the flop with any two flop overcards and with pairs above 88 plus JA and JKs. Again a raise is especially good against weak-tight limper.
I would only fold on the flop if the limper would never lead on the flop against a preflop raiser even with top pair.
To sum up, I am interested in the flop only because the limper didn't show interest about it yet. Now that he did call and showed some interest I have to check the turn.
Badger,
Student agrees with you 100%.
Regards,
Rick
Well obviously, I disagree with Badger on almost every street.
I am really perplexed by Badger's advice on the turn...how in the world can a check be better than a bet here...Jim's hand is marked for 2 overcards i.e., AK or AQ. I suggest betting to get him to drop AQ. Badger says Jim would automatically call anyway. I doubt it. If Jim has AQ, he can't be saying to himself "well, you know, I have a 10 outer and therefore will call". Jim probably can't count the 3 Queens as outs and may not even be able to count the Aces as outs. If Jim can count those cards as outs, he should bet the turn rather than check-call. In any event, even if Jim will call with AQ...so what...Student should still bet.
If Jim has AK, Student obviously should bet and Jim will likely be erring by calling.
Ah yes...we do have the limper to be concerned about. On the other hand, all he has done so far is check-call the flop and checked the turn...so, I wouldn't exactly be quivering in my boots while looking at him.
I say "bet the turn"...and I also say what I have already said concerning Student's play preflop and the flop (although I am not nearly as vehement mith my selections on those streets as I am on the turn play).
I would be interested in more opinions on the turn play.
I wrote my message before I read yours, and I agree with you on the turn bet. Way, way too many dangerous free cards to give out here if 77 is in fact the best hand.
Post deleted at author's request.
Badger,
Maybe you are right. But this makes the flop call even worse. Student is laughing at me right now.
Regards,
Rick
Badger wrote:
"You are wrong about free cards, Dan. Think about it. What could Jim have that he would fold? AQ is a gutshot and two over cards, he should call one bet from the last player with that. AT is an open ender. TT is to, and is a pay off pair. All pocket pairs 6 or above are either a set or a gutshot or an overpair. The *only* muckable hand is AK. All the other hands we will not be giving free cards to. He's going to call! So, therefore you have to look at the *value* of betting 77 against AQ or AT. There is precious little value there."
The problem with this analysis is that while it correctly contemplates various holdings that the other two players could have, it gives very little weight to the fact that they have both checked the turn. Their checking the turn makes it unlikely that they have many of these monster hands that Badger seems to be concerned about. I mean, if you had a set here, would you check on this draw-infested board?...Didn't think so.
Let us examine Jim's "possible" hands:
10,10 - No. He just turned an openender. He was the preflop raiser. There is only one overcard and there was no raise on the flop. He would be nuts to check 10,10 on the turn.
A set- No. He can't afford to check with this draw-infested board. Besides, there is only one player left to act and she may not bet. A slowplay here with a set would be crazy.
A,10 - Possibly and he will call Student's bet on the turn. But so what, if I am student, I would prefer he fold but if he calls, I am still the favourite. In other words, I like his call but love his fold. I hate not betting at all and giving him infinite odds.
A,Q - Quite likely. I disagree with Badger that Jim should automatically call with AQ. He can't count the 3 Q's as outs (particularly if limper also calls Student's bet). If Jim were to check-call with AQ, he ought to have bet AQ on the turn. After all, he was the preflop raiser and his bet on the flop was met with no resistance. Also, as with the A,10 analysis, Student would like a call from AQ but would love a fold from AQ. She has to hate giving a freebie to AQ.
AK - Very likely. If you knew that Jim had AK, it would be silly for 77 to check here.
Based on the action so far, it is highly likely that Jim has AK (with AQ being a close second choice). In either case, Student should bet.
Now, let's take a look at limper:
Once again, for the reasons already given, a set is unlikely. Firstly, sets are hard to come by. Secondly, a set really should be heard from earlier on this type of board. And if you go around fearing sets all the time, you will never be able to bet without a strong hand on the turn because a set is possible on every board no matter how raggedy it looks.
Now, we are talking about HPC games. I have never been there but I gather from Rick's posts that these games are not exactly the tightest games on the planet. So, when limper check-calls the flop and checks the turn, why in the world would you assume that he must have Student beat. Could he not have called preflop and on the flop with a hand like A,10 or KQ. He could also have something like A,8 and peeled off a card on the flop with second pair and then been ready to fold on the turn. There are lots of hands that he could have that Student beats. While there are lots of hands that he could have which beats Student's hand, the point is that very few would be strong enough for him to checkraise with. In fact, some hands (such as A8) though stronger than Student's hand may be folded at this point by the limper.
Bottom line vis a vis limper: Ya, Student could be called by a better hand. So what? Is not the expense of 1 big bet worth a shot at the sizable pot?
I can't help but go back to Mason's infamous 44 hand. His bet on the turn was something that everyone agreed with. In fact, he may have got the chump of the year award if he failed to bet the turn on that hand.
Badger is rarely wrong but I really think that there is something amiss with his turn analysis here.
Post deleted at author's request.
Steve,
I guess the premise of your argument is that Student has no chance of winning the pot with a bet. That's where you and I disagree.
I think we are on common ground that Student's hand is definitely better than Jim's hand at the turn.
As to the limper, I can think of:
a. Several legitimate hands that he could have which Student beats i.e. AT, K10, A6s, 55 and down, KQ, 76s, 65s
b. Some hands that he could have which beats Student's hand but which he may lay down for a bet i.e., A8; Q9
c. Very few hands with which he would checkraise Student with (i.e. if you agree with me that he is not likely to check a set in this situation).
The penalty in betting and being called by a better hand is small: 1 big bet
The reward in betting and driving out even one of the other players who may go on to hit the river is several big bets.
It is easy to conceive of a situation where betting halves the number of collective outs as against Student's hand.
I make the bet every time.
Let me ask you this:
Suppose Student checks the turn. A deuce comes off on the river. If limper bets and Jim folds, what should Student do?
If you say "call", her check on the turn is a clear mistake i.e. the call you make on the river may as well be the bet you make on the turn.
If you say "fold", you are a lot less suspicious of river bluffs after a display of all-around turn weakness than I am.
Anyway, I enjoyed the debate. If you don't mind, let me have your E-mail address. I want to run something by you in private concerning this hand.
Post deleted at author's request.
"You guys are grabbing at a chance to lose this pot."
I don't get it.
This assumes that you too believe that 77 is the best and that betting somehow will expose you to dropping the best hand in the event you get checkraised. If anything, I think that checking is "grabbing at the chance to lose the pot".
As I have already said, it is unlikely that you will be checkraised here. Yes, a check-call flop/ checkraise pattern by the limper often signifies a set. But not every checkcall flop/check turn is made by a set. The vast majority are made because the player ain't got SH*T. In other words, you don't have to fear a set until and unless limper comes to life on the turn and he often will not (and if you disagree with me on that one, there is NO WAY in hell I can win this argument).
And even if he does raise with a set (which is highly unlikely given that he would likely have bet considering the layout of this board and the simple infrequency with which sets crop up in play), 77 still has some outs.
"A pair of eights or better ain't ever going to fold for one bet."
Oh...so you are saying that it's absolutely ridiculous for 77 to bet the turn but perfectly reasonable for the limper to call with something like A8?...eh?
"A player who routinely loses that river bet (as opposed to the turn bet) is going to make a lot more money than somebody who loses the money on the turn. When you have the draw, you want to see as many cards for free as you can (against one or two opponents)."
Disagree. That may be true when you have just a naked draw. It does not apply when you have a draw and possibly the best hand (or a draw with the second best hand where the best hand may fold to a bet).
"You really think there is *any* chance *both* players will laydown for a bet on the turn? "
Yes - a good chance. And even if 1 lays down and you catch the other on a draw, your bet has helped you tremendously.
"I don't understand your point about calling when a deuce comes on the river. Why does this make the check on the turn a mistake?"
The point I made is also made by Dan Hanson and probably needs not to be repeated. Betting the turn and checking the river is a common and effective use of position. It's one of the reasons that you can often bet AK on the turn against your opponent even if you are unpaired. You then check the river. Another way to play it is to check the turn and call the river even if you are unpaired. I generally prefer the first alternative. This situation is not much different in principle.
Post deleted at author's request.
Badger wrote:
"Are you saying you would muck A8 if she bet? I don't know that I've *ever* played with anyone who would."
Oh c'mon. This is way too melodramatic and wrong to boot. Are you saying that you have never folded 3rd pair on the turn?
Of course, I could fold A8 on a board of J986. If you are saying you would always call I revoke the license I gave you to call ME the live one;)
Actually, I know that you wouldn't always call here either. I just don't know why you would say the opposite here.
Badger wrote:
"Well we disagree totally on the one point. I think it's ludicrous to think both will muck. They basically *both* have to have AK!"
Why in god's name does that have to be the case. In one of my other posts, I set out several hands that the limper could have none of which beat 77. Are you saying that none of those hands are probable? Have a look at them again and tell me why if you will. And we know that Jim doesn't beat 77. So ya, a bet can win the pot and a bet can certainly knock out at least one opponent.
Badger wrote:
"Betting in position is often a good thing that leads to checks on the river, but who cares about that in a situation where you are very likely betting the worst hand and losing value?"
Well, this retort assumes that you are correct. It is not an argument advanced to prove your theory. Thus, it really doesn't add anything to the debate.
I could just as easily dismiss off all your arguments with a wave off my hand and say:
"Checking with a draw is often a good thing that leads to saved bets, but who cares about that in a situation where you are very likely also betting the best hand and therefore gaining value?"
Post deleted at author's request.
Steve,
OK, even if they don't lay down to a bet, won't a bet on the turn stop a bet on the river that she would prefer not to call but may have to because of the size of the pot?
Regards,
Rick
Boy, this is fun...but Badger also wrote:
"If I had JJ, and had one of you crazy crap-betting guys behind me, I'd sure check and let you bet the limper into me, then checkraise!"
So, let me get this straight:
You espouse calling a middle position solid player's raise preflop with 77. The hand is not "crappy" then.
You then espouse calling the solid player's bet on a J86 flop with the limper still left to "really" act. The hand is not "crappy" then even though you could be drawing to a 2 outer or some remote runner-runner straight.
You then say the hand becomes "crappy" on the turn after *both* players *check* and after the hand has also become an open-ended straight draw.
Aaaah...no...it ain't right.
Steve,
It seems to me that you are offering a reasonable alternative of how Student can go about saving $30 by checking. I will grant you that your idea of checking increases Student's chances of saving 30 bucks.
But, you are overlooking the fact that betting is a reasonable alternative of how Student can greatly increase her chances of winning a $160 pot.
I weigh the two and the contest is not even close: This "crazy crap-betting guy" would bet every time.
Post deleted at author's request.
Badger wrote:
[Re: the flop call] "Lol, no, it's crap. But it's worth a call. That's a lot of what poker is, protecting your equity with marginal hands."
Funny how that logic doesn't seem to appeal to you on the turn bet *after* two opponents have shown weakness by checking. It almost seems like you have no respect for raises (preflop) and bets (on the flop) and all too much respect for checks (on the turn).
Badger wrote:
"Only a sucker would view it as "open-ended". It's a bottom end draw only, realistically."
Exactamundo. That's why you have to bet (see my initial response to Jim's post). The chances of it being a bottom end draw are greatly increased if you meekly check.
Let's take a very realistic possibility. Limper has KJ and Jim has AQ. You bet. Limper calls. Jim folds. The bet just gave you an open-ended draw. On the other hand, the check not only leaves you with just 4 outs, it leaves you with 4 "drawing dead" cards.
You seem to intimate that betting may increase our chances of winning from 12% to only 14%. Clearly inaccurate. Creating 4 extra outs increases our chances a lot more than that...and that assumes that our bet has no chance of winning the pot which is clearly not correct. What are you saying? You have never won a pot with a bet on the turn against two opponents who have already checked when you know that one opponent (Jim) for sure does not have you beat?
I am sorry...but this "live one" bets
Badger wrote:
"but given we should fold to a checkraise I'd say betting is a wash in terms of the not-very-important concept of "chances of winning the pot."
You say we should fold to a checkraise. I don't...so the wash you speak of ..well...just doesn't wash.
and "not-very-important concept"?...lol...
Badger wrote:
"Every game needs a liveone."
Aaaah...finally a statement I can agree with:)
Post deleted at author's request.
Good players spot weakness when their opponents check ahead of them on the turn. Good players bet when they sense that weakness and when they could have the best hand and a back-up draw to boot.
Bad players fail to see this and therefore fail to win the bets and pots that they should win.
I don't know how you can define the limper's hand at all. The only evidence we have is that the limper check-called one bet, and then checked again. If he does have us beat, there's got to be a good chance that he'll lay the hand down (say he had an 8 or a six). This flop could also produce many gutshot or straight draws. In any event, if you check the turn and the limper bets, you're committed to calling if Jim folds. Might as well bet the turn.
skp, Badger and all,
This seems about the right place to post this although Oz may disagree.
Jim Brier and I had a drink in the Hollywood Park bar Sunday night after this hand was played and we both agreed this would be a fun one to post. Anyway, Student appreciates all the interest and work so many posters put into disecting this hand. We believe there cannot be a better and more exciting place to learn but on this forum. After all, we are all students of this complex and exciting game and no one knows it all (except Badger ;-) ).
I’ve posted my thoughts here and there but they are pedestrian. Of course, the most interesting debate has been between Badger and skp sort of above. Student told me to post the following excerpt from an email she wrote this morning before work. It describes what she was thinking during the hand:
"…I still agree with Badger 100%, he could not have described better my position when I was playing the 7's. I agree with him that my post play was the best I could do no matter what other people say. Since I already took the plunge of calling Jim's raise preflop and there were 2 cards on the flop that were higher than my pair, I will not bet my cards even though I was the last one to bet. For me, it's a waste of money, the limper was there (who had a Jack and a small card), and my thoughts were, "let the best person win", I was ready to have a showdown at the end since I had a medium pair anyway. Also, I have been playing quite a few times with this guy and I know how he plays and how the other HP players play. If they have a pair, they will hold on tenaciously to their pair to the river and nothing you do will kick them out. So, Badger was right in my opinion and I will just know better the next time not to put myself in a predicament like this again."
Anyway, those were her thoughts as of this morning. She was very entertained by the lively debate between skp and Badger tonight after getting them again at Hollywood Park this afternoon. Thanks guys.
My thoughts: I generally agree with Dan Hanson that calling pre flop was a little loose but this game had about as good a lineup as you could want for this play. On the flop I think she should raise since this flop is pretty scary to many hands Jim would play but I also wonder about the back door straight making the call a little better than it looks.
On the turn, I’m up in the air. A bet seemed clear cut but now I’m starting to see Badger’s logic. A lot depends on a “feel” for what the limper will do. Maybe the above email will help.
Regards,
Rick
** Although many who play with her know her first name, “Student” goes by that name or “Rick’s Student” on this forum because she has a very responsible day job controlling the finances, books, and office supplies for a secretive fundamtalist/religious/conservative/libertarian/socialistic organization dedicated to changing the American way of life. I think their main goal is to ban the sale of packaged snacks at gas stations but there may be other more sinister items on the agenda. If they knew of her poker activities, she would become pollitically suspect and could lose her job. Moreover, she is the only one in the office who smokes so she is already under suspicion.
P.S. My computer is falling apart as I type (the disk drive sounds like a cement mixer) and somehow I lost my spell checker. I may be offline for a few days as a new one I ordered is at the UPS office in my town so I will be in installation hell the next few days.
Post deleted at author's request.
Steve,
Why save something good for weeks?
In all seriousness, she did mention that the limper was unaggressive to the extreme. If so, her flop call may have likely bought her two looks.
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
skp,
Student has just told me that the original limper was a bit loose, unaggressive and not very tricky (thus unlikely to checkraise but likely to call if he had top pair).
If so, I like the raise on the flop but not by a lot. If the limper has a jack (or maybe an eight), he is likely to just call and Jim or Student won't like it. Now I like the call even less. Folding was still an option and better than a call.
Since she reached the turn and was checked to, now is the time to put on the heat. She has a draw and a pair. Once they both check, she has a hand to protect and it is unlikely she will get check raised since the board should be scary to her limping opponent and to Jim, who is no big fan of the check raise ;-).
BTW, as we speak, Student is seeing the logic of the turn bet but is still stubborn about the call on the flop.
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
That's what I like about poker, it's a continuous learning process.
Badger and the student played one way and won.
I would have played it totally different and won also.
Badger is a much better player than I am, so his advice would more likely be correct.
Congratulations to Rick for being such a fine teacher.
Your way seems fine against a lot of tight players. They're likely to just call your 3 bet pre-flop with face cards and give it up on the flop when they miss.
Post deleted at author's request.
Bob,
Student has tremendous potential but a lot of raw edges to work on. Her focus is great and she is starting out at 15/30 after a brief stint at 6/12 and 9/18 holdem. She has been barred by me from playing Omaha H/L for playing too many hands before the flop. Besides, it is a lot more fun playing forty hands per hour at 15/30 or 20/40 holdem compared to eighteen (or less in a good game) hands per hour in Omaha H/L.
Anyway, in Los Angeles, playing 6/12 and 9/18 holdem just won't prepare you for for the yellow chip games. The dead drop makes the game too loose and it is tough to develop skills. She did have some time with me on Planet Poker. There the 5/10 game is tighter than a Hollywood Park 15/30.
Regards,
Rick
I'm going to have to disagree with Badger. I think it was a marginally bad pre-flop call. So far, she's looking at calling a raise cold with a smallish pocket pair with only two people in the pot and several to act behind her.
On the flop, I would have either raised or folded, given that the limper checked. I don't have the odds to draw to a set here, so I'm only calling if I believe that I may have the best hand, in which case it's a big deal to get the limper out. If the action had been slightly different (i.e. limper bets, raiser cold-calls), a smooth call becomes more defensible.
On the turn, the student should have bet. Once both players check, there is even more reason to believe that 77 is the best hand. And, you don't even mind getting raised, because it becomes an easy fold. If the hand had more outs, perhaps a check is more in order.
Dan wrote:
"And, you don't even mind getting raised, because it becomes an easy fold. If the hand had more outs, perhaps a check is more in order."
Suppose Student bets the turn and is raised by the limper...I am not sure that Student should automatically fold here. After all, the raiser has to have exactly Q,10 to make him uncatchable. There are lots of other hands he could be checkraising with (i.e. any set, 98 etc). Thus, I am not sure that I can agree with your comment above.
That said, I still would bet the turn for the reasons already given. I mean, the guy did check twice. There is no reason to believe that he is now suddenly going to bombard the pot with chips.
Post deleted at author's request.
I meant that in the second case smooth calling would be more defensible as opposed to raising. I agree that folding would be the best option in that case.
The point I was trying to make with the raise is that you have the chance force the limper out of the pot. Remember, you think that you have the raiser beat, or you couldn't call his bet. If that's the case, you need to get the limper out. You might get him to fold a better hand, and if he doesn't have a better hand he's likely to have at least a gutshot.
I should point out that this situation was just about inevitable, given the call before the flop. This is where you'll find yourself when you call a raiser immediately to your right with a small pocket pair. They're going to get checked to, then they'll bet, and you'll be put in a difficult position. You can't always just fold to this bet, but you know other players could be waiting to check-raise, and you may call or raise, find yourself re-raised, and lose a bunch of chips. This is why I thought it was a bad call before the flop. In a completely passive game, where the blinds almost always limp and where you'll be able to outplay your opponents on the flop, the call is slightly +EV. You can count on at least a couple more callers, and check-raising will be at a minimum after the flop.
This game obviously wasn't like that, given that the blinds folded and it wound up 3-handed, and given that players like Jim Brier were in the game.
Steve,
There are so many posts here and it is obvious some of us are now up. I will say that the limper did in fact show a jack small suited (he was a weak player) so he in fact did play it bad.
Regards,
Rick
Oh Boy,
One thing about trying to help someone with their game is that in the short run they can beat the heck out of you and tend not to want to listen to what you have to say. Lately it has been that way since she has won nine out of the last ten sessions and my talk of short term luck runs thin.
Right after this hand was played, student runs up to me while I'm working the floor and tells me Jim (who she had just met since she is an avid reader of his posts) was writing in his notebook and she was pretty sure this was the hand.
Anyway, she described it quickly and my initial reaction was that the hand was a close call before the flop against a single limper and solid raiser, a bad call on the flop where the pot was not big enough to justify taking one off and hitting the set may be dangerous (remember it is vulnerable to redraws on the river, especially against the limper). But betting the turn once she picked up a draw/pair combo hand and was checked to by two opponents did leap out in my mind (especially since at least one was capable of folding). Unfortunately, I was baby sitting my section so I didn't have time to ponder.
So, I will comment above in this thread here and there and later we may have another hand to post where she actually may have bailed out too soon on a much better draw where the danger cards were unlikely to be in the opponents hands.
Regards,
Rick
Shouldn't Jim have fired a second barrel on the turn? He has two overcards with a gutshot, he can represent an overpair, and his two opponents have shown weakness.
Not her,
Interesting point. The limper has checked and he should know that student should respect his bets, although she can be hyper-aggressive in the best "Abdulian sense".
OTOH, I wonder if Jim can call a turn bet by Student if the original limper calls. He is only getting 6 to 1 odds with AQ and the board is J 8 6 9. How good can hitting an ace or a queen be?. And the ten can easily end up in a split pot. Jim has a problem here.
Regards,
Rick
There is $160 in the pot and it costs me $30 to bet the turn. These are only 5:1 pot odds. Given that board and two opponents who have been staying with me all the way, a bet will not win the pot here. What are my outs? Any 10. A Queen may not be an out given that board since anyone with a 10 would have a straight. An Ace may or may not be an out. I have 4 clean outs although someone with a Queen ties me and the other 6 are of dubious value. I think this is the functional equivalent of a 5 outer which would require about 8:1 pot odds.
I don't understand the pre-flop cold call of a solid player's raise. I would drop my small pair here.
wgb,
She ended up almost worse case scenario. But normally she would get two more to commit. If so, it was a close call.
Regards,
Rick
I think it was a bad call, because it's a bad situation for the small pair. Forget odds before the flop - She's probably not going to get enough to call just to hit a set. Sure, she might get three callers behind and wind up in a +EV situation, but she might also get re-raised behind and wind up in a 3-way pot for 3 or 4 bets before the flop. That would be 'bad'. Overall, if you're a good player there is no reason to stick your neck out like this. Another factor is is that a good player raised. If I'm faced with a marginal call, I base my decision on the quality of my opponents. If there are several good players in the game, I tend to just avoid them. No sense butting heads with the tough guys when there are fish swimming all over the place.
The real problem calling here is that she's going to get put in a tough situation on the flop, having the pre-flop raiser immediately to her right, and players to act behind her. This will force her to play incorrectly quite often when she doesn't hit a set (playing incorrectly in a FTOP sense - folding the best hand, or raising into a better hand). And the nature of those small pairs is that bad decisions are expensive, since you typically have few outs.
Incidentally, for those of you who helped me through my losing streak, thanks for all the support and advice. My game is now back on track and better than ever. I used the experience to improve my game and I am actually glad I had that run of bad cards.
Here is a recent 10-20 hand for you to critique:
I was dealt Ac Js on the button. This is a loose and near on tilt game. Three callers, a maniac immediately on my right (thank god) raises, I call, everyone calls. BB goes all in to call.
Flop comes Jc Jd 4c. Checked around to the maniac, he bets, I raise, ALL CALL. BB is still all in.
Turn comes 9c. 3 flush is on the board. I now have trip jacks and the ace of clubs for the nut flush if another club comes. Checked all the way around to me, I bet, mid position player checkraises, everyone drops, I call. Now it is heads up between me and the checkraiser and the BB.
River comes As. I now have jacks full of aces. Mid position bets, I raise, he makes a crying call and says full house. I say me too, AJ. He had 99. I win the side pot.
The BB turns over AA for aces full and wins the main. When the mid position player sees this he tears his cards in half and throws them across the table. He says 'nice two outter guys'!
Now, would anyone in their right mind make this laydown? How could I possibly have made this laydown when the guy who checkraised me could just as easily have had a flush or another jack with a weaker kicker?
Fact is, I had 4 outs because another 4 would give me the best hand, too.
The only possible mistake I think I might have made was the flop. I normally will not play AJ offsuit for a raise, and only called it because the maniac was raising every hand.
Any comments?
SmoothB
"The only possible mistake I think I might have made was the flop. I normally will not play AJ offsuit for a raise, and only called it because the maniac was raising every hand."
You took the words right out of my mouth. Even maniacs wake up with the good now and then. I'd play the AJ against him in a head's up pot but multi-way I'd be a little shy.
-Fred-
This is quite the interesting hand. I like to fold this hand preflop to this raise, simply because I feel the hand is easily dominated, however if you can get away from the hand quickly after the flop, your long term EV will still be ok. Once you see a flop with two jacks, you played it properly. You absolutely have to raise the maniac's bet. (By the way, speaking of two-outers, what is the 99 waiting for? If he puts you on a jack or an overpair he has to fold. He played this hand extremely poorly). When the nine comes on the turn, I like your play. When you are checkraised, I would put the checkraiser on a flush. (He could conceivably have 44, in which case you would have 7 outs) (I don't put him on 99 unless he is a very weak player who regularly draws thin). At this decision point there is $125 in the main pot and $165 in the side. For twenty more you are getting 8-1 just on the side pot. You have to call. Too bad for him that he didn't have the discipline to lay down a weak hand on the flop. Your post flop play was correct. (Folding it preflop may still be the right play)
Thanks for the feedback. RE getting away from this hand - I have no trouble getting away from a hand like this unless the flop hits it HARD, like it did here.
If the flop came A Q 5 rainbow and there was a bet and a raise I would fold it under these circumstances (depending on the better and raiser) if it were raised preflop.
-SmoothB-
Tell the guy who ripped up his cards to learn better manners. There's no way you're getting off that hand unless Mr. AA turns his cards face up.
BTW, Mr. Mid position called to hit a two-outer on the turn himself.
Let me get this straight. The mid-position player is complaining about 2 outers when he called a bet and a raise on the flop against 6 opponents when an open pair of Jacks are on the board and he has pocket Nines? I think he is a little mixed up.
You played fine, except that I would fold pre-flop with Ace-Jack offsuit given the number of limpers and then the raise by the maniac to your right. However, your call is understandable.
I normally don't like playing AJo. In this situation with the maniac on your right raising I would prefer either 3 betting it or passing.
Bruce
AJo should be folded to the raise. Keep in mind that if the "maniac" has been raising every hand then all the limpers before him presumably feel their hands can stand a raise. Also, anyone with a really big hand will simply call preflop, and backraise the maniac once all the AJ's of the world have committed themselves.
Wait for a better opportunity than this.
Not to sound too redundant but with the number of limpers described and facing a raise, I would definitely fold here pre-flop(especially given the fact that anyone calling had to expect to be raised by the maniac and already felt their hand was worth more than 1 bet). If I was able to isolate the maniac, then I would have 3 bet him pre-flop and attempt to get the pot heads up with position.
Have no idea what the guy with 99 was doing in pot after the flop but I would definitely want him in the game. I love players like this, especially in the 20-40 and higher games, that peel one off only to catch their card and get crucified. Even more amusing is the fact that they think they got bad beat!
Hope this helps.
Michael D.
IMO you did not make a mistake by calling pre-flop. Perhaps you should have reraised the maniac though, since he was raising almost every hand. You might have limited the field some, but calling was probably just fine.
On the flop you did what you had to do. when it was bet, you raised, OK. Seems to me that the guy with pocket 99 called two bets cold here. We'll see about that later....
On the turn a nine comes and our mid position hero check-raises. You absolutely had to bet and you absolutely had to call his raise. You still had three aces, one jack, three nines, and three fours to beat him. Plus you still had the ace of clubs and a flush draw so you absolutely cannot fold. You played the turn fine.
On the river you also played fine. Although some of your outs were not actually in play, you had to consider them because you could not have known they were in other player's hands. If you knew what the other players held you would have had to fold, but you had no way of knowing what they held!
(Looks like Mr. nines hit his two outer on the turn. He made a stupid call of two bets cold on the flop. It was a multiway pot that was bet and raised, he should have folded rather than calling two bets cold. I hope they kicked him out when he ripped the cards).
Dave in Cali
Hello all its been a few months sense Ive posted,,, but here is a hand that i found myself in a couple days ago,, 20/40 table is tight all exect 2 players who have been 3 betting and 4 betting weak hands in all positions,,, hands like 67 89 66 44 middle limping hands if that in this game ,,,, I find myself stareing down at 10sJs in the BB 4 callers including the 2 maniacs,,, wich one is on the button to raise,,, ive only been in one other pot with him and folded out the flop... so as im stareing at him, im thinking hes on a bluff ,, so I 3 bet him all call!!! Flop.....7s 8h Ks ..I check,,, one next to me ,bets all call button raises,,, all call,, turn 9h,,, i check all check to button he bets out ,,,I raise 2 fold 1 call he 3 bets me, I capped it ...river 8s,,, I bet all fold to button,,, he raises ,, I call,,,
I have been reading about how some of the top players have proteges. How can I get one of these top players to be my mentor? Also - do any of the top players charge for hourly consultations? I would like more info on these matters.
-SmoothB-
By regularly making posts in the twoplustwo.com forums, you will effectively be giving yourself a lot of knowledgeable players as your poker mentors. Post everything from individual hands to general philosophies. You'll wind up with a lot of advice. And it's free!!!
I'm going to hate it when his phone gets too busy but....Bob Ciaffone gives lessons that can't be beat. He's reasonable $-wise and available. Call him today at 517-792-0884.
.
I agree with happy student. Give Bob "the Coach" Ciaffone a call on 1-517-792-0884. He charges about $25 per hour and he gives outstanding hand analysis. He has tutored dozens of students over the years. However, if you are rich then you might want to talk to David Sklansky. For a modest $300 per hour you will probably get the greatest teacher of all time. Another possible source is John Feeney but I do not know if he takes on students since he is busy getting rich playing high limit poker these days.
Smooth B.,
Contact Badger. He will always agree with you which should increase your self esteem.
Regards,
Rick
Here is another 10-20 hand that I got flack for.
I was on the button. One caller, extremely loose preflop raiser makes it 2 bets. I am on the button with J T of diamonds. 2 more callers, I decide to call. I usually don't call this hand for a raise but I like my position and I can expect to be paid off well if I hit this hand hard. I also know that I can cut it loose.
Flop comes Js Ts 5h. I flopped 2 pair. BB (very loose aggressive bad player) bets out. Preflop raiser makes it 2 bets. Now, I have seen him bet strong draws very aggressively - he might even have 98 of a different suit. I was going to raise myself but decide to just call the 2 bets unstead of making it 3.
Turn comes Qc. Not a great card for me. Preflop raiser bets out, two other people and I call.
river comes Jh. Preflop raiser checks, I bet, 1 caller, he calls. I show my full house and he mucks.
He had AK of spades! He flopped the gutshot royal flush draw, and turned the nut straight with nut flush redraw. There were only 4 cards in the deck that could hurt him.
He was pretty upset about this 'bad beat', but he is a friend, and we talked the hand over later. He didn't blame me for hanging in there with 2 pair. And I don't imagine that many people would be able to fold for 2 bets with this flop.
Did I play this ok? Since I suspected that the preflop raiser made it 2 bets on the flop with a strong draw, should I have made it 3 to go?
-SmoothB-
In a raised pot with multi-way action, there are many turn cards that may come that will be scary for your hand. The pot has already become large. If you 3 bet on the flop you are taking advantage of your postion. It should make the turn somewhat easier to play correctly, plus you don't mind getting more money in the pot. (Although, if you could see all of your opponents hands you might not raise even with the best hand).
It sounds like you were getting close to the correct odds to draw to your full house, it's a little unclear how much money was in the pot.
This is one example of why hands like J-10 suited can be complicated to play in a raised pot when the flop comes and negates the value of your hand being suited.
When you flop the top two like this you must play it fast. Three betting is clear. You almost certainly have the best hand and must make others pay to play. I find it ironic that so many players like to play loose pre-flop like you did here by cold-calling a raise (which is not bad) and then back off on the flop or later when they have could easily have the best hand.
J10d is a preflop fold in my book to a raise and two cold calls. I hate this hand. You say you can "hit this hard" or "cut it loose" if you miss, but your story shows how untrue this is. If you flop a diamond draw you are stuck, and may be drawing dead. If you flop two pairs you will often be shown two better two pair, trips, or a straight. Other times you will make a straight with your J only to be shown QJ.
Sometimes I think people like this hand simply because it's two cards to a Royal Flush!
a
Hi all,
I've been playing more and more in the 10-20 game on Paradise Poker. Most of the time, the games seem to be moderately tight and aggressive, but still with some players making what I would consider obvious mistakes.
I seem to be doing reasonably well (low statistics, though), but upon reviewing transcripts of my play, I find a few questionable plays when it comes to medium pairs. I'll give an example a bit further below.
In the low limit no fold'em games with which I am more familiar, my usual playing strategy with pairs is to limp in whenever it looks like a 5-way or better pot. I don't cold call single raises with less than JJ, double raises with less than QQ. On the flop, unless I nail a set or an overpair, it's an easy fold.
In the online games, these conditions are rarely met. While I have seen several of my opponents cold-call raises with 77 or worse, I still cannot believe that this is good poker. Am I correct in this assumption? Hence, while I will call raises out of the BB with pairs (I believe correctly), I'm not playing very many elsewhere.
On the other hand, since one is usually up against a smallish field, if one can get in cheaply, an unimproved medium pocket pair may hold up.
Even so, on those occasions when I have played medium pocket pairs, I feel that I am playing them rather weak-tight, and have flagged this as a potential leak.
Here's an example:
8 handed 10-20 Paradise poker.
PREFLOP
I'm in the cutoff seat with 7c 7d.
UTG limps, folded to me, I limp (methinkst I should have raised here), button folds, SB completes, BB checks.
4 small bets in pot.
FLOP: 3d 4h 8h
Checked to me, I bet, SB folds, BB raises, UTG drops, I call.
BB hasn't been on the table long, but strikes me as relatively tight, generally strong player. At this point, I'm figuring that I probably have a payoff hand.
Should I have surrendered here?
8 small bets in the pot.
TURN: Jc
BB bets, I call.
6 big bets in pot.
RIVER: 6h
BB bets, I fold. If BB was playing a draw aggressively, he got there; if he had an overpair or two pair, I've been dead all along.
OK... I know, I played that badly. So, how should I have played that??
What should my thought process be like when I consider whether/how to play medium pocket pairs (55 to 88 or 99) under the tightish game conditions described?
I would have bet out on the flop like you did, and folded to the checkraise. I honestly can't think of anyone that would checkraise a draw, especially since it is almost a guarantee that it would become heads up, as it did.
That is the way I would play the hand if I had flopped top pair. The board is pretty coordinated, albeit on the low side. If the game were pretty tight I would assume that the flop missed everyone and that the cutoff seat were betting a draw or trying to steal.
Like I said, I like the bet on the flop a lot, but I probably would have folded to the checkraise. Or definitely folded on the turn.
-SmoothB-
Thanks for responding!
I would have bet out on the flop like you did, and folded to the checkraise. I honestly can't think of anyone that would checkraise a draw, especially since it is almost a guarantee that it would become heads up, as it did.
I agree. Going over the transcript of my past 100 hands, this one stuck out as a "What the h--- was I thinking?!?"
One note though, while I agree that almost all players wouldn't checkraise a draw in this manner, later in the session, this player made a couple of plays which suggested he might suffer from "Tricky Play Syndrome" (TPS), so I thought I'd include that option for completeness sake.
You should have called the river.
Just how strong a hand do you think the BB needs to have to check-raise a last-position bettor in a 3-way pot? If I'm in the big blind in this situation, I might have played a straight draw, flush draw, two overcards, or ANY pair that way. I might have check-raised the flop on the assumption that you would bet just about anything here, then lead into you on the turn. If that's the case, I wouldn't have liked your call on the turn, but I would have planned to possibly bet into you if a scary card landed, which it did.
In heads-up situations like this, you need to vary your play. You might have re-raised the flop, then taken a free card on the turn to induce a bluff if he was trying to move on you. Then you have to call the river. Unless you absolutely know your opponent is a rock, occasionally you should call the raise, then raise his bet on the turn with the intention of checking down your hand on the river. Or, you can check and call all the way.
I'd have a hard time folding pocket sevens any time when I'm heads-up with another player with an 8-high flop. There are just too many worse hands he could be playing at me with.
Agreed. I think I would have three bet the flop here, then lead bet the turn and tried to check down the river. As far as small pairs go.. As Gary Carson (and others) have pointed out, there's quite a difference between 33 and 77-- they can't both be classified as 'small pairs', since 77 will drag quite a few more pots than 33 if it doesn't improve. So, when looking at 7's or higher I tend to raise in virtually any position if I think I can get it heads up. If I DON'T think I can get it heads up (or get a huge mulitway pot going), then I'll either limp or muck. If it looks like it's going to be a three or four handed pot, I'll always muck unless I'm on the button.
I would have raised pre-flop and hopefully I'd be playing headsup where I am a favorite, although perhaps a small one. Assuming I limped preflop I would bet the flop and either reraise after getting check-raised or raise on the turn and then check the river. I prefer raising on the turn because your opponent very well may lay the best hand down. It is unlikely a J helped him and your raise may pressure him to throw his hand away. If you are reraised on the turn you need to throw your hand away.
Bruce
If you're going to play 77 preflop against one early limper (and thats a questionable play) you have to raise. Firstly, to ensure that you are in last position on subsequent betting rounds (buying the button). Secondly, to ensure that the blinds aren't coming in with complete crap. I think thats why you ran into trouble later in the hand. You just can't rule out the possibility that the raggedy flop has hit the BB in some way.
If you'd have raised you may have got it heads-up with the early limper, and would have been in excellent shape when all low cards hit the flop, or the blinds might still have called, but you'd at least know that they were more likely to have high cards than low cards, and could have put more pressure on them to fold, since you've shown strength preflop.
Keyser
Greetings,
I was thinking about some of the conventional wisdom regarding raising flush draws for value on the flop. The usual point is since you will make the flush more than 1/3 times you can raise for value if you have more than 2 callers coming along for the ride. However there a few problems with this namely:
if these players are ok who could be coming along for the ride?
If one of these players have trips he'll he's a 3-1 favorite over you, thus you need at least 3 callers. If you have only 2 players and one has trips youre making him money by raising!
Maybe someone else is drawing to the same flush, and your odds of making the flush is considerably lower.
I suppose straight draws could be there, but most won't pay through the nose for a straight draw in a two flush flop. (Eg they won't call 2 cold).
Maybe the ideal scenario is one or two people have top pair, another an over pair.
Comments?
The likelyhood of being up against a set is slim, plus if you are and you do make a flush you can often get three big bets in on the turn or river. You have less outs, but your implied odds go up. If there are multiple flush draws, which doesn't occurr all that often, hopefully you will have the nut one and if not, be able to identify that and release your hand. If you do hit the nut flush draw you will often get two or three big bets in and your implied odds go up again.
Bruce
While it is true that other player's holdings might change the actual expectation of your raise, you usually cannot realistically consider these things when making such decisions at the table. Now if you have SPECIFIC information that might influence your decision, that is one thing. However, if you can't tell what cards they have in their hands, you have to raise for value on its own merit.
While it is true that you will be making more $$ for the guy with the set when you raise with your flush draw, how can you know he has a set?
And while your scenario about two players having top pair and another an overpair is completely valid, it is hard to actually determine when this situation occurs, so therefore you cannot wait for this situation to arise in order to raise.
These considerations you have brought up are all valid but I don't think there is very much opportunity to make a practical application of these theories. Good post though....
Dave in Cali
I observed a very interesting 40-80 hold-em hand at Oceans 11 in So. Cal. tonight. Limp by one of our illustrious posters, followed by a raise by a live one, with another raise, and a cap. The blind calls and everyone else calls. The flop comes Q33. The initial raiser bets, the three bettor calls, the capper folds, and the blind calls. An 8 comes on the turn. There are no flush draws. Bet and now a raise by the three better. The blind calls and the initial bettor calls. An 8 comes on the river. Check, check, bet, check-raise, call, call. The blind has Q8s, the next player has AQ, and the next player has AA. On the flop AQ has 1 out to split the pot, while Q8 also has 1 out to split the pot plus he needs to catch runner runner to win. Interestingly on the flop, Q8 is in much better shape than AQ. God bless California hold-em. We pay higher collections, but nowhere else do you get this type of consistently good action 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, 365 days a week. (P.S. The collection in this game is $7 per half hour)
Bruce
Heh, I remember this hand. I was the poster, I think. I had a small pair -- 55 as I recall. Well, I hadn't really expected it to get capped behind me, but getting 17-3 preflop I had to call the three additional bets, especially given a couple of the players who were in and the action I could expect from them. I think I called again on the flop, didn't I? I hate when all that happens -- unless I catch the card. Oh well, what's a couple hundred bucks between buddies? Fun game :-/ It's been that way sometimes recently.
When I saw the blind turn over Q8 I about fell out of my seat. He was totally clueless. How he called on the turn I don't know, but I guess if you call four bets with Q8s pre-flop what the hell is two big bets more. I think you did call on the flop. I was talking to a buddy playing 20-40 when I saw this hand.
Bruce
From the sound of it Student played a few hands tonight that may be driving Jim Brier to drink but we won't talk about those now. (Note: Jim, go ahead if it eases your frustration.)
Here is one where she bailed out when I believe she was getting good odds. She is a classic case of a player who will reach a certain win (or get even) and play too conservatively trying to protect it. I've tried driving John Feeney's "The next hour you play is the next hour you play" directly into her head but it is too thick.
As I write, she just argued that I had told her to watch for opponents who tighten up once they get even after being stuck or those that sit on her stack when ahead by a goodly amount. I meant that is what typical opponents DO, not what is the right thing to do.
On to the hand:
Before the flop Student has 5d 4d on the button. Three typical HPC players call and the blinds are loose. She calls. This is OK with me but not a big profit maker. Both blinds call.
The flop is Qc 3c 2s. SB checks, BB checks, check, bet, call, Student calls, and all call. There are now 6 big bets in the flop. IMHO, I think the call is OK. With the late bet, two flush and no high card strength, there is no good reason I can think of to raise here.
The turn is the Js. SB checks, BB bets, call, original bettor raises, fold, Student FOLDS! Her thinking was that she was afraid of the flushes and the higher straight (by someone playing a king ten, after all this is Hollywood Park!).
I hate this fold. Best case is that there is no reraise and all call. In that case she will be getting 14 big bets on her two big bet call. That is 7 to 1. Worse case is the BB rerasies and we lose a player or two. That drives down the odds but there are extra bets to be made on the river. And this doesn't look like a capping hand.
Let's also assume a club ace or six will be break even at best so she only has 6 clean outs (if king ten is there and an ace hits it just isn't her day). So she has 40 bad cards and 6 that will almost certainly win it. That is 6.7 to 1. This one isn't even close unless she misplays the hand when a Ac or 6c hits (i.e., folds a winner or pays off a loser big).
Homework for student: Keep track of bets in the pot and know your turn odds for various number of common outs. The turn is the betting round when knowing the odds really matters along with the logic of which outs are questionable and which are clean, and how future bets that can be won improve your hand when the immediate pot odds may be marginal.
All comments and flames are appreciated. BTW, the river came an ace of spades which would have won (not that this is relevant (i.e., the "would have won" part).
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
Almost every draw stinks when its capped on the turn and this one more than most but mucking because of this possibility is paranoia. She's looking at 5-1 now, at least 6-1 when the round is over, and another 2-3 bets on the river if she hits. Calling is correct.
Why is she committed to paying off if the river is the Ac or 6c? Perhaps much of the time she will, but she's not looking at set over set here. If the original bettor on the turn bets the club hit on the river and gets called, she should bail (unless he's wierd).
I should read these things better before posting. So the ace might be a trap. Good laydown.
Steve,
In the worse case she ends up getting trapped for four bets on the turn against two opponents. Then she is getting 3.5 to 1 on her money (I'm still discounting the KT). She should get about four big bets on the river when she makes it after this much action so she ultimately will get about 4.5 to 1. But if two opponents cap the turn against her, the likelihood of a flush draw being out goes way down. So maybe we can include the other two outs as fairly clean.
Then that is worse case. Most of the time she will be calling just the two bets and have all or most of the opponents. With the money to be made on the river, I would call. But I don't expect to get the last word on this ;-).
Regards,
Rick
by misplacing that other post.
Rick, I agree with Badger on this one. I think it would be a bad call not only because of the possibility of having to call further raises but also because the As or the 6s could give someone a runner-runner Spade flush. Yes, in these games guys will play runner-runner especially if they have a pair (e.g.-QsTs, Qs9s, As3s, Ks3s,etc.) and most importantly your student has 5 opponents which makes all kinds of stuff possible.
I'll have to go along with the student on this one Rick.
Calling on the turn is PURE GAMBLING in a dangerous situation. You want to be the bettor or the raiser, not the caller.
I call. The other hand I am in the Dan Hanson/Skp camp wrong play at every street. Glad to see Badger debating all these hands though, it is not so often that we have strong arguments on both sides.
D.
I count 12 big bets, assuming the original bettor and caller both call the raise. So she's getting 6-1. Sure, there will be some bets to be had on the river, but I think counting on 4 big bets is a little excessive. More likely 2 or 3. With this many callers on the flop, I'd also put a high likelihood on the club flush draw being out there, so she's probably drawing to six outs. Like you, I wouldn't place much stock in KT being in the pot, but you do have to consider it when the decision is close. I also think there is at least a 50/50 chance of a re-raise from the original bettor, seeing as how he stepped out into a large field after checking the flop. I suspect two pair.
I think the call on the turn is a coin flip. I can think of reasons to call or fold. Small EV either way, don't worry about it. Variance considerations might predominate.
...
I have been lurking here for about three months and only recently started posting. I am quite overwhelmed with the incredible number of variables one has to consider on each and every hand. The thread about Rick's student is particularly puzzling to a relative novice like myself. A world champion like Badger, a formidable presence like Jim Brier, Rick Nebiolo, Dan Hanson, John Feeney, skp, Tom Haley, I mean the plethora of talent is astounding and you all seem to have legitimate arguments for disagreeing with each other. The pat answer "it depends" makes more and more sense to me with every post I read. I can only surmise that it is hands like this, with decisions so on the cusp of pos or neg EV, with variables so abstract such as the temperament of an unknown limper, and whether or not he or Jim or student are at the moment varying their play for effect, these are the kinds of hands you guys like to distill to the pure essence. What it means to me is that unless you have an exceptional read on your opponents if this situation comes up, flip a coin, how wrong can you be?
Bartholomew,
Actually when we start arguing that things may be close then what we are doing is establishing baselines for play and what we should be thinking about in difficult and (hopefully) common situations. Ultimately, we get a firmer grasp on "why" we should do something. Some would call it "brain storming", here it may be "brain bashing". But it is more fun than complaining about bad beats (I give advice for free but charge $2 per stupid bad beat story).
Regards,
Rick
P.S. At least Badger can't underbid me.
"..., with decisions so on the cusp of pos or neg EV, ..."
These are the issues that generate the most discussion but will put the least money in your pocket. The big winners are the posters that get a leak fixed with one short post that's straight to the point.
There is some value in each issue so I'll keep my head in it.
-Fred-
I believe that the primary place where fiery debates occur on the forum is when the play is not exactly clear and the EV of each play is fairly close. For instance, there will never be much debate about folding J8o for an UTG raise by a tight player. This play is pretty clear. But whether or not to play AQo for a raise (and if so, how to play it) is not always a clear call and therefore will generate much debate. It will "depend" on the nature of the game, the playing characteristics of the original raiser, the texture of the game, etc, etc, etc.... Many post flop decisions are very close as far as EV goes. These situations will also generate much debate. These debates may not conclusively prove "who is right" but everyone who reads and participates will improve their game by spending time thinking about poker. That's what the forum is here for.
Of course some posters are more likely to be right than others........
That one should generate some debate!
Dave in Cali
I am a winning 5-10 player who wins about 55% of the time, maybe a little better. I know that isn't great, but I feel that some of my loses are due to the looseness of the 5-10 game. I have been thinking about moving up to 10-20. One of my problems is that my bankroll isn't even close to the 300 big bet rule for the 10-20 game. Do you think this is a wise move? Or should I stick it out at 5-10 and learn how to play loose players better?
All comments are appreciated. Ray
You'll most likely get more technical answers from the regular posters but I'm in the same situation as you. The problem is when you move up too fast and get hit hard right away you no longer have the bankroll even to continue at 5-10. I would think you want to be killing the 5-10 game before taking on 10-20. The differences between 5-10 and 10-20 are dramatic compared to the differences between 2-4 and 5-10. More fancy raises, trickier opponents, and opps who can read you better. In the loose game play tighter, be patient and be agressive when you've got the goods. Post a few hands here when you have doubts and maybe you can plug some leaks.
I think you should stick it out. Moving up too fast is a killer. I know from personal experiences. Remember just because you play higher doesn't mean the game will be tighter. You have to learn to play in very loose games. This is where most of your earnings come from. Player's calling when they should fold etc. The 300-big bet rule is if your going to play this game only. If you have other everyday expenses it's probable isn't enough. I think you should have at least 500 Big Bets. If you have to pay your everyday expenditure out of your bankroll like I do more is better. My bankroll is around 12K, but I play $10-$20. If the games looks incredibly good I'll play $15-$30, but not that often.
It's the 55% that concerns me. Can you convert that to $$ per hour?
Also, can you be selective about the 5/10 you play in are there other games to move to? I like a bit of looseness but a maniac table is really hard to beat on a consistant basis others will argue with that but I don't buy their logic.
The hourly rate is more important then the % of time you win.
Moving to 10-20 depends a lot on the house and the players there - for example in Arizona the 10-20 was like watching grass grow a very tight game and there was much more money to be made in the 4-8 and 6-12 but you had to be selective about it.
Of course with 8 - 10 games going a lot of the time it is a bit easier to be selective.
I have won my last three sessions and my hourly rate for those three was $35 per hour. I have gotten lazy in keeping my journal and would have a hard time figuring my loses into my hourly rate, but my bank roll has been moving in the right direction.
Where I play there aren't too many options as to what 5-10 table you join. A player is usually seated at a feeder game and then moved to the main game over time. The main game is usually a little tighter though.
If you can't beat the hell out of a 5-10 game chances are you will do worse playing at a higher limit esp. if you are under capitalized. In smaller games hand selection can generally guarantee you a win but as you move up your opposition is stronger, players will take shots at you, the play is more deceptive, and reading becomes more important. If you want to give it a shot be real selective about the games you play in and try to lower your variance by avoiding certain hands and situations which may be only marginally positive, but don't play scared or you will get massacred.
Good luck!
Bruce
Don't move up. The toughest competition in the casino is usually at the 10-20 games. Better to build your bankroll and your experience at the 5-10 game and then take occasional shots at the 10-20 to see how you do. I underestimated the importance of an adequate bankroll but just knew that my "skill" would compensate for it. It didn't because I was playing with scared money. On the bright side, it was probably the best lesson that I've learned at the tables and I'm a better player for it. Too bad I had to sell my Grandmothers teeth to get back into the game. Good Luck.
OK Badger, tell me Student played this one right.
Jim Brier opens for a raise one after UTG. Student cold calls with Kd Jd (unlike Rounder, she just loves those suited hands). Two typical players cold call along with the big blind. There are five players and $85 in the pot.
The flop comes K 9 8 (she forgets the suits but thinks it is a rainbow). After the big blind checks, Jim Brier bets, Student calls(?), as does everyone else. There are five players and $160 in the pot.
Turn is a jack. The big blind checks, Jim Brier bets, Student raises, fold, fold, big blind calls and Jim Brier calls.
River is a blank. The big blind checks. Jim Brier checks. Student bets. Big blind raises. Jim Brier folds. Student makes a crying call. Big blind shows QT for a straight. Student thought that Jim had at least AK or a pair of aces but did not see his hand (which makes me wonder why she called before the flop). Jim makes a quiet exit shortly after the hand. Welcome to Hollywood Park, Jim. Maybe Student needs a better teacher unless Badger can justify calling a solid player who raises early with KJ suited with players yet to act.
Regards,
Rick
Most of the times in these CA games it is probably not too bad to call with the KJs. I would lay it down to Jim B and few others but not very often and she probably just had a hard time letting go, besides it must be fun to drive Jim nuts.
She needs to raise on the flop here I think too.
D.
Bad play preflop in early position. Perhaps calling in the back if it looks like it will be a family pot and only one raise. On the flop student has to raise. Gut shot draw may fold. If she thinks Jim B. has her beat on the flop then why play the hand to begin with. Raising certainly increases your chances of winning the pot. Calling a solid player with KJ is generally a poor play. Don't care if it is suited or not.
Bruce
I had the KhQh. King-Queen suited is a pretty hand I seldom drag pots with. I don't believe I opened with a raise but I think I just limped in. With 5 players including the big blind but excluding the small blind, then there would $85 in the pot before the flop as stated in your post. Otherwise if the pot had been raised there would be $160 in the pot pre-flop. On the other hand if I had decided to vary my play and raise with this hand, I don't think it is a bad raise because we were getting multi-handed action and raises were not driving out players. I was stuck about $500 for the session and I had to get back to the valley so this was my last hand anyway.
On the flop, I bet top pair/excellent kicker and I got called by your student and the big blind. I am unsure about who else was in the hand. Since I am on vacation so to speak I have not been writing down hands this week. There would be $160 now in the pot assuming no raise pre-flop and five players on the flop.
On the turn, when a Jack comes I now have picked up a gutshot straight draw with any Ten in addition to my top pair/excellent kicker. I bet the turn. When it was raised and called back to me there is now $310 in the pot and it costs me $30 to call. For all I know, a King could be an out, a Queen could be an out, and a Ten could be an out. I could have as many as 10 outs and as few as 4 outs. I remember that the flop was rainbow and I don't believe there was a flush possibility. Therefore, I called for another $30. Note also that this closes the action so I don't have to worry about any more raises.
At the river when a blank falls I fold when it is bet and raised back to me. Of course in sunny California (the land of "fruits and nuts") KQ suited is a dog to KJ suited and QT offsuit.
Jim,
She is pretty sure there was a raise. If there was not, then calling with KJ suited pre flop is not so bad since it will attract more calls and the game was not too aggressive. But I don't like her call of your bet on the flop either way.
Regards,
Rick
Rick, If you call a raise with KJ how can any rational player when they flop top pair lay down their hand on the flop for a single bet? Why would you play the hand to begin with if you lay down top pair on the flop? On the turn with more compelling evidence a fold may be the appropriate course of action, but mucking on the flop is certainly very weak-tight.
Bruce
Bruce,
I wouldn't call a solid up front raiser holding KJ suited with many players yet to act behing me in almost any game. But if there was no raise (and I did call) and Jim Brier bet into a field when a king flopped with many behind me, I would probably fold. If Marc Maniac made the same bet things might be different.
Regards,
Rick
.
Rick,
There are two players behind the student excluding the blinds who can have anything. I think your giving up too much if you flop top pair on the flop and you muck your hand for one bet. I know your position sucks and Jim plays solid, but Jim is just as likely to lead at the pot with pocket Queens or Jacks. I know I would if I were Jim rather than check and either call or pass. We are in agreement that the best strategy is not to get involved in the hand to begin with.
Bruce
Jim,
My late night math was wrong in the original post. With the raise, your numbers are correct.
Regards,
Rick
Post deleted at author's request.
Many of the games if not all at HP are shootouts with lots of callers raised or not.Id make the call preflop as long I I felt if I got there i'd win a big one.Did one poster suggest folding after the flop?As for releasing after the flop when JB bets ,terrible play.
Steve,
You wrote:"Rick Rick Rick... calling with that hand at Hollywood Park is fine. You say two "typical" players called too, and I take that to mean they had worse hands than her.
She cold called a very tight, solid player sitting on her right who raised in early position. Most of the field was left. I can see calling late after worse players had called, but not with so many left.
"Not raising the flop was not fine. She screwed up there. She wins the pot with a raise, or she gets the gutshots to make terrible calls, which is fine too".
Agreed. She needs to work on hands were she is medium strength and in the middle. But she is getting there very fast.
"Happy now? She made a mistake... not the one you were scolding her for tho, natch."
Scolding? Me happy? Anyway, she really wants to become a top player and has the talent. I wish I had her concentration and observational skills. Maybe I'll be her Butch Harmen to her Tiger Woods.
"You've done a great job with Student thus far, especially the cruel Omaha8 ban, but..."
Actually she started doing very well at Omaha. She was becoming a solid winner but really wants to play bigger. I don't see steady mid limit Omaha on the horizon. And her card reading skills help more in holdem. And she doesn't like watching paint dry.
"now you want her calling two big bets with crap, and routinely folding good hands preflop, at HP?"
Huh?
Regards,
Rick
i agree with rick preflop.
but there is an even more important issue here. rick, read you own posts!! you always forget to unbold after the quote.
actually, it's not a big deal. i just thought someone should point it out.
scott
scott,
Regarding the unbolding, I do 99.8% of my 2+2 browsing using the small market browser "Opera". There it looks fine. I just looked my post up using MS IE5 and you are right!!!
I wish someone told me earlier although I had only started omitting the "close bold" marker at the end of paragraphs a month or two ago. For some reason, Opera closes the bolding at the end of a paragraph and I thought it applied to any browser.
Regards,
Rick
To the 21CHE authors
After recently perusing the hand rankings, the fact that A9s was not listed struck me as odd. When K9s, Q9s, J9s and A9 are in the rankings, I find it hard to believe that A9s should be part of Axs. Please clarify, others will also find this interesting.
There is some specific discussion of A9s in the text.
It´s not that I overlooked the explanations (e.g. page 25) on how to play this hand - I´m just interested in the value of A9s in terms of hand rankings and groupings. I´m also aware that decisions regarding which hands to play are not based on hand groups but - as is aptly explained in your book - "on the intrinsic value of each hand in each particular situation" so, just in case you suspect me of being a hand ranking stickler, I´m not. The main reason I´m asking is plain and simple curiosity. So to cut a long story short: in which group and where in that group does A9s belong?
Just speculating, but to me the reason A9s is treated as part of the Axs group while K9s gets its own listing is because K9s (Q9s, J9s) can make a straight using both cards while A9s cannot. So A9s is more like A8s than K9s is like K8s, for example.
Might well be. Still, that doesn´t explain why A9 is listed separately (in group 8) and A9s is not.
/
the reason is that all Axs are about equivalent. a higher but still low kicker does not affect these hands very much because the majority of their profit comes from hands higher than one pair.
the reason that A9o gets a mention is that it is significantly better than other Axo. the reason it is so much better is that a higher portion of it's wins come from scenarios where kickers matter.
there is much more difference between A9o and A2o than there is between A9s and A2s. this is reflected in the rankings.
the reason that K9s, Q9s and J9s get a specific mention instead of being lumped in with Kxs, etc, is that the 9 makes the straight. the straight accounts for a significant portion of its wins.
scott
I'm in a 15-30 game at the Bellagio. I have the BB with Q8o. 1 early limper, sb folds , so I'm heads up. Flop coms KK3. I check, he checks. Turn brings a T making 2 hearts on board. I figure I can steal it with a bet. After my bet, the dealer immediatly flips the flop cards over, drops the deck and pushes me the pot. I mean this guy was a fast worker. This was all done in one motion before I, the limper, or anyone else could say anything. With my puzzled look he finally glances over to limper who still has cards. I hadn't stacked any chips yet. He ask if I want a floorman, I don't answer. He turns the flop back over saying he can recreate the hand, and ask me if I want a floorman again. No one speaks. I'm thinking if I answer this question yea or ney it gives away my hand. Either I want a call or I don't , either I have a K or I don't. Anyway I know the limper should have the option of calling so I say "just play the hand". He called. Dealer picks up a card from the table and flips over another heart as the river. Of course limper makes flush and calls my final bluff. I would like to know what I should have done and what the dealer should have done. I'm sure it's was an honest mistake however it was aggrevating losing this way. Since I have no idea where the river card came from. Should I have grabbed the pot quickly, do I want a floor or not, shouldn't he be asking the limper ?
You should simply take the pot. For all you know, the player could have said something to the dealer like "I fold" and the dealer is just reacting before you realize what has happened. I would take the pot and start stacking my chips. Let the dealer and the player call the floor if they like.
Jim, are you saying I should protect myself at all times ? I seem to be on the losing end of every dealer f-u lately ? Have I been naive ?
I am saying that no one has a greater interest in protecting yourself than you have. When the dealer pushes you the pot, simply take it and start stacking. Assume that the dealer knows what he is doing and let the house and the other player worry about any potential conflicts.
Thanks Jim, sounds like good advise.
I would stop the dealer from pushing me the chips and alert him to the other active player in the pot. I also would not tip dealers who don't pay attention to the game.
Scenario: I observed the following hand and am not sure of the correct answers.
Hero Hand: QQ (Novice player)
Hero Position: BB
UTG raises (Novice player)
1 seat left of UTG 3 bets (Solid player)
all fold to hero and she calls and novice calls (3-way pot)
Question # 1 - Should hero just call because she may not have the best hand and want to keep her hand deceptive because of her poor position? They may have AA KK Aks - wait and see the flop?
Flop: Th 9c 6h
Question # 2 Would it be best to Rope-a-dope (check & call) all the way to the end. By playing this way if they have a bigger pair, hero would save money and if they were betting a weaker hand, hero would win several bets.
Question # 3 Would it be best to check-raise with this hand since they raised & re-reaised in early position; and are unlikely to have a straight draw but maybe a flush draw?
Action on the Flop: Hero bet overpair to avoid giving free card to straight or flush draw. UTG raises and solid player accidentally exposed AKd as he was mucking his hand. Hero just called raise.
Fourth Street: 8d (Board Th 9c 6h 8d) Question #4 Should hero lead or check and call; giving a free card to a straight or backdoor flush draw. If she leads and gets raised again, does she fold or call? Thanks for your opinions.
Personally, I like the flat call preflop. If an Ace or King comes on the flop, I am probably done with my hand. Also, by just flatcalling, my hand remains a bit of a mystery to my opponents. For example, I can now more easily represent a staright on a board of 10,9,8,6 (I use that as an example because that is the board that we have here).
Given the 10,9,6 flop, I generally would try for a checkraise here on the assumption that the bet would be coming from my right (the preflop 3 bettor). The problem with betting out is that I am likely to be raised by someone regardless of wheteher I am beat. In other words, I am likely to gain more information by raising as opposed to betting out. Checkraising also has a greater chance of reducing the competition to 1 opponent. The other advantage of going for the checkraise is that I also have the option of folding without putting in any chips if there is a bet and a raise back to me.
Anyway, let's assume that we flat call preflop, bet on the flop and just call the raise on the flop. It's heads-up and the board then reads 10,9,8,6. Obviously, you should know that your opponent can't have a straight. You should also know that he can't be so sure about your hand i.e. he may well think "ya, ok, he may have called preflop with QJs or 77 or something". So, the question really becomes "how do I best convince him that I have a straight"...Generally, the best play is to lead bet again. It is highly unlikely that your opponent will raise you. If he does, you should know that something is fishy and may even want to consider poppping him back. Put yourself in your oppoent's shoes. If you were him, would you raise with AA or even 10,10 on this board?
If you decide to check, a checkraise ought to be considered for the same reasons given above. Your opponent is more likely to bet on this board if he had AQ, AQ or JJ. He is likely to check with AA, KK or 10,10 because giving free cards is not as big a concern with these hands as with other hands.
Geez, I wish I could write more concisely. Sorry for the long post...I don't have time to make it short.
BTW, the rope-a-dope strategy may not be a bad idea if you were heads-up to begin with.
i agree with most of this analysis, but i think a check raise is a better play. especially after failing to reraise the flop.
i am pretty sure that we want don't want to lose him on the turn so we should not try to convince him that we have the straight (unless he has TT and will give it up when he fails to fill. haha. that's real likely.)
the opp has at most 4 outs if he is losing. the pot can't be big enough to want to drop him. i want his AK, AQ, AJ, JJ, JT, etc in. i want them all to call.
if we bet we lose most of these and most will bet. we will lose some of them on the check raise but people hate to bet/fold.
and if the rare KK, AA, TT will really check fearing a check raise then that's great. we save a bet.
but i would have probably reraised the flop, after which i would lead out.
scott
With regard to #1, our hero should just call and not cap the betting here. Make it AA or KK and I would cap despite my poor position but with QQ I would just call being out of position like this plus if an Ace or a King flops your hand is probably dead.
With regard to #2 and #3, once the flop comes I would not necessarily go for a check and call strategy all the way to the end because I could easily have the best hand given that no Ace or King has flopped. I want to make sure I collect something on every street and I don't want to give any free cards. My tendency would be to lead at this flop with my big over pair and see if I get raised and by whom. If it gets raised and re-raised back to me I would probably fold figuring between the raiser and the re-raiser I am up against a better hand. If it get raised by the 3 bettor after the UTG folds, then I would probably just call and check the turn depending upon what showed up. Unless an Ace or a King shows up I will see this hand through to the river in a heads-up situation.
With regard to #4, our hero needs to recognize some things:
1. The UTG did not cap pre-flop so this tends to deny AA or KK.
2. Given that the 3 bettor is gone and exposed an AK then there are only 6 ways the UTG raiser can have AA or KK. There are only 3 ways for UTG to have TT given a Ten on the flop.
3. His raise of our bet on the flop means AA,KK,TT,QQ,JJ, or maybe AT, KT suited, JT suited, etc. given that he is a novice and capable of anything.
4. There are enough hands that our hero can beat and enough doubt about the novice player that we will not be folding this hand unless an Ace or a King shows up and we get heat.
5. On the turn, our hero has picked up a gutshot straight draw with any Jack.
I think our hero should check and call on the turn. If our hero bets the turn and gets raised, then she must call because she has 6 outs to beat AA or KK and there is still an outside chance she could have the best hand when up against a novice.
I like skps answer better.
BB check calls on fourth street. River is a Queen (making her a set) She bets ant UTG calls with ATo. Novice raised UTG with ATo and floped top pair with ace kicker.
I have been dumping this hand when it gets 3 bet to me in the sb. Suited or not, multi or not, 10/20 or 15/30. For instance 15/30 one late limper, a cutoff raise and a button reraise (button unknown), limper and cutoff solid. 2 1/3 to me, I've been letting it go and seeing multiway big pots go down to lesser complete hands. Although I was dominated by AK, or big pairs, when the hand hits it can be huge. I would like to know, "if I think my escape skills are good enough, should I go for it if it might be multiway"? Seeing as how I don't like to take a lot of heat with the hand to see the river. Am I giving up too much ? Comments welcome !
KQ offsuit is a clear fold. Usually KQ suited is a fold except when you are partially in and you think you will get good multi-way action from at least 3 plsyers. I might venture a play with KQ suited. You need to be able to get away from this hand quick if you flop top pair with no flush or straight draw and get any heat.
It's a lot different when the raise comes from the cutoff and the reraise from the button. MANY players would reraise with a wide range of hands on the button that do not dominate KQ b/c they think the cutoff is stealing or semi-stealing and want to get heads up. If the raises come from earlier on, it's an easy fold. But in the situation Clint describes, I would call with KQs (maybe still fold KQo) and not necessarily panic if I just have top pair on the flop. I would be very afraid if the cutoff re-raises preflop after I call.
But there was also a limper before the cutoff (described as solid) made the initial raise. That also puts a different spin on things. The presence of the limper indicates that cut-off may not necessarily be on a steal and if button knows that, his 3 bet is also likely to represent a strong hand.
I agree with your analysis if there was no limper, cutoff raises and button 3 bets.
I missed that -- good point. I was assuming no limper.
I had started a thread on June 28 (KQ facing a limp re-raise) about just this topic. The concensus was virtually unanimous that it was good poker to dump the hand facing that kind of heat,although in that particular hand, the KQ would have been a winner. (All the "Results Wizards" may line up on the left.)
The hand is just too easily dominated by legitimate 3-bettors, and even after allowing for the maniac effect, I think it is better play to be patient and wait for more attractive opportunities.
I went back and read your thread of a week ago on this subject. I'm sure I read it then. Funny how some things need reinforcing again and again before they take. I don't consider myself slow but until you live it you ain't done it . Folding a winner seems to be negative reenforcement to good poker theory. Which can be as compelling. Thanks again everyone.
KQ is a clear fold against a solid raise, let alone a reraise and poor position. I would venture to say that this is one of the worst hands to be holding against heated action. I will play KQs against a loose raise and several callers, but even that is dicey.
"Escape skills" really won't help you. What are you going to do if the flop comes K72 rainbow? Fold? Even Houdini will get trapped with these cards.
KQ for more than 2 bets is a big time losing hand. In fact, if you fold for one raise against a good player, you save a lot of money over time.
My wife is pretty new to short handed play. So I wanted to give her some advices. This is what I told her. Can you pleas correct me if I´m wrong or add something, when I missed something (don´t forget, she´s new to shorthanded play)
1) Raise preflop from the small blind with every pocket pair, A, K and two cards above T when the other player is cappable of folding preflop (even if it´s just sometimes)
2) Raise preflop from the big blind only with premium hands and once in a while with hands like JTs, just for not being too predictable.
3) When you are first to act on the flop and raised preflop, bet the flop no matter what comes. (same goes for turn and river if you got some kind of draw and missed)
4) When you are first to act on the flop and did not raise preflop always check the flop. If you flop a pair (or better), a flushdraw, an open end straight draw or a gut shut (or backdoor flush) draw with at least one overcard, check raise the bettor. If the other player does not bet the flop, always bet the turn, no matter what you have.
5) Fold on the flop with all other hands.
6) When you check raised your opponent on the flop, always bet the turn.
7) Always bet the river when you bet your draw and missed (exeption: when you hit a small pair or got at least A high)
8) Don´t give your opponent too much credit for having a hand.
9) Call preflop raises in the small blind almost with every hand.
10) Call preflop raises in the small blind most hands.
11) Try raise bluffes on the river regulary.
Thanks for all responses in advance.
M.A.
Never do anything always.
Says, "if after the flop , thou has a pair plus a possible straight draw, i.e. (K,J) and the flop is (Q,J,T), though hold a weak hand unless the pair is boss pair. Consider: AA, QQ, JJ, KK TT, AK, AQ, AJ, K9, and 98, are all better cards than KJ, not even considering flush draws."
However with a rainbow flop and no preflop raise, this picture changes significantly. Does anyone else agree this statement could use some revision ? I approach this because one should not have called a preflop raise (mostly) with this hand in the 1st place. Also no early raise changes the likelyhood of the above mentioned hands out against you, although you could still be chasing. This seems more like a pot odds vs. heat proposition rather than a golden rule. Comments appreciated.
I agree. I don't see how a nut straight draw counts as a "weak hand" so I wouldn't agree with the statement even without the pair. It would be correct to say that these hands look better than they really are. They tend to trap players into making aggressive mistakes because of the potential for improving to second best. So play it as if you had no kicker and check and call out of the blind.
The real problem with these hands is that they're difficult to price in a multiway pot because some of your outs are held by your opponents. Even so, as long as you play as if your kicker's no good you can't make a big mistake. Heads up against a better hand, figure that you'll win 1/3 of the time.
Who is Davis? I thought this might be from Cloutier/McEvoy book.
Your hand isn't bad here, and has a reasonable chance to improve to a straight. Seems to me you can continue even if your hand is allegedly weak.
Granted there are some people will not raise w/ QQ, KK AQ at times.
Specific conditions will dictate how to play this hand but rarely will you fold.
"Holy Bible" the Holdem Poker Bible , by Davis. The cover doesn't give his first name and I don't remember as I don't have the book with me now. However it is a collection of short passages and golden rules pertaining to the play of Holdem, each passage supplimented or augmented by a passage from THE "Bible". Quite interesting, but some (minor) stratagy (like here) is probably outdated. You can read the whole thing in a couple of hr. and for a quick brush up before you play, it's great, for the average and begining players. The "Bible" analogies seem appropriate as well. Very interesting, but I'm not sure if it's still in publication.
n/t
Hi Everybody.
I have been playing BlackJack for well over a year now, and have been making quite a good profit on it. Lately I have been very interested in POker. POker really got my intention after seeing the WSOP on the Discovery channel. I believe a guy named Noel Furlong won........ Here is my question: Is it possible to make a good profit playing poker, like it is in Blackjack?? Also how much is skill and luck in poker?? I mean, if I sad down with the world champion of Texas Hold'em. How whould that game be? WHould I stand a chance?? I hope somebody will take the time, and answer my questions.
P.S. Can somebody recommend some good books/videos on Seven Card Stud??
Best, John Slater
i don't know what you mean by skill or luck, but if you are interested in the std dev of hourly rates i think it is about 10 big bets. hourly rates are on the order of 1 or 2 big bets.
yes. it is possible to play poker profitably.
i don't understand 'how would that game be?'
but whether you would stand a reasonable chance would depend on the structure (blinds vs stack sizes, limit vs nl or pl). you would always have some positive chance of winning. but, assuming the wolrd champion (or whomever you are playing) is better than you, you will usually lose.
7cs for advanced players is a great book. it's the only one i've read besides the stud section of supersystem, which i thought was rather superficial.
stud is a great game because you can have a sizeable edge against pretty good players. in holdem you dont win much unless you have some bad players to play against.
scott
If you think (and I do) yhat there is skill in blackjack well you're in for a treat. Poker is one of the most difficult game to learn. Sure Bridge and Chess are good but Poker offers a lot more than most people think. For starters, in Poker there isn't a perfect strategy that dictates every hand. You have to adjust to the number of opponents in the hand, your position, your reputation at the table, your take on the other players, your cards, tells and many many more.
Poker is a game of skill. NOT LUCK!
Of course anyone can bet or raise a straight flush and win. No problem... But in the long run as we like to say it, a solid player will crush weaker ones. Always.
Poker is not played against the house, it's played against other players, your edge can then be significantly bigger. If you were to play against a player who has a solid base of poker strategy, you would surely loose over a period of time. If you were to play a world class player, you would be crushed to death.
If you're interested in 7cardStud, I strongly recommend Winning 7card Stud for the low and medium limits by Roy West. Then when you'll have digested it, buy 7cardStud for advanced players by David Sklansky.
Don't venture in the higher limits (20-40 or higher) until you have many, many hours of play. In the thousands... If not you'll get crushed. The higher the limit, the tougher the players get.
Hope this helps...
Keep reading 2+2 and you'll learn a lot.
theprince
On one hand, poker is completely luck-dependent because, apart from when you have the nuts, you´ll never know if you´re going to win that pot when you put money in it. On the other hand, poker has nothing to do with luck in the long run, because the foundation of being a good player is knowing the probability of a certain event to occur, and good players will use that knowledge to such an extent that they do win on a very regular basis. My personal recommendation (due to my lack of blackjack insights?) is forget blackjack, at least that´s what I did, because the house has a built-in mathematical advantage over the other players (apart from bj tourneys), in poker you "only" have to beat the others. Regarding books: try Seven card stud for advanced players (21st century edition)
Purchase Roy Wests 7 Card Stud-42 lessons book. This book is easily comprehended and gives you a solid foundation to build on. I own other 7CS books but this one is by far the best.
Unlike blackjack, poker odds are EXTREMELY dependent upon your skill level versus that of your opponents. In the short term, anything can happen. But, in the long term, the game is beatable.
If you played against the "best in the world", you would lose unless you hit a lot of hands. However, even in the 2000 WSOP championship event, there was a lot of luck at the final table. However, both players in the top 2 (TJ Cloutier and Chris Ferguson) are elite players who you probably would not invite to a home game.
There is a very high frustration level in the game. You can do everything right and still lose in a given night. This is true of blackjack also, however, your small games will make some of the most absurd plays in the world to beat you. However, these players also make enough errors such you definitely can beat them over time.
Hello All,
I am posting this question to see what the forum thinks about the following situation.
3 handed 10-20 holdem game - Is it correct or incorrect to straddle (obviously the straddle occurs on the button) for the duration that the game is 3 handed. The player in the small blind is tight agressive, the player in the big blind is loose agressive. Both like to check raise frequently.
Both are capable of raising draws, betting middle or low pair and check raising if they feel they have the best hand or best draw.
Thanks in advance for any thoughts or suggestions.
Michael D.
Hey Mike!
Only if one of the players is PK! (Sorry forum, inside joke)
It might not be clear that you are probably talking about keeping a forced straddle button in the game when it breaks down to three handed.
If you have an edge on the other 2 players (which I assume you did) I would think you're better off taking it out of the game and opting to play 15-30 or 20-40 instead. This is because the straddle button can cause a lesser player to play accidently correct against you. This is Ok in a full game because the biggest mistakes people tend to make with a straddle IMHO are usually pre-flop. But due to the randomness of hands in a 3 handed game, your edge is probably best utilized without it.
Take care.
Hey Kevin,
Good to hear from you.
The situation I described was not a forced straddle. Small blind folded 80-85% of the time and raised 15-20% or the time. The big blind folded 25% of the time called 50% of the time and raised 25% of the time.
I found that the forced pressure placed on the small blind to either make it 3 bets or fold was worth the extra edge. The small blind was a very tight agressive player who probably did not care for short handed play (is this true IRS Frank? - just a guess) I was able for the most part to isolate heads up with position. I felt this advantage was worth it.
As I said, I am not sure if this is a good or bad strategy.
Thanks for the input Kevin.
Michael D. (and no it was not PK!!)
Hello,
Isn't there something to be said for throwing out the idea of the straddle and simply taking a very aggressive approach to being on the button with solid (three handed solid) raises?
The straddle has potential to cost you alot of extra bets that may be best saved for legitimate hands. There is also the chance of falling into the hole of feeling you need to defend your straddle of BB raises.
I often play in a three handed game with two lose-aggressive players. Am I off base here with my thinking?
Radish
I misunderstood the original question. But offhand, I'd say it doesn't matter since if the sb folds 80-85% and the bb 50% of the time in a 3 handed game, you'd be correct to raise EVERY time anyway.
This is a very good question...
Between both of them, they may be collectively re-raising the proper amount of time to thwart this strategy. Since I didn't have time to do the math, I shouldn't have shot out such an the off the cuff response. I apologize.
Again, I apologize for at first answering without thinking. Here's where it gets really embarrassing because I've now thought about it and I may still be wrong! But I think I am close and perhaps someone else can do the math the correct way...
Assume 100 hands. Also take into account that we can only consider the blind money since you can't place a $$$ amount on post flop play. But it should at the very least even out since you have position and figure to play better than your 2 opponents post flop.
First the big blind. You will win the $10 blind the 50 times he folds for a $500 profit. 25% of the time he will call you. Since you have position and showed strength, I think it's safe to say you will win at least %70 of these hands. So you win $20 17.5 times and lose $20 7.5 times for a gain of $200. Lets say the 25 times he re-raises, he wins 80% of the hands (again, I think this is more than fair since he is out of position). Now you lose your $30 20 times and win his $30 5 times for a loss of -$450. So you have a net gain on the bb of $250.
If the sb folds 85% of the time you will win $5 of his money uncontested 85 times out of 100 for a profit of $425. He will re-raise you 15% of the time. But at least some of these times you will also win. Even if he wins over 80% of the time he re-raises, (again, not only do you have position but there will be times you improve on the flop when he does not) you will lose $30 12 times and win his $30 3 times for a loss of -$270. So you show a total profit from the sb of +$155.
I think these figures are very generous (to the blinds). So whether you put the $20 in as a straddle or a raise is irrelevent. The only difference is that if your opponents don't know any better, a straddle makes it less obvious of what you are doing. Some players will start to play tougher if they are constantly getting raised. So I think the bottom line is YES! Given the percentages you gave, it is definitely a good idea for you to get $20 in before the flop regardless of how you go about it. Great question!!!
I don't see why you would voluntarily put $$ into the pot BTF when you don't have to. Straddles are not good poker. Putting up blinds voluntarily when you are not required to is not good poker. The opponents you mentioned have little effect on whether this is correct - it isn't.
Dave in Cali
Dave-
He is talking about a three handed game. If the blinds incorrectly fold too often, then he is definitely correct to raise and try to pick up this dead money regardless of his 2 cards! If you think about it, it doesn't really matter if he raises or straddles.
I think his question was more concerned with the percentage of times they would need to fold and/or re-raise to make this play correct.
Dave,
Kevin has summed up what my thought process is here - as I said I am not sure how correct it is - it may be awful - however I can honestly say that I have found it extremely profitable in 3 handed situations - I have used it about 15 different times or so - most players do not know how to react - I agree with you that a straddle is a losing play - but given the circumstances I described, from my limited experiences, the presssure applied to the blinds forces them to play incorrectly pre-flop - ie calling when they should fold or raising when they should call - The other major important factor is how well one plays compared to his opponents after the flop - I have found that this factor along with guaranteed postiion throughout the hand - has definitely been a profitable play.
I realize I may be opening myself up to look like a complete and total idiot here but felt it was worth it to get others opinions.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Michael D.
I think I understand what you guys are saying now.
I guess that the straddle move might be OK to use against some players, especially since you said that these particular players did not know how to react to it. It might also be useful in places where you can post a "live straddle" since you could insure that you were last to act on all 4 rounds of betting (assumes you were playing 3 handed still).
However, if you make this move against knowledgeable players, you will inevitably lose $$. Good players will simply reraise you with their best hands and fold their worst hands. Then, when you get reraised, you have a random hand being played for two bets blind against a raise. Often you will find yourself in a difficult position when you straddle against good players who know how to adjust. One thing though, if the players you are against are not adjusting well to this move, then perhaps it would have some useful application, I would just use it very cautiously.
Dave in Cali
Let me get this out of the way first,
On the flop, your odds of improving by the river are divided by about two, right? For example, an inside-straight draw (with 4 outs) is about 10 or 11 to 1, but on the flop, with two cards to come, it's about 5 to 1.
My Question: Let's say you have some sort of draw on the flop you're not too crazy about(inside straight, just overcards, hoping to hit a set), and you've decided that you want to only see the turn card [people will often phrase it in their post's like, "I decided to peel off one card"]. Don't you need to be getting somewhat higher immediate pot odds(on the flop), since you're not planning on going to the river if you don't improve? And if yes, about how much higher?
Because of Sklansky's implied-odds reasoning, I'm assuming you wouldn't need to adjust them to the full required odds for your draw. Like 11 to 1 for a 4 outer, but yet higher than 5 to 1 with two cards to come.
Thanks, Dan
You need to be careful about estimating the odds w/two card to come. It isn't twice the chance of im provement of improvement on the next card. It is always less.
If you want to figure out your true chances, figure out the probability you don't improve. (Eg if you have a gut shot(and thats all) the odds of making it by the river is 1- P( missing both times)= 1-((43/47)(42/46)).
If you plan to "peel one off", just consider the chances you'll improve on the next card compared to the pots odd. Actually if you are drawing to a big hand (like a straight), you dont' need to be getting say 10-1, since you have implied odds. That is if you anticipate making extra bets besides what is in the pot if you make it. So you could draw to a gut shot if you were getting 8-1 from the pot.
Note the reason you less than 10-1 is not bc of the chances of improving by the river (youll pbly fold on the turn unless you pick up something esle or the pot if big), but bc of the extra bets you intend to win if you make your hand on the turn.
In addition to what suspicious has posted I would add that we must remember that hold-em is not like draw poker where we get to draw two cards. There is a betting around between each card so our cost to draw is higher. This means we have to be more conservative about evaluating your chances of improving to the best hand. HPFAP-21st Century Edition, Appendix A contains a chart that shows you the probability of completing various hands with a given number of outs based on two cards to come.
Your odds to draw are not exactly 2-1 with two cards to come. You also want to make sure you are drawing at the "nuts". The worst thing to do is hit your draw and get beat anyway.
You can "peel off a card", then fold the turn. In this case I use about 11-1 for a gutshot straight assuming no flush draw exists. If there is a flush draw, I go on 3 outs vice 4. This makes the odds about 14.5-1.
Question? normally you raise to either get more money in the pot or narrow the field. However if your preflop raises are not narrowing the field should you now not raise before the flop or do you still have instances where getting more money in preflop is correct? background: 5-10 game with a kill,blinds $2 and $5 avg of 6 players see a flop. a raise at any time will normally result in checks around to the raiser(not necessarily a bad thing). an early position raise will result in 2-3 seeing the flop. a late position raise drops no-one. I stopped raising in late position, figuring if I hit the flop I could then raise later. I also started playing hands I would usually toss. also knowing there are few raises, can you lower your starting hand requirements or is this where i went wrong? a few examples: 3-5 players in , I'm on or near the button, no raise, very rarely do the sb and bb raise. I played 22,33 hoping for a set played far more connectors than usual, like 78 off, 67 suited , or 1 gappers like 9J or 810. I don't think it was wrong to play these but I had trouble getting away from them when hitting a partial flop or open ender. a flop of J,6,2 with my J9 resulted in me playing it out and getting out kicked. all comments welcome Thanks
Nothing wrong with playing small pairs and suited connectors from late position. You might even consider raising with some of these hands. However, hands like J9o and 78o are rarely worth a play in any game IMO.
If you're in late position with a legitimate raising hand then by all means raise. Reducing the field is only one consideration. Magnifying the mistakes who opened with garbage is another (apologies to Jim). Plus, raising on the flop sometimes puts you into position to win it with a turn bet even if the flop misses you. As for the second part of your post stay away from non-suited gappers. Even KJ is a dangerous hand against multiple opponents. If you're going to play suited connectors make sure you do it with enough opponents to make your pot odds right for a draw.
3-6 HE last night. Game is loose, passive, with several weak calling stations in the game. I would consider 3 players in the game were decent players, a buddy on my immediate left, one other guy downtable who played generally a fairly sound game, and your humble author.
I'm on the button with Qc-Th. I don't really like this combo very much, but if you are ever going to play it, here was the spot. Five limpers up to me, I call, and both blinds call as well. Eight of us in an unraised pot to take the flop of Qs-9c-4c.
BB bets out. 3 callers to me, including the decent player downtable who was in early position. I just called. I did contemplate a raise, but my thinking was like this. I've got top pair with a weak kicker, and what would I accomplish by raising. Thin the field? They were already in for 1 bet, and the chances of anyone folding who might outdraw me even if I WAS in the lead were slim and nil, and slim just left town.
Raise for value? I've got an early position bettor into a big field and several callers. Can I assume I have the best hand? If I did raise, and got re-raised by the BB, should I dump or peel off the turn card to see what happens? Does the Qc add any value for runner-runner flush potential? Should I raise to possibly portray the flush draw and/or possibly buy a cheap turn card from the sheep if they all check to me on the turn?
Anyway, turn card was a low club, the 3, I think. BB now checks, and much to my surprise, it got checked around to me. Who would take the free card now? Am I walking into a check-raise? Do I have the best hand? I felt from the texture of the game that my Q was best, and I bet. BB calls, decent player calls, 1 other caller.
River is Kh. Checked to me, I just turned my cards over. I figured no worse hand could possibly call in this situation, and maybe the overcard killed me. BB mucked, so I had him beat all along, the late position limper also quickly mucked, and the other guy turned over JTo, and took the pot with his str8.
In talking over the hand after the session, my buddy felt I should have raised the flop to take control of the hand. He's possibly right, given the hands as they actually existed, for when the small club comes on the turn, and they (presumably) check to me again, when I go ahead and bet out, the guy with the open-ended straight draw may fold. He is thoughful enough to put me on the flush, so why would he draw for the str8 on the river when he didn't have a club card? I suppose we cold argue the merits of his playing JTo up front, but that's another thread. Thoughts?
I'm on the button with Qc-Th. I don't really like this combo very much, but if you are ever going to play it, here was the spot. Five limpers up to me, I call
Unfortunately I don't have it in front of me, but HPFAP21 specifically mentions that offsuit face-ten hands should often be mucked after a few limpers. You like the pot odds but could easily be dominated, and will not be able to put much heat on if you flop top pair. Of course in low limit I would usually call too, but I think this is worth noting.
As you point out, although a raise on the flop won't thin the field right away, it might get people like that JTo out on the turn when you bet again, as the flush scariness factor goes way up. I also think that if you aren't very confident that your hand is best, you should consider folding. There are a lot of possible draws, and (if not best) you are playing a 3 outer probably, right?
This guy was on a straight draw - somehting LL HE players live for you ain't getting him out of the game with a ski mask and a .357. I really doubt if he would muck his beloved straight draw to a flush on board. All he knows is he has a draw and will cry call you to the river.
If a player is good eneough to muck the hand maybe it is a play to bet the turn - which I probably do anyway.
PS Was one of the other guys Don.
Don was sitting on my immediate left, and we were discussing the hand at home after the session. I played 6-12 last night with the str8 drawer in the game, and after seeing some of the junk he showed up with at a little higher level, I have reevaluated. You're right, I wouldn't have been able to get this guy out with a gun. Thought it was worth some discussion.
Mike, are you back from Europe?
Nothing wrong with playing preflop QTo on the button. If you raise on the flop and the flush comes on the turn are you going to bet the hand? I doubt it, espc. since you have the Queen of clubs. So the outcome is not going to be any different. Raising preflop with a marginal hand when you are last to act doesn't accomplish anything. You have no draw and you have a weak kicker and you won't muscle anyone by raising.
Bruce
I think your plays were fine except that my preference in this situation is to raise with top pair/fair kicker since the bettor could be betting a draw and I want to charge everyone for staying with me when I may have the best hand. I think with AQ someone might have raised pre-flop so you are a big dog to KQ and QJ but a favorite to everything else. No one raised the flop bet so the other players probably have some kind of draw. However, with this many opponents just calling is understandable and I have no strong opinion one way or the other.
I think you played the hand just about as well as you could.
This seems to be an reverse-implied odds (sklansky term) problem. Since this is a flop that many hands will like, all the draws will be getting implied odds from your hand. If you didn't hold the Qc, it makes the play of the hand even trickier. The play should be to get in cheaply and see what happens on the turn in a loose passive game like this.
I think I raise the flop here. If I'm three bet I fold. If the turn brings the flush then it's easy to muck if someone bets or if I'm check-raised. Further, the pot's pretty small, which means I can catch people making a fairly big mistake if they call another bet with a gutter (or mid pair, etc.). But the main reason I raise is because I want to find out if my kicker is good, and generally a guy can accomplish this by raising and seeing if he's three bet (unless the original better has QJ, in which case they'll often call. But if they have KQ or AQ they usually raise in an effort to thin the field).
Guy! This was a loose-passive $3-$6 game!
I'm not totally against a raise here, but remember, the big blind led bet the flop. Who's going to fold for another bet?
C'est vrai tha nobody's folding. But, by raising you figure out if you've got the best hand. Note that if you're re-raised you can easily dump, since you're at best dominated and your kicker can complete all kinds of exotic gutter draws. So, if the gaggle just calls, you're a hugie banana for the time being (you will get run down by pocket fours on the river, but there's not much you can do about that) AND you get more money in when you're ahead.
So-- if three bet, you muck. If everyone just calls, you're ahead, and can procede from there.
Further, by raising you define your hand as top pair, which is a good thing in these small games-- in fact, I usually like it if people put the 'right read' on me in a LL game, as this accomplishes one very important thing--- it tells you a TON about their hand if they play back at you on a later street (or lead bet). In a LL game they may 'know' what you have, but they're not good enough players to really do anything with that information EXCEPT give away their hands when they get there.
Example. You raise the flop, everyone (correctly) puts you on a Q with a mystery kicker. If the lead better re-raises, he owns you-- muck at your leisure. If the turn brings the flush, or some other terrifying card (like a wheel card) and someone bets into you, their announcing that they've got a Q beat-- and usually have it beat badly. Of course, you've got to know just who at the table has a clue, since some players will know what to do when they've got your hand pegged, but most won't. In fact, all most of them will do is politely let you know when they run you down.
I consider this concept akin to your 'they'll play to beat A's' concept, which IMO is one of the most valuable contributions to HE theory in the past five years. If you define your hand, then they'll define theirs. The only difference is that you know what to do with the information, while they do not.
In sum-- by raising you can get away from your hand very easily if you're three bet by the original raiser (or three bet by a limper, as that lame limp- re-raise trick almost always indicated a monster set when utilized by a player in a game smaller than 6-12) OR if someone gets excited on a future street. And, if you have the best hand, it allows you to put more money in when you're still ahead.
I'm reading Super/System, and Brunson very often uses the words "flop" and "turn" interchangably. One of many examples: Page 391 in the chapter called "When You FLOP a Set". The second sentence of the chapter reads "If you TURN Second or Bottom Set. . .". He of course means "If you flop second or bottom set". Was there once a time when the "turn" was not the 4th card to hit the board?
just wondering. . .
In the old days of hold'em they used "turn" to refer to the first 3 cards. It wasn't until the game gainded popularity that 'flop' came to be known only as the first 3 cards and 'turn' specifically meaning 4th street.
Seems you have the wrong book.
You ought to be reading a beginners book on limit holdem.
You have totally misread the paragraph because you don't understand the terminology.
He means turn 2nd or bottom set cuz a set is 3 of a kind comprising 2 in the hole and one on board.
I was wondering which books were good to read for Holdem. I have already read Holdem FAP, Lee Jone's Winning Low Limit Holdem, Caro's Fundamentals, Malmuth's Essays on Poker, and i am getting Super/System soon. Are there any others that i should not miss out on?
Thanx.
Fist
Once you've read Krieger's books and Cooke's book, you've just about read everything.
here is what i read in the order i read it:
top, hefap, 7csfap, split poker for ap, book of tells, supersystem, ciaffone's nl/pl book, tj's nl/pl he book, sklansky on poker, poker essays 1, poker essays 2
the word read gets less rigorous as we go down the list. for example, i only read the hold 'em sections of ciaffone and rueben's book. and i have only read parts of the poker essays books.
i would recomend all of these books.
scott
Scott, I am suprised that you have not read "Improve Your Poker" by Ciaffone and Feeney's new book, both of which I would recommend to Fistdantilus.
which i would also recommend.
until just a couple months ago i had only read the advanced player series and top.
improve your poker is on my long term list, but right now i am reading don quixote.
scott
nt
it doesn't hurt to have someone ask this every week or so. remember that the reason we get this board free is that it helps mason sell books. having to tell a new player that he should buy 2+2 because they are by far the best every couple weeks is well worth the forum.
scott
for sure. If you read nothing else read TOP.
Also the other books Scott recommended when you find the time.
The two newest 2+2 books are excellent also. Definitely read "Inside the Poker Mind" if you are thinking about a move to middle limits and "The Psychology of Poker" if you want to get inside your opponent's heads better (and your own as well).
David
Theory of poker poker essays 1+2 Inside the poker mind Psychology of poker Holdem poker (original by DS)
super system is a great book but the holdem section is somewhat outdated because the structure has since changed. the draw sections and 7CS sections are good reading though and the entire book is a classic. The high/low rules may be somewhat different now as well as I don't believe the 8-low qualifier was in use when S/S was written.
I was going to mention Ciaffone's "improve your poker" book, but someone else did.
Of the books Fistdantilus didn't mention I also think Cloutier and McEvoy's book is worth reading though with a very discerning eye. Though there are alot of mistakes, but there are a number of things of value. I borrowed it from freind of mine and it did help my game, though it is very important as I said to read w/a discerning eye. Though one probably should read most things w/ more suspicion than I suspect one does...
... and I think Roy Cooke's book is very good.
Suspicious...
I have to agree. I also forgot to mention Bob C's book. I also think Roy Cooke's book is great, but I don't actually have it. I have read it but it was borrowed from a friend.
Dave in Cali
I've been reading the posts from this forum for quite some time now, and I love the intelligent discussion that goes on here.
I'm 21 years old an I have been playing hold'em for 2 years now. (I started out at the Indian casinos where the legal age limit is 18) I only make $10/hour at my job and i've been living on my own for 2 years now. I started out with 2-4, and played 3-6 for about a year and a half. I play on average two times a month (Including home games).
Needless to say, when I started playing for fun on the home games and the casino, my friends and the players used to take all of my money. So I bought some books including HFAP(even though it's not really for lower limit) and Lee Jones.
I am at the point now where my friends don't like playing hold-'em with me at our home games becuase I always take their money. So they switched it to 7-card stud, but eventually I started taking their money at that also.
At the casino, in the 3-6 hold'em games, I win the majority of the time I sit down.I've broken tables before at 5 a.m. the morning when there were no replacement players.
I wanted to know if I have an advantage In my age becuase I look really young. People that haven't played with me before think I suck becusue i'm young and don't think I have enough experince under my belt at the card table, until I leave with 3,4 or 5 racks of their money. People who are know me or are unusually obsevant know how solid I play, even after I dump small bet money at the table ocassionly to train people to think otherwise. What goes on in older players mind's when someone that looks 19 sits down? Do they think I'm a college kid with some money to blow? That's what I think when I see someone my age sit down.
Thanks for any advice!
Most decent players don't let looks affect their play.
I let their actions dictate how I play with them. I always assume a player is solid and go from their based on what and how they are playing and from what position.
i think most players do let appearences affect their thoughts about various players. obviously it should have less weight the more hands you see them play, but looks do tell you something.
also, i think assuming a player is solid is a mistake since so few players are solid.
one last thing, do you have any tips on quickly dissecting opponents postflop play? it's easy to notice general things like tight/loose, passive/aggressove, but i have trouble catagorizing things like 'bets draws' or 'will fold top pair no kicker' quickly. it usually takes me at least full hour with a player to begin to form that kind of detail. do you know of a way to speed this up?
scott
I said most "decent" players don't let a players looks affect their play and I play unknown players as solid unless they prove them selves otherwise.
I'd rather overestimate a mew player than underestimate one. It works for me.
I look to see what a player is calling raises with and in what position. I also want to know if he is betting draws I also like to know what he is doing UTG and on the button. Give me 2 or 3 circuits and I feel I can peg most players.
Rounder,
I almost forgot to say this, but I was curious about your age, and playing experience, where you play and what limits you play. You might not believe me, but I really admire your advice and guess that you are a really good hold 'em player. I have modlded my playing style after reading some of your posts and my game has improved.
Rock
Rock,
I'm a young 54 :-) been playing poker and specualting at the outcome of events since I was 14. Been pleying serious poker for 3 years since I sole part of my resort and it gave me time to persue other avenues of income. I play a lot of tournaments these days and was until last month playing in Arizona - I have relocated to Chicagoland and will be playing in Aurora and some local tournamrents. I play the best games available - my idea of a good game might not be the same as others but I do know what I like in a table mix - I like PL and NL HE best.
I'll be at the Orleans for the open and probably the TOC next.
Rounder-
NOT Aurora! That's where I play! What's wrong with the games in Arizona anyway? And what's the chances you'll be going back soon? Now I'll be going crazy trying to figure out who you are. Not many players in Aurora fit your style. (With any luck, you play Omaha).
Kevin,
This is me
I'm gonna try to make it to Aurora this weekend Fri. and Sat. If you see me say hi I haven't player there since early Jan just moved from Arizona for the summer and just got back from Europe.
See ya.
Hello Rounder:
To continue with Kevin's line of thought. Have you considered the Empress?
scott,
You wrote: "i think most players do let appearences affect their thoughts about various players. obviously it should have less weight the more hands you see them play, but looks do tell you something.
I agree here. There is a "look of live" that the bad players eminate and it is worth it to have a feel for it as players quickly move in and out of your game. But you can change your mind if you have time to observe their play.
"also, i think assuming a player is solid is a mistake since so few players are solid."
I agree for the most part. An old friend had a saying: "Assume they are idiots untill they prove otherwise." It probably works better in California than it does in the mid day Las Vegas games ;-).
"one last thing, do you have any tips on quickly dissecting opponents postflop play? it's easy to notice general things like tight/loose, passive/aggressive, but i have trouble catagorizing things like 'bets draws' or 'will fold top pair no kicker' quickly. it usually takes me at least full hour with a player to begin to form that kind of detail. do you know of a way to speed this up?"
If you can figure this out in less than an hour than your mind is going at warp speed and you retain everything.
Regards,
Rick
P.S. Hope I got the HTML tags right as I wrote this in my Opera browser. Am excited to be getting a new machine this afternoon as I just heard another chunck of data on my hard drive being ripped off.
your html stuff was a-ok.
my problem with dissecting other's play is that i often focus too much on preflop. it is so easy to analyze it begins to dominate my considerations of other players. i have to really focus to pick up on particular nuances of their post flop play.
scott
i am 18 and have been playing for 2 years.
obviously people will react differently to your youth.
some people will assume are inexperienced. some people will assume you are studied.
of the ones who think you are inexperienced some will play soft against you because they feel bad taking money from a kid. others will be overbearing, assuming you are on a short bankroll and can be scared out of pots. still others may think you will call them down with anything because you have not learned to temper arrogence and your temper and thus allow your ego into the game.
but after a little tight play, most players (especially decent ones) will immediately decide that you are a book player. obviously this is only agianst players that know about the books. they will think you are a 'math' player, probably weak tight.
at least that has been my experience.
scott
I'm 26 and look like I am 14. In general, I **know** that I'll probably get called a lot more often than other players in the game - at least in the beginning. This generally means, no bluffs. However, the more astute players will **typically** notice in an hour or so that I am not some "dumb kid." Then I can generally adjust my play accordingly, as well, especially when my bets and raises are getting some respect.
Like Rounder, I generally assume that a player is solid until they show me otherwise.
My 2 cents
Thanks Tim
I agree with everything Scott said. Sometimes when people softplay me I feel bad about taking their money later. But I'm learning to deal with it.
With respect to strange players, I generally assume they know what they're doing. This is usually a mistake.
Take advantage of your image and let the old rocks think what they will. I look very young as well, and if some ancient rock makes a comment about the young whipper-snapper in seat #3 then I will do something to reinforce his illogical beliefs about me. This is just one more weapon in your poker arsenal so keep on using it to your advantage.
5-10 game with a kill. full table. 6 seeing most flops, very little preflop raising other than me(seat 8) and seat 4. only other preflop raisers usually show down, AA,KK,QQ . blinds $2 and $5
Hand 1) I'm on the button with 10,9 off. 5 in not including the blinds, no raise. blinds rarely raise in 4 hrs of play. I called figuring 8 of us would see the flop. Was this correct? flop came 10,6,4 it was checked to me. I bet but don't think I should have? comments 4 callers who all checked the J turn card to me what should I do now? Bet, Check?
Hand 2) was the very next hand, I'm the cut off. I have 10, 9 suited. seat 2 in seat 3 in seat 4 raise , folded to me ? Call, Raise, Fold whats my play. I called figuring the blinds and seat 2,3 would call. we take the flop 6 handed. flop 10,9,2 rainbow . checked to seat 4 who bets, now my turn, do you raise, call, fold ????? and why. I raised to get it heads up and seat 4 reraised. him and I took the turn of a 4 now 2 of a suit. he bet out; my play and what do you put him on ??
Hand 1 bet on flop is good jack on the turn is a bet in my book - of course it will depend a lot on my read of the players. I would most likely bet the turn.
I find giving free cards to tight players is a losing strategy. If I can't bet and raise in a game like this I am folding.
Hand 2 I don't usually call raises in tightish games with T9 suited or not. But since you did I raise with top 2 because when you flop two pair with coupled cards in the hole you are most definately looking at a straight draw I raise him on the turn.
He probably has a straight draw with a poss. flush draw now he probably has JQ possibly AT maybe TJ. If he came back at you on the turn raise I put him on a set.
Hand 1: Bet and fold if you are chackraised. Check river even if you improve. Hand 2: Raise him now or raise him on the river unless a 2 or 4 hits. He's probably holding an overpair. Only two ways for him to be holding a set, because you're holding the other ten and nine. I'd raise him now and check the river if a 2 or 4 comes. I would not worry about the flush...
On the first hand you barely have a call pre-flop. Make it Nine-Eight offsuit and I would fold. On the flop you have top pair/weak kicker and 8 opponents but they checked to you so your bet is correct. On the turn, when your 4 remaining opponents all check and the Jack turns up I think you have to bet again since you could still have the best hand. If you get raised you should fold.
On the second hand you should not cold-call a raise with Ten-Nine suited. I would fold because the hand is not worth two bets to take a flop plus it could get raised again. When you flop the top two you should play it fast and raise at every opportunity. This is a raised pot with lots of players so the pot is large and you should focus on making your opponents pay the maximum to continue. Seat #4 was the pre-flop raiser so he could be pushing his big over pair so your hand is probably still good. I would raise on the turn when bet into by the pre-flop raiser when I have the top two pair.
hand 1) I bet because I did not want to give a free card and figured a J out there would have bet or check raise me. blank hit river, checked around including me. got beat with A,10 off
hand 2) I wasn't sure if a call was correct or not but have seen seat 4 raise with K,J Q,J A,K and other non pairs so I figured the flush possibility added just enough to call. I played the 2 pair fast and when seat 4 checked the river I knew he had just an over pair so I bet and he called. he had A,A . I threw these hands out because I still struggle with how to play middle connectors and how to play when you don't have a solid hand but may have the best hand. Glad to see I was not far off from how most would play it other than my preflop call. Thanks
On the turn, when your 4 remaining opponents all check and the Jack turns up I think you have to bet again since you could still have the best hand. If you get raised you should fold.
Folding to the check-raise is probably wrong. I count 9.5 big bets in this pot already minus the rake. You should have 5 outs available (2 T's and 3 9's). Even without implied odds, you're getting over 9-1 on an 8.2-1 shot.
I know on the actual hand you were dominated because the T's aren't an out and will get you in trouble. But this is only true because your opponent played his "big ten" like a toad. The only sane reason for him to check the flop is for a check-raise which he didn't follow through with.
Opponents who slow play a small set will have you in trouble, but based on everything I read here, this is a dangerous way to play. If your opponent is known to do this, you might want to fold. But I think you've run into a "big jack" here most of the time, and the pot odds seem to suggest a call. The implied odds from getting another bet on the river probably cover your edge cases.
Fat-Charlie
Hand 1. I doubt I would see the flop. If I did I would certainly bet the 10 if checked to me. I don't think I'd bet the turn. I smell a checkraise in the making.
Hand 2. 10,9s is a fold against the raise. Especially in such a passive pre-flop game. Assuming I called, I would certainly raise the flop. Since seat 4 was the preflop raiser I would immediately put him on big pocket pair. I think I would just call him raise, then pop him on the turn. Given the benign flop, I think this is not too dangerous.
On hand 1 I can't say that I know wether a bet is right. I do think that if a bet isn't right with this flop and this action then you shouldn't play the hand in the first place though. You got top pair, in position and its checked to you with a not-super-dangerous flop. If you can't bet that, why are you playing the hand at all? If you are only gonna wait on straights/flushes to play it, then wait for em to be suited too.
What exactly does it mean to be 'weak tight'? Is this similar to tight passive? Or does it refer to a person who may well be tight aggressive, but plays in a very straightforward way - and is probably easy to read?
What are some characteristics of a weak tight player?
-SmoothB-
Playing with scared money is the first thing that comes to my mind.
Under-valueing hands on the flop and beyond because of lack of reading skills seems second.
Lack of balls after commiting to a pot, the third.(fight of flight syndrome) Directly related to 1 and 2.
Just a guess at what makes Johnny run !
weak as opposed to aggresive tight as opposed to loose
Ray Zee coined this term many years ago and it refers to a player who does not bet his good hands aggressively enough when he clearly has the best of it. It is not the same as tight-passive. However, lately a player gets the label "weak-tight" if he recommends folding when someone else would call or he calls when someone else would raise when in fact there are legitimate reasons for either course of action. I think the term has done more harm than good recently because it tends to be a "discussion stopper" since no one wants this label stamped on them.
If a low limit loser wanted to turn it around then weak-tight would be a damn good spot to start. You won't get rich but you won't make too many mistakes at low limit either.
-Fred-
I think it means a tight player who plays too predictably. One who never semibluffs or even bluffs.
A player who you always know where he is...
I think you describe a rock, although similar, except a rock is unlkikely to fold his hand head up or three way but w/t will, if the risk is big enough also a rock is subject to raise the near nuts if he can read at all. This from someone who considers himself weak tight at certain limits. I've never been mistaken for a rock at any limit. Just my .02 .
Here's a trip report I put together for rec.gambling.poker, but thought I'd post it here also..
Off to a Good Start
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I arrive Friday evening thinking that I would spend the evening/night unwinding by playing some blackjack and having a few drinks. I would retire early, and be fresh to catch some fish at the poker tables on Saturday. I end up going on a pretty good blackjack run -- I would routinely crack the dealer's pocket Kings and Queens by sucking out with my 65o and 74o. I manage to win $500 playing $25/hand, and in that process, I also manage to drink 7 Kamakazes.
High from my win and the alcohol, I unfortunately decide to venture over to the poker room after all. The plan is to just kill some time playing 4-8 hold 'em until I get tired.
Why Kamakazes Are Called Kamakazes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When I stumble over to the poker room, there is a list for the 4-8 but a seat available for 8-16. "Cool!" I think to myself, "I can win twice as much!"
I take a seat and proceed as planned, just having fun and playing as loose as the others. By the time the table breaks up, I'm down a little but not as much as I should be. I then decide that having now had 9 Kamakazes, it being 2am, and I being extremely tired, that it was the perfect time to move over to the 15-30 table.
I buy in for a rack and start playing, but after a few rounds it becomes clear that there aren't any live ones at the table. The table is tight-aggressive, with frequent blind steals and typically 2-3 players seeing the flop. So of course I decide that I would beat the table by altering my strategy. My new strategy would be to cleverly raise my trash hands and smooth-call my premium hands to throw everyone off! It was brilliant!
Three racks later I partially recover my senses and realize that going to sleep is probably the correct move. Ai-ya!
Day Off
~~~
I switch to Plan B and spend the next day, still tired and slightly hung over, away from the poker tables and playing various table games with my girlfriend (blackjack, Pai Gow, etc.) I end up recovering some of my poker losses playing $100/hand blackjack at the Venetian.
The highlight of the day comes at O'Sheahs on the way back to Bellagio when I win 500 nickels at the nickel slots. That was the largest number of nickels I had ever seen in my life.
Real Poker Day
~~~~~~~~~~
After a decent night's rest I wake up early on Sunday, ready for a real poker day. I grab a seat at the 15-30 table but encounter the same tight-aggressiveness from Friday. This time, however, I refrain from employing my brilliant strategy from Friday and instead get my name on a few additional lists.
If You Can't Beat a Table, Move to a Higher Limit
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A seat comes up at the 30-60 table, so I move there. It's a bit looser, but not by much. Pretty soon, though, there are a few player shuffles and I find myself at a decent table: In seat #1, there is a maniac they call Bad Beat George (BBG) -- he got his nickname, not surprisingly, because when he does win a pot it usually gives someone a bad beat. Seats #2, 3, 4 are occupied by solid locals. In seat #5 is an attractive young woman who is weak-tight (she plays by S&M and is rather predictable). In seat #6 is a loose-ish caller. I'm in #7. In #8 is another solid local. A tough player in #9 -- a funny man with a British accent who is joking with everyone and winning. And sitting next to the dealer in the #10 seat is our main dish -- a fish we'll call Wanda who never, ever folds preflop.
When the Going Gets Tough, Go Get a Hot Dog
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I find myself in an unbelievable dry run of cards. In the meantime, Wanda and BBG are cleaning up the table with their fishy play. I finally catch QQ in a 4-way capped-pre-flop pot, but lose to Wanda's Js4s when she turns a flush. It really wasn't that bad of a beat, but watching her scoop a giant pot with Js4s got me on tilt so I got up to grab a quick bite to eat.
Let's Go Fishing!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I return to the table just as Wanda is scooping a big pot with J7o when she sucks out on AK to make trip jacks on the river. (Flop was AJx.) I give my friendliest smile, congratulate her on her nice hand, and tell her how tough she is.
Soon I find myself with KdJd in middle position with one limper before me. I raise, and get three callers including Wanda, the BB, and the limper. I'm not too happy because of the prospect of being dominated by AK or AJ. I feel better when the flop comes: KJx. I'm still a bit cautious because in an almost identical scenario earlier I'd ended up losing to 89o when he made a runner-runner gutshot-gutshot straight. Two checks to me, I bet and everyone calls. I'm delighted when another K falls on the turn. The delight turns into ecstasy when Wanda raises my bet! The BB and limper drop, I re-raise her, she calls it and my river bet and I win my first decent-sized pot. Wanda flashes me her K before folding, and I give her a sympathetic nod.
After that hand, Wanda tightened up quite a bit and I was able to steal several smaller pots from her.
Next Up: Bad Beat George
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BBG raises in early position, everyone folds to me, I look down and see QQ. I re-raise, and it's heads-up. Flop comes 356 rainbow. BBG checks, I bet, and he raises. Normally I would re-raise, except that it was BBG, and there was no way I would eliminate the possibility of him holding something like 47 or 56. So I just call. Turn is a 3. I feel a little better, but only call his bet to avoid a potential Bad Beat. Then a beautiful Q falls on the river, I raise his river bet, and give BBG a Beating of his own.
Why Everyone Should Wear Dark Glasses
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's getting fairly late when the following hand eclipses my previous highlight of winning 500 nickels. I'm in the BB. A late position raise, SB calls, I look down and see JJ. I decide to smooth-call.
Flop comes JJT. I thank God that I'm wearing my sunglasses because my eyes probably grew twice as large. Flop is checked around, and I realize I probably won't win much off this hand.
Until the dealer turns a 7. SB bets! I hesitate and give my best crying-call imitation. Now original raiser raises! SB calls! Now I fire off a re-raise with both hands. Raiser calls, and SB gives up.
River is a 9, putting a possible straight flush on the board, but I take the risk and bet, and fortunately get just a call. Turns out, the raiser had 77 (so she turned a full house) and the SB had QQ.
Cha-Ching!
Obligatory Presto Story
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No trip report is complete without a presto story, so here goes. I'm UTG with 55, so I raise. Everyone folds, and I win the blinds. Presto! Sort of.
Not long after that, I leave the table up just shy of a rack.
Easy Come, Easy Go
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An hour before my flight on Monday, I'm killing time playing $10/hand blackjack when the shoe count goes off the charts. I place two bets of $300 each, but end up losing one and pushing the other. That gets me on blackjack tilt and I start playing $100-$200/hand until my flight.
By the time I leave for the airport, I'm just about even for the whole trip! I guess it could have been worse..
Murdoc,
I really enjoyed your post and would like to advise that if you are drinking you should probably refrain from playing poker. No other form of gambling requires so much concentration, and you can really blow a lot of chips (and your cool) when a little tipsy. Good thing for you someone filled up with your quad jacks, finally got some action with a next to unbeatable hand eh?
Great post! It sounds like you had a good time. That's why Las Vegas is there.
ps. If you're a serious poker player and are there to win money, drinking is not a good idea, but if you're there to have fun, have at it!
Drinking and cards ouch, kind of like fire and ice.
But in a more serious vain, it sounds like the 30-60 was a pretty ripe game. If you want a really wild story, try Bobbycho's story on no-limit hold em (I think it was June 30)
Correction, July 1, it's a great story.
What a great post. I really enjoyed reading it. Have you ever considered becoming an author?
Hello Everyone,
I was playing 3-6 hold-em at Cache Creek, an Indian casino in Brooks, CA, and a hand came where I won the pot, but I am not sure if I played the hand correctly. When situations like this occur, I am never sure of the correct strategy.
I was sitting in seat#6 in a nine-handed game. Table was loose-passive, with frequent muti-way pots, but little raising pre-flop. In the BB with black Tens, the whole table called.
Flop came 245 rainbow. SB checked, I bet, and everyone called!! The turn brought an offsuit 4, SB checked again, and I bet again. I think 2 or 3 folded and the rest called, except the button, a loose playing lady who raised.
At this point I was sure I was beat, either looking at trip 4's or a made straight, and was thinking about folding. SB cold called two bets. When the action got to me, I thought a ten was my only hope to win, but the pot looked big enough to call, so I did. UTG called the extra bet and the others folded.
The river brought a ten. SB checked, I checked, and now UTG bets!! The lady on the buttons just calls and now SB raises!!! I 3-bet, UTG folds, SB and button calls.
SB had 6-3 offsuit and button flashed a 4 before mucking.
Was my call on the turn correct? And if I did not hit my ten on the river and everyone else folded, how big does the pot have to be for me to call, when I am fairly sure I am beat?
On another subject. I just got back from Las Vegas, I've only been there 3 times(including this trip), and played some 3-6 and 6-12 at the Mirage. I know this is low limit, but the games seemed awfully soft. I was under the impression that all the limit games in Las Veas were tough.
Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
At the point where you are deciding whether or not to call the button raise on the turn there is $108 in the pot and it costs you $6 more to call. These are pot odds of 18:1. But if you consider that the original callers will probably call the raise plus the extra money you will win if you catch a Ten then I think you have a call here and should play your 2 outer which is a 22:1 shot. I think you will win more than $132 here when you hit so your call is correct. If a blank comes, it depends on what the card is and who does the betting.
The low limit games at the Mirage can be tough or soft depending upon the lineup. If you get a lot of tourists playing then it will be soft which is usually on the weekends. If you play during the day during the week where you might get a lot of locals than the game could be tougher.
Thanks for the response Jim. The only problem that I have is that math is not a strong point for me and I frequently have trouble calculating pot odds, especially if the pot is big to begin with and there are multiple raises in the hand. I have been playing poker for about 3 years and it is still difficult.
In regards to the Mirage, it seemed like the locals were the ones playing the worst.
Thanks.
You're probably stuck calling the turn, and may be stuck calling the river-- don't worry to much about making these crying calls on the river. If the decision seems close, it's because it IS close, which means it doesn't cost you much or make you much. Plus, as Rick Nebiolo points out, you can sleep better at night knowing you saw the 94o. However, if the pot was smaller you may have to muck, since most players won't raise here without a 4. Ask yourself this: "would this player make this play with a hand WORSE than mine?" If the answer is no, figure you're chances of catching up (and, as you improve your game, quickly calculate you implied odds and reverse implied odds), your chances of your hand being good if you do make it, then make a decision.
BTW, this is a good spot for a pre-flop raise. The whole field is in, which means a raise will make a pretty good size pot-- which, of course, is exactly what you want should you flop a set. Further, should you flop trips, many players will continue on with hands they SHOULD MUCK (like two overcars, which is almost always drawing dead), thereby increaing your profits.
I'm not sure I understand the action correctly. Did you raise pre-flop out of the big blind with TT's?
With nine way action and a big pair and everyone calling both pre-flop and on the flop it seems to me that you are justified in calling to the river with your two-outer (even though you did'nt know it).
On the flop I think leading out with top pair is good, but you really cant love the flop. Sounds to me like a no fold em game, and someone with A3s could have flopped a monster, as it stood someone with 63 flopped a monster.
You played the hand correctly in calling a raise on the turn since there was so much multi way action and chips in the pot, but I would be wary of lead betting considering the amount of players in the pot. Of course you are beat on the turn, with all those players, but folding just seems wrong here. I would not fear quad 4's, but it should be considered.
On the river I think your checkraise is a little dicey unless you KNOW someone is going to bet, maybe in this case you were correct, considering how bad at least one of the players is, three betting the river is mandatory . Good hand.
Appreciate the response JOE. Actually, you brought up some very good points which I didn't address in my post because I didn't want to make too long of a message.
I didn't raise in the BB with my tens. Although, I gave it some serious consideration. I think it was Mason Malmuth who suggested raising with medium pairs in the BB to make the pot size correct to flop a set (am I wrong here?). However, in situations like this, I usually refrain from raising because I'll make the pot too big and I won't be able to get away from my hand once the flop comes. Like AA3 or J65.
Also, It did occur to me that someone could have flopped a monster hand, but I hate just checking and calling. I thought if someone flopped a big hand, they would let me know quickly. As it turned out I was wrong, with the SB having flopped the nuts.
Lastly, I thought about lead betting on the river. I was pretty sure the button was going to bet but not raise if bet into.
I think you did get very lucky here. Once you hit the river, you did well getting bets from your opponents.
I believe TT is worth a raise in the blinds if no one has raised before you. The guy who flopped the 6 high straight really messed up, he should have re-raised against trip 4's on the turn. His error allowed you a marginal call with your 10's.
I typically fold here. There's a chance for a backraise. There's a chance you're drawing dead. You will be tempted to call on the river even if you miss.
Even if we assume you are getting roughly correct odds to spike a 10 (about 22:1), it's a close call, and you will very probably lose many bets before you recoup. When I'm faced with a very close call like this, I usually err on the side of lower variance. It can get frustrating to miss a draw like this 40 or 50 times in a row.
Post deleted at author's request.
But Badger-
You left out one very important possible scenario...
Those times her bet gets the limper to fold a better hand like 2nd pair. Now that $30 bet wins her the entire pot when Jim does not improve or folds.
You've loaded the dice before throwing them.
If you want to calculate the EV of this bet, you have to consider the following:
Given the large number of variables above, it's easy enough to make a case for betting or checking. It all depends on the probabilities you assign to these possible events. SKP (and myself) feel that on balance it is better to bet here. You do not. You have more experience in those California games than either of us, so perhaps that accounts for the difference.
But the decision has got to be closer than you make it out to be. Your attitude is that a check is CLEAR, and that you'd be nuts to bet. I don't agree with that at all.
BTW, I'm not sure why you think Jim Brier is going to hang onto his overcards here, even with the gutshot. If you read his messages on here, he advocates folding overcards routinely. In this case with a board this scary, he may assume that hitting an overcard is no good, so all he has is a gutshot or nothing at all, depending on whether he has AK or AQ.
Dan, you don't recognize a -EV play when it smacks you in the face! Taking the other side of any issue against Badger is a bankroll burner. Badger is never wrong, he'll explain it to you just as soon as he wakes up.
Next time just nod, mumble and go on to the next issue but don't tell Badger he might be mistaken.
Post deleted at author's request.
Post deleted at author's request.
"But now suppose the limper has any hand that impacts on Student's out: QJ, T9, 87, J5."
If you are going to include this set of hands in your analysis, then you should include hands like, AK, AQ, AT, KQ, KT, 55...
A bet would then have +EV and may save the pot.
Hope I'm never drawing dead,
albert
Badger, skp, Dan and all,
I talked with Student early last night as we surfed the "Wirebrushing" thread and one thing she emphasized to me about the play of the limper was that he was the type to rarely bet or bluff himself when others showed strength and also the type to call with good overcards and any pair (except perhaps an underpair) all the way to the river. So this player would check and call with hands such as A8, A9, A6, K8s, K9, K6s and even AJ and KJ. He would also play hands such as Q9 and QJ about the same way.
I trust her evaluations and observations of opponents and so does my friend who regularly plays 15/30 to 40/80 at HPC. My friend and I have been astonished by portions of email that describe a common opponents playing style precisely.
I also posted some thoughts late last night in the original thread. One defends the flop call on the basis that there was a very good chance that she would get a free look at both the turn and the river because of the style of play of her opponents.
BTW Steve, I was just kidding. I do believe you think you may be wrong on occasion.
Regards,
Rick
Steve,
When I posted my initial response to Jim's post, I said that one reason to bet is to create 4 outs. I did not say that it was the only reason or even the chief reason. I would note that it could become the chief reason if the pot was slightly bigger (if the pot was way bigger, this reason may disappear because someone with a Queen may have enough odds to call for the gutshot).
I am in meetings most of the day so I don't have time to check your numbers. Knowing you, they are probably correct. If so, I believe it tends to support my argument. Your conclusion apppears to be that betting purely to create 4 extra outs yields a gain of $2.33. That is to say, even if limper and Jim exposed their hands to Student on the turn, Student should bet.
You correctly point out how this $2.33 can be negatively impacted on if, for example, limper has QJ, Jim decides to call etc.
However, as Albert says, there is a flip side to that coin. You have to throw into the mix the possibility that you (a) have both limper and Jim beat [after all, they both checked] and (b) limper may throw away a hand that beats yours eg. A8 - which I say he may well do given that he only has 3rd pair. I know you disagree with me on that one.
In any event, Suppose limper has KQ,A6,KT,AT,65, 64. Clearly, the bet by 77 has positive EV.
Assume that 77 bets, limper calls and Jim folds his AQ.
The figure in round brackets indicates the number of bad river cards for Student if she bets the turn. The figure in square brackets indicates the number of bad river cards for Student if she checks.
KQ (9) [12] A6 (4) [12] KT (8) [15] AT (8) [11] 65 (2) [12] 64 (5) [15]
In all but perhaps the case of KQ and KT, Student drastically reduces the number of bad river cards for her by betting.
[And don't forget that both players could fold to a bet at times. i.e., limper could easily fold KQ, A6, 65, 64 followed by a fold from Jim.]
Now, I put this up in a bit of a hurry. So I will readily admit that I could be in error on my calculations concerning bad river cards.
Gotta go. Will tune in again later.
Post deleted at author's request.
Obviously, I meant that Student sees KJ and AQ out there. Jim doesn't see KJ and 77 out there. He just sees Student bet and Limper call.
Anyway, forget about what anyone sees. It doesn't happen in the real world. If limper has KJ and Jim has AQ, your own analysis indicates that a bet by 77 is profitable.
Badger wrote:
"Face it, if Student is beat, there are some scenarios where a bet is proper *if* Jim folds. The bet is never right if Student is beat *and* Jim calls. And the bet is *usually* wrong if Student is beat and Jim *does* fold. And the bet is always wrong if the Limper checkraises."
Actually, there is nothing for me to "face". Review all my previous posts. I have never argued against these statements.
This whole new thread seems to be deviating from the main point of a bet on the turn. You bet because you probably have the best hand. The point of the KJ/AQ example is that your bet can gain value *even* if you are not the best. Your own analysis shows that.
I mean, the $2.33 advantage is an advantage we gain by betting when we are *beat*. What about the betting advantages when we are ahead.
Let me ask you this:
When players check to you on the turn...do you find that they usually plan on folding to a bet or raising a bet? Obviously, the chances of limper folding to a bet are WAY higher than him raising your bet.
Let me pose my own little "face it":
I say your bet has positive value if you have them both beat even if they both call. Your bet increases in value even if one of them folds...Face it.
I have some other comments to your posts under Dan's post and Jim's post. Off to play a set of tennis though. Will post later tonight.
As I recall, Badger based his analysis on the assumption that the limper had Student beat. I could be wrong, but that's how I read the earlier post.
If I'm wrong on this, then I'm wrong. But if I'm correctly describing Badger's stance, then I have to ask this: How does he come to the conclusion that the limper has Student beat? If I was the student here, my thoughts would go like this on the turn: a) I have Jim beat. If he had T's, or a J or an overpair or something even bigger, he would have bet the turn. b) God knows what the limper has. In fact, I wouldn't even think about it. If the limper is a bad player (and, judging from earlier posts, I'm assuming he was) he could have just about anything. The only hands that would worry me are a slowplayed set that he's now scared to bet since the straight came, or a weird two pair. Either way, I'm not 'putting' him on anything.
So, I think I've got Jim beat, and I think he'll fold if I bet. And I have no idea what the limper has, but I think he'll probably fold to a bet as well, or maybe call with bottom pair/ overcard kicker, a four flush he picked up on the turn, whatever. But the limper is the last thing I'm concerned about. One of my 'rules' (such as it is) is this: "Never worry about a bad player calling when there are more cards to come IF that player hasn't shown aggression on any previous betting rounds". This isn't always correct, of course, but it's correct enough to make it one of the stars I set my course by.
If the student suddenly had to go to the bathroom and somehow gave me her hand to play, I'm betting it here on the turn. Without a doubt (Although, had she given it to me on the flop, we wouldn't be having this discussion). And I'd bet it because a) I think I have the best hand when they all check, and b)I think there's a reasonable chance that the limper will lay down with a hand that beats me if I bet.
I agree.
We haven't even considered hands such as Ax, Kx, Qx suited (and a whole host of other hands) which limper would call with on the flop and then bail out with on the turn.
In other words, there are lots of times when Student has both limper and Jim beat. Clearly, a bet is called for on those occasions. And as Badger's analysis shows, a bet can also be correct *even* if the limper has KJ so long as Jim will not overcall.
In other words, for the bet to be bad, limper has to have Student beat and Jim must overcall with his AQ.
Post deleted at author's request.
"I don't know what else there is to talk about if you don't at least see that a bet in this actual situation, in hindsight, would have been very very bad."
Obviously. Review my posts. I have never said that betting is a good idea if limper has a Jack AND if Jim will call with AQ. So, I don't need hindsight to agree with this statement. I have never claimed otherwise.
Heck, I would also agree (obviously) that the bet is a bad idea even if Jim folds if limper has us beat and his sidecard cripples our draws (eg. he has a 7 or Q in his hand). Once again, I have never claimed otherwise.
But you don't seem to want to concede that there are lots of hands that limper could have which makes your check on the turn miserable. And I am not talking about silly situations where both limper and Jim have 22 or something. I don't know why you bring that up as if I need to rely on those extreme situations to prove the point.
Post deleted at author's request.
I think the debate boils down to one simple point: You think that the limper usually has the student beat, and I-- and I think skp-- don't think this is usually the case.
Post deleted at author's request.
Badger wrote: "Okay, so you are gonna delude yourself the guy has one of the about six plausible hands that you can beat, instead of one of the 25 that have you beat, not a very good idea but even assuming that... and assuming what Jim said, that he'd overcall a bet something over 50% of the time."
I'm not going to get into a debate on the limpers possible holdings, since IMExperience the limper could have a very, very wide range of hands. And that is the crux of this debate. YOU think the limper has you beat (and is going to call the turn), while I think the limper could have almost anything--- maybe they'll call the turn, maybe they won't)--- and will likely-- say, 75% of the time-- muck on the turn for a bet.
If the situation was different, then I'd change my analysis. But, in situations akin to these, the limper (again, IMExperience) could have just about anything. Consider these factors.
1) If the limper is not an award winning player (and for the purposes of my post here we'll assume he's not), he could have almost anything pre-flop. On the flop he could have anything from top set to a three flush with bottom pair and an overcard kicker, a gutter, whatever.
2) The pot is not huge, but it's not a scrapper either. While many mediocre players will muck on the flop in an unraised pre-flop pot if they don't really hit, many will peel with just about anything if the pot's been raised.
3) This is one of those flops that bad players just don't miss. The worst case scenerio (for the fish) is that he has suited wheel cards. Otherwise, he has either a) A small pocket pair with which he'll take off ONE card, b) A gutter draw, c) A pair of some kind with maybe an overcard kicker, or d) some combination of a pair, three flush, three straight. In any case, he'll look at the turn with just about anything... maybe as high as 30% of the hands that he would have taken a flop with.
If the flop was 229, and the limper overcalled on the flop, then I'd be a bit more nervous. But with these co-ordinated flops they'll peel with an incredibly wide range of holdings.
Badger wrote: "Now do yourself a bunch of math. How *much* more often do you think you have the limper beat: 52%? 98% Find your number. Work out all those profits you make. Then, subtract the losses you take when you don't have the best hand, including the times you are drawing dead, including the times you get checkraised."
This is fine, but it's imcomplete. It's not just a question of how often you have the limper beat, but how often the limper has you beat AND will call a bet on the turn. If the limper has you beat but mucks on the turn, then a bet has saved you the pot.
If the limper is the type who will check-raise when they pick up a draw on the turn, then clearly a turn bet begins to look more like a bad idea. But most players-- at least, most players in the games I've played in-- rarely if ever utilize this play.
Badger wrote: "Okay, now delude yourself the limper doesn't have middle cards, then go ahead and add all the numbers together, the small wins and the big losses..."
Again, I'm not deluding myself into believing they don't have middle cards. I'm simply saying that it would be very difficult to put the limper on a hand in this particular pot. Further, if a bet makes the limper fold on the turn, the wins aren't quite a small anymore. And IMExperience most bad players will muck on the turn here-- either with a hand that currently beats you or with one that doesn't-- if the turn hasn't in some way helped their hand.
All said, a turn bet has many things going for it-- first, there's an excellent chance that you're betting the best hand. Second, there's a good chance that you'll get either a) a better hand to fold, or b) get a hand that would beat you on the river to fold. Third, by betting the turn you'll given yourself a MUCH better chance of checking down the river should you not improve.
Post deleted at author's request.
Whoa whoa whoa. You are now twisting words. I said "let's not factor in silly situations where BOTH limper and Jim have 22." It's not at all silly to factor in hands such Ax,Kx,Qx,44,33,22 etc as limper's hands. The essence of my argument all along has been that there are lots of hands that limper will call a bet with on the flop and then muck on the turn (GD echoes this point). You essentially want to take away the majority of the limper's hands that my argument is based on and arm yourself with every possible hand tha the limper could have which supports your argument. This is akin to the accused telling the prosecutor "You can't use the knife with the victim's blood and my fingerprints on it as evidence...let's see you prove me guilty now."
You say:
"Is the limper going to call with KT? Not likely. AT, maybe. KQ, maybe."
Why do you say that? If a guy limps with Jx suited UTG and then doesn't bet or raise with on a flop of J86, I can tell you categorically that there is a very strong chance that this fellow will call 1 bet on the flop with as little as 1 overcard and then routinely fold for a bet on the turn. That's the modus operandi of fish play.
In one of my early posts in response to one of yours, I already stated that you contemplate various hands that the limper could have but do not give sufficient weight to the fact that he has check/called the flop and checked the turn. The vast majority of the time that signifies weakness. The guy ain't got much. And that applies to fish and non-fish alike.
Anyway, enough of the preamble.
Just as you have listed every possible hand where limper beats Student, here are the possible hands where Student beats Limper. And I am not just talking about theoretically possible (i.e. I haven't included hands such as T5s etc because I will assume that even fish will not call a flop bet without an overcard). I am talking about hands that limper could call the flop with and then check the turn:
55,44,33,22,
A2,A3,A4,A5,A6,A7,AT,AQ,AK
K2,K3,K4,K5,K6,K7,KT,KQ,AQ
Q2,Q3,Q4,Q5,Q6,Q7,
T6
76 74
65, 64, 63, 62
If limper has any of these hands, the bet gains value. BTW, I am not going to work out the value of betting in these situations. Frankly, I don't have the brain power (or sufficient quantities of Excedrin at my disposal) to undertake the task. If you have the time and interest to do so, be my guest.
Calculate the cost of checking if your bet would have attracted 2 calls and both limper and Jim fail to go on to hit.
Also calculate the cost of checking should limper or Jim go on to hit when either or both would have folded for a bet. This is an *important* calculation which you overlook.
You say:
"Except the AT, all these bets make about $5 or less. Hardly a "miserable" check."
I gather you are talking about situations where Student bets, both players call with lesser hands and then both players miss. The more importnat calculation is to figure out what you would lose if your failure to bet costs you the pot. i.e. both players would have folded for a bet.
To make your analysis complete, also factor in the fact that your bet gains value even on those hands (that you list) where limper *beats* the Student and when Jim folds his AQ.
In addition, there are the hands that limper could have which beat Student's hand but which he might fold on the turn. I will use A8 and K8 as examples (I will not include hands such as A9 or Q9 because it is rare for someone who hits on the turn to fold for a bet. However, it is not all rare for someone to fold third pair on the board for a bet on the turn).
GD has it right. I too said the same thing a long while back in the thread below. Fish check/calls flop, checks the turn...well, more often than not, he is going to fold for a bet on the turn. That really is the bottom line.
Away now until Sunday night. I will reply to your next retort at that time.
Happy calculating.
Post deleted at author's request.
Well, now that you want to bring in "reading hands" into the picture, try this:
2 people check to you on the turn:
What stands a greater chance:
1. Neither player has 77 beat and will fold to a bet eg. Limper has 64s and Jim has AK: or
2. Limper has a hand that beats 77 (eg. KJ) and will call AND Jim will have AQ (rather than AK) and will call.
Remember both people checked. What do you think is more likely: (a) Limper check-called the flop and checked the turn with a hand like 64s or (b) he did so with a Jack in his hand.
Notice also that the "cost of checking" in situation no. 1 is $40+ while the "cost of betting" in situation no. 2 ranges from a loss of $6 to a gain of $2.33 depending on whether Jim has AQ and will overcall with it.
In other words, the magnitude of the error in checking (situation no. 1) is about 7 times greater than the error in betting (situation no. 2). So, situation no. 2 must occur about 7 times more often than situation no. 1 for checking to be correct.
Now, what do you think is the better play?
Believe me, you don't need to waste any brain cells to figure that one out.
Horrible check.
And just what do you mean that this player will not call on the flop with A2s or K2s and then fold to a bet on the turn? This player plays UTG preflop with Jx suited and then fails to bet or raise on the flop after he makes top pair and then fails to bet again on the turn. You say that a player who plays that poorly can't call the flop with A2 suited?
What color is the sky in your world?
Fish do that hand in and hand out.
You ask:
"We have a guy who limps in an LA 15-30 game, who calls a raise, who calls a bet on the flop from the preflop raiser with a J86 board, a 9 comes on the turn... now what can we put this person on when it's checked to the third person who holds 77? What actions can we expect of him?"
Usually, you can expect him to fold. If not usually, he will at least fold often enough to make a bet profitable in the sense that you avoid the $40+ catastrophe if you check and let him or Jim hit a hand that they would have folded if you bet.
Post deleted at author's request.
"you ignored the point of my post that if you have a guy calling with A2 it's ludicrous to think the same guy will fold K8 on the turn."
The fish who calls with A2 on a flop of J86 figures "ah..it's one bet, the pot has got $145...it only costs me $15 so I'll peel one off to see if I fluke out an Ace"
The fish who calls with A8 on a J86 flop figures "ah...it's one bet, the pot has got $145...I'll peel one off to see if I hit an Ace or 8" (his thinking here is more or less correct although I would often bet this hand on the flop).
He mises the turn. He now figures "well, I missed. It's now $30 to call..too much...I am gone"
Now, I am not saying that the fish will fold every time he has got A8. I am saying that it is a possibility. It is certainly not an unheard of happening.
That said, I too must say that you have not now responded to the main part of my post being the exbortitant cost of checking when both players would have folded to a bet but go on to overtake us because we checked.
In closing:
a. My apologies for the "what color is the sky in your world" comment...totally inappropriate...but to be honest, I have been rather ticked ever since you insinuated that I was a "crazy crap-betting player". I trust that based on my posts alone (as you have never seen me play), you would assess me as a winning player.
b. My thanks to you for putting up a tenacious and well thought out argument. It made me think and it sure was fun.
Yes...on to the next AQ thread...
skp amd Badger,
I am in the middle of computer changeover hell and figuring out the best way to repel an ant invasion of my home all while trying to keep up with stuff.
Little did Jim Brier and I know that this hand (one of three he wrote down even while on "vacation") would provoke such a debate. It is fun to read you guys and the quality of the discourse here is fantabulastic.
Regards.
Rick amd Student
Also don't forget to factor into your analysis that for the bet to be bad, the number of trials where the limper has us beat AND Jim will call with AQ MUST far outnumber the number of trials where we have limper beat or where Jim will fold his AQ even if limper has us beat.
After all, when we are wrong with the bet, the cost is the calculated fraction of the bet.
When we are wrong with a check, the cost can be:
a. The calculated fraction of the bets put in by your opponents when they call and go on to miss on the river.
b. More importantly, the calculated fraction of the pot where one or both players would have folded to a bet but go on to overtake us because we checked.
Well, my departure has been delayed by an hour or so.
So, here's a startling illustration of the cost of Student's check.
Let's take a very realistic scenario. The board is J869.
Student has 77. Both players check to her. Let's give limper 64s and Jim AK.
[Now, I am going to keep the math simple and omit some nitty gritty detail that will not affect the calculations by more than a couple of dollars either way. If it does, I am sure Badger will correct me].
If Student bets, both players fold and she wins the $160 pot.
If Student checks, there are 11 bad river cards for her. 11 out of 44 unseen cards is 25%. Thus, a quarter of the time, she is going to lose the $160 pot that was rightfully hers. So, 25% times $160 is $40.
Every time Student checks in this situation, SHE LOSES FORTY BUCKS.
Add to this the fact that Student will call a bet from limper on the river if he hits a 6 or a 4 (I will give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that she will fold on the river if an Ace or King hits and Jim bets). This will happen 1 in 9 times. The call on the river costs $30. $30 divided by 9 is $3.33.
Thus, Student's check in this situation costs her $43.33 on average.
Compare that to the $6 and change that it will cost the Student if limper has KJ AND Jim calls with AQ. If limper has KJ and Jim folds with AQ, Student's bet in fact has a positive value of $2.33.
Miserable, horrid, catastrophic check.
Badger, since I raised pre-flop, bet the the flop, and now check the turn, I can only have AK or AQ since with a big pair I would obviously keep betting. If I have AK I clearly have to fold when the turn is bet since I have no pair, no draw, and two opponents who are betting and calling. With AQ I have anywhere from 4 to 10 outs depending upon how you evaluate my hand if an Ace or a Queen hits. An Ace gives me top pair/excellent kicker but will one pair win? A Queen gives me top pair/top kicker but it puts four parts to a straight on the table. A Ten is an out but I could split the pot with someone else who had a Queen. If the turn is bet and called by the limper there is $220 in the pot and it costs me $30 to call. I would probably call but it is very marginal.
Bottom line is that the pre-flop raiser (me in this case) will be folding about half the time when the turn is bet by the student and called by the limper and the other half of the time I will have a marginal call. Overall, a turn bet hurts my chances and therefore must help the student.
Post deleted at author's request.
I could be forgetting something that you posted in the earlier thread, but it seems to me like you're giving the limper a heck of a lot of credit. If the limper plays poorly he could have just about anything, and will likely muck on the turn. In fact, I'd say there's probably at least a 20% chance that the field will muck to a turn bet IF the limper is a lousy player.
I say this because the flop is relatively co-ordinated, and IMExperience a lot of bad players will overcall on flops like this with all manners of mid pair, gutshot and pocket pair holdings, then automatically muck on the turn for a bet. Sometimes they go all the way, but they'll usually miss even when they do. And, if they do call, it will really compel Jim to muck, since he now has to be very concerned with splitting the pot should a T drop.
To all regular posters, I am a lurker and a rare poster, but i would just like to thank all the regular posters who have shared their often brilliant and well constructed arguments. I think it goes without saying that quality poker players are often high quality people as well. Special thanks to Rounder, Jim brier, Rick N, Abdul, scott, spitball, Dan Ne..., Ray z, ds, mm, jf, and so so so many others. This discourse is superb and apprecitated as others have stated. Hey gentlemen just so realize that your time and effort is appreciated. god bless
i couldn't help but notice that you forgot to mention the incomprabble alex b.
true, he has posted only 5 posts related to poker. and one was censored, 2 were unintelligible, and the other two were just wrong.
but his work on biosuits and john's biography were groundbreaking.
brilliance is a dime a dozen. laughter is what matters.
in all seriousness, thanks for your kind words. but i think you would get even more out the forum if you were to post more frequently.
scott
Ok, here is my problem, I have faced this twice now at the local casino in Chicago. I am playing 3-6 holdem, and the table is not really loose. There is verry little pre-flop raising. At this game I usually do extremely well. the past two few times that I have gone since reading a few books I have gotten up 100 or more pretty easily. But on the last two occasions a problem has come up where I lose big.
All the sudden the table gets loose as all hell. one guy goes on tilt and two others start capping pots preflop and all the time. How do you adjust your play to this? I am assuming that I need to tighten up and play only premium hands, but what happens when your hand misses on the flop, but you have an overpair to the flop..say you are holding QQ or KK or AA and it flops a 3 6 8 rainbow? Do you call 4 bets there? how bout 2 or 3?
Allot of these guys are calling garbage too. I had pocket 7's and it flopped 433, they capped the betting before it got to me, I folded, and two people chopped th pot with 33 with king kicker, neither had anythign and were raising the raises. How do you play these guys.
It just adds to it that these 3 guys live at this poker room and are friends, this is soemthign that I get nervouse around because you hear how 2 people sitting at a table can crack a game, how about 3 of them?
What are y'alls suggestions?
Kevin
Play 6-12 or 10-20 it's not as bad. really !! The 3-6 games at the casinos are crap shoots, you know that. They chase shi.. to the river all night long. If you gonna play in that games you have to expect it.
Save your cash, build a stake and get in a better game.
Best of it !!
MJ
MJ gives good advice. A game can change personality with just a couple of new players.
If a game gets like you described I just move and find a new one. I have waited out the loose explosion you described and won big. Just a matter of judgement.
Kevin,
Get up that stake and join Rounder and I at Hollywood Friday night for the 5-10 game and you will see the difference. It will be money well spent.
See ya there, ¤¿¤
Mike H.
PS: Ray and George will be there also, should be a good game.
If all 4 of us and Rounder will all be up there, wouldn't we be better off playing out at one of our houses and saving the rake? Just an idea. How much will I need for buy in out of curiosity? I look forward to playing, and hopefully getting some feedback from y'all on my play.
My question with your advice is that these guys that were playing free and loose were the guys waiting for the 6/12 game to open up. Eerie that they would play like that in the 3/6 but not the 6/12.
Talk to y'all later,
Kevin
Kevin,
They figure they can win it back in the 6/12 so why not have a bit of fun.
As for the buyin 200.00 to start with another C note as a backup would be a good start.
See ya there,
about 7:00
Mike H.
Last time there I bought in for a C and cashed out $800 a few hours later. Don't expect that again but it was a nice sat afternoon in Jan.
Seems to me you're in a great game for making money. Play only AA, KK, QQ, AK and never fold unless the board is horrible. You can probably play other hands (JJ and AJs+ come to mind), but it really isn't neccessary. If people are truely willing to cap it all the way to the river with nothing, you will eventually win a gigantic pot. The road will be bumpy, but you will eventually get paid off big.
People are advising you to play in a game with better players because they can't stand being drawn out on, but they seem to forget that the bad play is what makes the game profitable.
Now if you want to actually play a few hands and enjoy the game, move up to the higher limits that other people are recommending. But you will make more money over the long haul with this game.
Played 4-8 holdem last night and the following hand came up. I'm in the big blind with ATh and a late position player raises after 2 players enter the pot. I do not know the raiser and call.
Flop comes T, 6h, 5 rainbow. I bet out with top pair and best kicker two other players call and preflop raiser raises. This is a problem since I'm not sure of the raiser, usually I will reraise with top pair best kicker but I may be beat already. I call although with backdoor flush and figuring a T or an A may win.
The turn is a 8h, I check and it gets checked around and now I know I have made a mistake against a drawing hand, should I have bet?
River is a 4s and now I check and call a bet to someone who held on with 6s7s.
I felt (and know) that I just played the whole hand wrong, I guess this is the problem with AT, it's too easy to be dominated with that hand. Also, the raiser had AKo and I could not believe that he raised when he totally missed the flop, thats another problem, when you don't know the player your up against.
Comments?
I believe you played correctly. Pre-flop, of course you call a raise out of your big blind with Ace-Ten suited. You should assume that the raise is legitimate since two players limped and the late position player raised. By legitimate I mean that his most likely holding is AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK,AQ,AJ suited, and maybe KQ suited. Had no one limped in ahead of him, then his raise could be on worse hands like 99,88,77, AJ offsuit, KQ offsuit, KJ,AT, etc.
On the flop, it is correct to bet your top pair/top kicker and backdoor nut flush draw into 3 opponents. You could easily have the best hand. Now when called in two spots and then raised by the pre-flop raiser you have to worry about AA,KK,QQ,JJ, or TT since with just over cards most players would not raise.
On the turn, you have picked up the nut flush draw in addition to your top pair/top kicker. The problem is that there are three parts to a straight now on the table and you still have 3 opponents. It is quite likely that if you bet here the pot will get raised by the pre-flop raiser who probably has a big over pair. I would check as you did. When it gets checked around, obviously the pre-flop raiser has just over cards and yes with 20-20 hindsight it would have been better to bet the turn but you didn't know this. Furthermore, you have a draw yourself.
At the river, a blank comes, a limper suddenly finds a bet, and I am assuming everyone else (including the pre-flop raiser) folds. I think you have to call for another $8 when there is $72 now in the pot.
You got a bad result but you played correctly. This happens a lot in gambling games.
Jim, I dont think I agree with your analysis completely.
I would prefer to check raise this hand on the flop to isolate the original raiser who I have put on two overcards. I'm willing to risk the free card because my hand is not that strong and ,in most of the games I have played in, a bet here is like going to war with a peashooter.
If my check raise is successful, I can probably knock out the two in between callers and eliminate giving them the opportunity to suck out, like one did here.
I feel like if I have correctly put him on AK, AQ or AJ, he won't reraise me on the flop and he is drawing to 3 outs plus whatever outs you assign to a backdoor straight.
If he does reraise me, I can plan to check and fold on the turn or bet and fold to a reraise (although I would probably do the former).
However, if the turn brings additional outs, like it did here, I may come out betting even after his reraise because so often a bet at this point is so confusing to someone who had previously raised.
Often times, they will lay their hand down right there thinking a have two weak pair or if they dont have anything, which was the case here. Even if they dont lay their hand down, there is a good chance they will just call unless their hand is very good. If I am raised, I'm not happy but I have a lot of outs to make calling his raise proper.
See my response to Mad Hatter's post. Many of the advantages you cite for the check-raise also work by just leading with your top pair/top kicker. Players who would fold rather than call two bets cold will frequently fold when bet into with a pre-flop raiser yet to act. In addition, if the guy has you beat with an over pair he will raise and you will find out for only 2 bets instead of 3.
Except that you don't *really* learn anything from the two bets since it doesn't have to mean overpair. Can, as here, mean unimproved big slick. I also suspect in the typical 3-6 game you will move more people out of the pot facing a double bet as opposed to calling a single bet with the risk of a raise behind them.
If you believe that when a player raises pre-flop and then raises again on the flop that this player could have anything, then your check-raise approach won't tell you anything either. If he loves big slick and is always willing to raise with it regardless then it won't matter what you do on the flop.
Again, if the assumption is that because this is a $3-$6 game and the players are basically unaware then the check-raise approach is totally useless and won't make any difference anyway.
I think you have to go for a check-raise on the flop here, unless the pre-flop raiser is the type who a) will define his hand by his reaction to your bet (i.e., he'll raise with an overpair and just call with overcards or an underpair, and b) will just check if he missed. Since very few players meet both of these conditions, check raising is usually the best play. If he three bets you can make a call and see what the turn brings, then muck if you don't pick up any help.
Virtually every player that I have played against will raise having an over pair in this situation when bet into after raising pre-flop. Most of them will call with just overcards although some might even fold if it is bet with several callers to them. The check-raise approach is risky because some players will be happy to check it down having only overcards when faced with multiple opponents. Furthermore, the check-raise approach frequently results in you spending 3 bets on the flop to find out what you could have found out for only 2 bets if you would just bet your hand.
I think this is a great example of where you need to know your competition and vary your play.
If you always fold to the flop raiser when he bets on the turn, then I gotta believe players will pick up on that and begin to run over you. I also think its risky allowing the other two players in. I wonder how much you lose by betting out, finding out your in the lead only to have people tag along and beat you versus checkraising, being wrong and then folding on the turn.
So you spend three bets to find out your not ahead, sometimes you will suck out and win, other times you will actually be ahead and win the whole pot because you isolated the preflop raiser.
I dont know if this can be easily packaged in a nice mathmatical analysis but it would appear that checkraising might be more advantageous.
Another advantage to check raising is the long term benefit you receive by causing players who would have bet their hand to check and give you a free card because they fear your check raise.
I also have a hard time believing the 6/7 would have called two bets cold in the given example. Obviously, in retrospect, the check raise appears to be the correct play under this scenerio. However, I can certainly see playing the hand multiple ways.
As is so often the case, "it depends" is a very applicable answer.
I don't advocate always folding on the turn when you get raised on the flop by leading. It depends on what the turn card brings and the subsequent action. Like you say, you might suck out on the turn anyway. The point is that whatever decisions you are faced with on the turn when the pre-flop raiser bets the turn will be the same whether you check-raised on the flop or not.
Check-raising has merit and is a valuable tool when used properly but you have to pick your spots.
Who knows what a guy who limps in with Seven-Six suited in early position will do? Why do you assume that a player who is so loose pre-flop will suddenly start playing solid poker on the flop when he catches a piece of the board and is faced with a calling two bets instead of one? Again, if the guy is influenced by having to call one bet versus two bets on the cheap street he might be just as influenced by being bet into with a pre-flop raiser yet to act.
"Played 4-8 holdem last night and the following hand came up. I'm in the big blind with ATh and a late position player raises after 2 players enter the pot. I do not know the raiser and call."
Sound fine.
"Flop comes T, 6h, 5 rainbow. I bet out with top pair and best kicker"
The preflop raiser will almost always automatically bet with this flop. You should consider a check raise.
"two other players call and preflop raiser raises. This is a problem since I'm not sure of the raiser, usually I will reraise with top pair best kicker but I may be beat already."
You may also just want to call and see what the flop brings. If a blank comes you can lead at it. (This way you defend against a possible raise with two overcards by someone hoping to get a free card.
"I call although with backdoor flush and figuring a T or an A may win. The turn is a 8h, I check and it gets checked around and now I know I have made a mistake against a drawing hand, should I have bet?"
If you checked, you should have done so with the intention of check raising once the second heart hit.
"River is a 4s and now I check and call a bet to someone who held on with 6s7s."
A check raise on the flop would have solved this problem.
"I felt (and know) that I just played the whole hand wrong, I guess this is the problem with AT, it's too easy to be dominated with that hand. Also, the raiser had AKo and I could not believe that he raised when he totally missed the flop, thats another problem, when you don't know the player your up against."
Many players will make this play.
"The preflop raiser will almost always automatically bet with this flop."
Not where I come from. Against 3 others who've called my pre-flop raise from the button (including those instances when my raise gained me the button) and checked a trashy-looking flop, I used to automatically bet and regularly got my clock cleaned. Now I'm 90% likely to bet against 3 strong or fatigued players and 40% likely to bet against no-folders.
"Now I'm 90% likely to bet against 3 strong or fatigued players and 40% likely to bet against no-folders."
When I hold two big overcards with no other draws.
And when the pre-flop raiser does bet he will frequently have AA,KK,QQ,JJ, or TT. Now when you check-raise you are doing it with very few outs and helping him thin the field at your expense. "If he will almost automatically bet this flop" you do not get much information when he does bet as to whether or not he has an over pair or just over cards. However, by betting out, when he fails to raise this frequently tells you that he does not have an overpair.
The check-raise approach is centered around the problem of driving out a secondary hand held by one of the other opponents who might go on to beat you if they would fold for two bets but not for one. However, your primary problem is the pre-flop raiser and check-raising frequently backfires especially when you get re-raised by the pre-flop raiser who has a big over pair after the other players fold.
Actually, in this case the checkraise technique probably would have knocked out the 76 that won the pot.
Also, in many less tough games even someone with AA will not pop you back ever after you checkraise, although they will call you down. (I realize that in most of your games, Jim, checkraising is less useful, but many 4-8 players really will just call you down with both AA and AK in this case, which makes it much better).
Jim-
I know your not a fan of check/raising, but when do you check/raise? This seems to be a classic example of check raising to cut down the field and improve your chances. Granted. You may already be beat by the pre-flop raiser. But for crimeny sakes Jim, a pre-flop raise does not always indicate a big pocket pair! There are other hands people will raise pre-flop with!
Do you only use a check raise to get more money in the pot? Or do you acknowledge there are times when it is correct to check raise in order to cut down the field?
I check-raise usually for value because I think I have the best hand. Sometimes I will check-raise on a draw against one or two opponents over which I have good control and I feel there is chance I can win the pot outright. But check-raising a pre-flop raiser with a crowd of players involved is not a good idea.
Think of it this way. When many players limp in, a guy who raises pre-flop will usually have AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK, or AQ. Given that you have an Ace and a Ten and there is a Ten on the board, there are 22 ways he can have a better hand and 24 ways he can have a worse hand. Now if he has a better hand he will be betting 100% of the time. When this happens you are HUGE dog with hardly any chance of winning and you rate to get re-raised and frequently you lose the maximum amount of money when you make crying calls all the way to the turn or river. Now what happens when he has AK or AQ? He may not bet into 3 other opponents 100% of the time but might just check and take a free card a certain percentage of the time. In other words, the fact that he is betting means that he is much more likely to have you beat than otherwise because of conditional probability. If he does bet and you raise you still have the other players to worry about as well as the bettor even though with AK or AQ he has very few outs to beat you. But even when you win because you guessed correctly, you don't rate to win much because the bettor and the other players will be folding on the flop or on the turn usually. The limpers who fold on the flop will have frequently folded for one bet anyway, so making it two bets didn't really help you that much in most cases. By the way, a limper who is astute enough to fold for two bets cold having a tenuous holding will frequently fold if bet into with a pre-flop raiser yet to act.
>> But check-raising a pre-flop raiser with a crowd of players involved is not a good idea. >>
I think this is the best place to do it!! The A 10 is very vulnerable multiway. If the check raise will move some or all of the people in the middle, it's a must play. If you can't move them, then the hand really loses value.
I think leading at the pot is the bad play. Everybody will be calling (the boardisn't scary enough to get someone to fold unless they have no hand and no draw) and the pot is going to be juicy enough after the late position raise that they'll stick to that pot like glue.
But Chris your primary concern should be the pre-flop raiser who is marked with a good hand not the other limpers who could have anything. Check-raising frequently just ensures a good second place finish for yourself but there is no place money in poker. Furthermore, the last thing you want to do with a good but vulnerable holding is to have it checked around thereby handing out free cards to a table full of opponents. If everyone is willing to "stick to the pot like glue" when you lead into them with a pre-flop raiser yet to act then why do you think they will fold when you check-raise?
>>> But Chris your primary concern should be the pre-flop raiser who is marked with a good hand not the other limpers who could have anything. >>>
In low limit hold em I worry quite intently on the guys who could have anything. I would much prefer to be heads up with the pre-flop raiser who I don't think has a hand that beats me. If I thought I was beat, then I'm not playing the hand anyway.
In the situation described, the before the flop raiser was a total unknown. I still would want to checkraise and see how he reacts. If he reraises and convinces me I'm beat, I'm probably done with the hand. But NO MATTER WHAT I want those other players out.
>> Furthermore, the last thing you want to do with a good but vulnerable holding is to have it checked around thereby handing out free cards to a table full of opponents. >>
Absolutely right. But it's extememly rare for a preflop raiser in this kind of game to check when all trash hits. He'll bet any pair and bet overcards as well. If they all check, then the next card off has a high probability of beating me. But that's all the more reason to go for the check raise!! If they stick around, that next card is still coming up.
This is the ideal place to do it. You're in early position and the probable better is all the way around back. If you don't think this is a good time for the checkraise on the flop, then when is a good time? What better time for a checkraise than when you think there's a good chance your hand is best, but it's very vulnerable?
>> If everyone is willing to "stick to the pot like glue" when you lead into them with a pre-flop raiser yet to act then why do you think they will fold when you check-raise? >>
If you bet and then comes call, call, call, raise, then you call, nobody is folding. (I like a reraise better than a call. Heck I like a fold better than a call.) The pot is big enough to hook them all. But the checkraise is a whole different story. Non brain-dead people with gutshots lay them down. People with an overcard and a backdoor flush pitch their hands. Middle or bottom pair with an overcard may call as well as the open-enders. But I want KJ and KQ to fold. And they won't fold without the checkraise. That's just the way these crap shoots go.
If the pre-flop better has me beat, then my judgement was bad and I'll lose money. But I won't be losing money because of the checkraise, but because of the poor judgement.
"By the way, a limper who is astute enough to fold for two bets cold having a tenuous holding will frequently fold if bet into with a pre-flop raiser yet to "
This is a very good point.
I should say that I tend to go for the checkraise in this situation more often than not but you (Jim) do present a evry convincing argument for betting out. It may be that the decision to bet out is better where the limpers are astute enough to fold for 1 bet with a pre-flop raiser foaming at the mouth and waiting to act behind them.
Anyway, good points.
>>> It may be that the decision to bet out is better where the limpers are astute enough to fold for 1 bet with a pre-flop raiser foaming at the mouth and waiting to act behind them. >>>
If you've got those kind of people in between you and the raiser, then your game sure is no ordinary 4-8 game. More typical is a thought process like "HE bet?? I'm confused so I'll call."
But even if you have thinking opponents, the check raise still does the same thing. Yes, it will perhaps cost you one extra bet if you are reraised and you call. But that extra bet has given me some info as well as to how I should proceed. I don't see it as a wasted bet.
If I flop a set, I like to bet here because they will all thoughtlessly call and then when the raise at the back comes, they'll keep calling. The lead bet here is going to build a pot. If that's your intention, then lead away. With A 10, I don't want to build a pot. I want it heads up and then I'll trust my judgement as to whether or not I have the best hand.
Just because I've check-raised here doesn't mean I'm going to the river. I may not (though probably will against an unknown opponent) even see the turn. But it's going to depend on the pre-flop bettor's reaction to the checkraise, what comes on the turn and how he reacts to that. I'll be watching HIM all the way here and the fewer oppenents hence less distractions, the better for me.
I would go for a check-raise here at least 80% of the time.
I don't follow your logic here at all. You say that with many limpers the late-position raiser can only have big cards or big pairs? This is contrary to S&M advice, for one thing. With many callers, a late position raiser could have a small pair, a hand like QJs, 89s, whatever. Lots of hands.
Anyway, even if it's even money that he has an overpair (and I think that's way off - I would guess that the chance you're up against an overpair here is less than 25%), a check-raise is still a good play. If there is some chance that you have the best hand in a pot this large, thinning the field is very important.
I have an article in the new issue of Poker Digest on multi-way pots. I'm curious if you've read it, and if so if it made you think twice about the importance of thinning the field.
My experience, for what it's worth, is that most people do not raise in late position with all the hands recommended by S & M. They tend to limit raises to JJ or better, AK, AQ. Some will add AJ. Much depends too on how often it gets checked around. Against S & M schooled pre-flop raisers who automatically bet the flop, then of course the check/raise should be employed more often in this situation.
Well, Dan maybe in low limit games guys raise with anything from late position, I don't know. In most of the games I play in when someone raises after several players limp in they are marked with a good hand just as if they raised from early position. The vast majority of players do not raise according to 2+2 standards in these situations. If they have a small pair or a suited connector they are very happy to just limp in behind everyone else and take a flop cheaply. Basically what you are saying is that one should simply ignore the significance of a pre-flop raiser and not adjust your play at all. Furthermore, if the guy has the kind of hand you seem to think he has rather than a premium hand, what makes you think he will bet the flop and not just check it down? I would argue that if he will raise on anything the likelihood of him betting the flop goes down dramatically unless the flop has hit him somehow. In Mason's post when he makes the statement that the pre-flop raiser will bet automatically when checked to he is assuming that the guy has a legitimate raising hand not a pair of Sevens for instance and therefore is not necessarily adhering to S&M advice.
"Thinning the field" is a good idea when you have a strong reason to think you have the best hand not when there is a very real possibility that you have the second best hand with the worst position.
Well Jim, there are now 9.5 small bets in this pot. If you are behind, you have anywhere from 2 to 5 outs. If you're ahead, the raiser has anywhere from 2 to 6 outs. So, the key EV deciding factor in this hand is whether or not the raiser has a big pair.
Where we really differ here is in your assessment of what the raiser can have. This is the situation: It's a 4-8 game, there are only two limpers, and this guy is on the button. In my neck of the woods, an 'average' 4-8 player here would raise with any two suited cards above a ten, any pair above 88, and any offsuit cards above a ten (i.e. AJ, KQ, etc). Plus, there is a smaller probability of other oddball hands like Axs, 55, etc. If this is correct, then the number of non-pairing hands he could have is much higher than the number of pairs ten or above he can have. I'm at work, so I don't have time to work out the combinations.
Now, given that the blind and two limpers check to him, which of these hands would he bet on a ten-high flop with no straight and no flush? Again, in my neck of the woods he would bet with any pair, and any of the other hands maybe 75% of the time.
This means that it's very likely that you're ahead. And if you are, a check-raise is very important both to protect your hand from the other two limpers, and to punish the button for betting a hand with a thin draw.
BTW, when I make plays like this they rarely cost me any more money than playing passively, because the show of agression on early rounds can often save you a bet on the river, or allow you to release the hand on the turn if the player plays back at you. Checking and calling has the characteristics of often winning you the smallest possible pot when you're ahead, giving you the least amount of protection when you're ahead, AND costing you just as much or even more if you're behind. That's why weak-tight is a bad way to play poker.
I will concede one thing - checking and calling may be the better play if you are so sure that the player has a better hand that you're willing to check and fold on the turn. Against a typical 4-8 player betting the button I could never do that with top pair/best kicker, but maybe you're better at reading players than I am.
Here's a typical scenario of how a weak-tight player loses a pot with AT on a ten-high flop - he checks the flop, and the pre-flop raiser bets. He calls, and now an overcard like a Q lands. The pre-flop raiser has AK, but now you're scared of a queen, so you check again. He bets again, and you fold your hand. I can't count how many pots I win this way when I'm the one with AK.
If I'm playing this hand, I'd check-raise the flop. If I'm re-raised and the player is tight, I'd check/fold the turn unless I had the odds to draw, OR an ace or a king lands. If a King lands, I'll bet into him again, since his most likely holding is QQ,JJ, or AT, which he may now release. If he calls my turn bet, I can check the river. It's a rare opponent who would bet one pair here or try to steal after I've shown so much agression, so I'll get a free showdown or I can fold if he bets, because that signifies a set, straight, or two pair.
Of course, if the player is a calling station, forget it. Check-raise the flop to drop the limpers, get heads-up, and then either bet the turn and check the river, or check and call the rest of the way.
If I absolutely knew the pre-flop raiser would bet this flop, I would check-raise 100% of the time. Given the uncertainty of a bet, you can make a case for simply betting out, not because you're worried that you're behind but because you can't afford to give a free card in this situation. If I did bet and he raised, I'd strongly consider 3-betting, if the limpers are the kinds of players who will fold a hand for two more bets after putting one in. And that describes the majority of poker players, even in the low-limit games.
Dan I now agree with you that if the guy will raise on all the hands you think he might have AND he will bet almost all the time even when he has a weak hand he shouldn't really be raising with pre-flop then the check-raise has merit. I guess I am playing in the wrong games because when I play $15-$30, $20-$40, and $30-$60 at the Bellagio and the Mirage in Las Vegas my opponents don't play this way. Nor did they play this way when I played $20-$40 on the Gulf Coast for two years before moving to Vegas. I am not familiar with these kinds of games.
I am not advocating checking and calling. I am advocating betting and if raised then I call. I think this is the preferred approach to check-raising in the games I play in. What started this firestorm was Mason Malmuth's comment about how check-raising might have folded the guy who eventually won the pot but this 20-20 hindsight. Mason plays in the same games I play in and I don't believe the majority of his opponents raise pre-flop after several limpers come in with tenuous holdings like suited connectors and medium pocket pairs.
I agree. When a guy raises in a protected pot pre-flop, he usually has a big hand.
Although I have disagreed with many of your arguments for not check/raising in the past, you make excellent points here.
Mainly, if the pre-flop raiser does in fact have just overcards, it is much less likely he will bet into a large field and you lose the chance to get money in the pot with the best hand. However, if he does bet you are probably beat, most likely by an overpair or set.
But there are still some counter points...
1). I think it is still very likely you have the best hand and should play it as such. It is wrong to irrationally fear a big pair from the button. Many players will raise a multi-way pot from late position with a wide variety of hands like AXs, mid-suited connectors and mid to low pairs. Although, if this is the case, he might not bet the flop. This robs you the opportunity to check/raise. Which is why I am starting to see your points. Albeit for different reasons.
2). Even if he does have a big pair, you might still be better off check/raising since narrowing the field does improve your chances somewhat even if you are up against JJ,QQ,KK.
3). It is unlikely that players in low-limit games are thinking about or even care what the chances are of the button raising.
Bottom line: You have given me some additional things to think about next time I'm in this situation. Thanks for your post Jim.
so what do you do if the turn had been the 8 of spades and the raiser bets again?
It would depend on who else was in the pot and how the action went. In general if I lead on the flop with top pair/top kicker, get called, and then raised by the pre-flop raiser, I will call and take off a card. If the turn card were the 8s which is a blank for me, then I will check the turn. Assuming others check and now the pre-flop raiser bets again on the expensive street I will usually have to fold here since I am usually playing with no more than 5 outs and sometimes less plus there are other players in the hand. Keep in mind if the raiser does not have an over pair it is pretty difficult for him to keep betting over cards like this when faced with multiple opponents.
Virtually all small limit players will three bet with an overpair and just call with overcards if you check-raise, so you can find out where you're at for the (relatively) small price of 3sb's. And that's a worst case scenerio- often you'll have the best hand, AND have the pre-flop raiser dominated (which happened here), in which case you're forcing draws to come for two sb's and forcing the pre-flop raiser to call one more sb with a hand that has three outs.
But won't these same players raise your bet if you lead having an over pair and just call with over cards? If that is so, then it only costs you 2 bets to find out that you are beat instead of 3.
That's a good point. But the 'free card' play is so standard now that often they raise, which puts you in a bit of a bind. And, by check-raising you stand a better chance of thinning them out behind you.
As always, I guess, 'it depends'. In my experience, I like to check raise here since the pre-flop raiser will almost always define his hand by his reaction to my raise, and I get to thin things out. Altough I readily concede that there are some players who will define their hand based on their reaction to your lead bet.
"However, by betting out, when he fails to raise this frequently tells you that he does not have an overpair."
Exactly. So by betting the top pair/ace kicker when first to act with a button raiser you get this benefit, squeeze the other limpers, and prevent a free look at the turn in case it otherwise would have been checked around.
You are almost certainly an exception. And if you're not, there's probably an easier game just down the street.
Had you known that the pre-flop raiser would only raise in that situation with either AK, AQ or JJ, TT, QQ, KK, AA, then the call makes no sense as you're a big dog pre-flop to all of these hands and there are only 2 limpers so you can't justify a flush hunt. However, if the pre-flop raiser would raise with any two high cards and even say 77 or 98suited in that position, you have a marginal call since your AT is suited.
Betting the flop was fine. Once raised, a reraise backfires often enough, but it can provide more information that just calling (there is no way to tell, after just calling, whether the raise was representing JJ or better or a drawing hand or two overcards). On the turn, after you pick up the nutflush draw, your cogent options are: 1) bet and call if raised, 2) check and call if bet, 3) check and raise if bet. Not an easy decision because you can't know for sure if you're behind or not. Betting out may put the squeeze on the limpers and you want them to contribute to the pot if you ARE chasing. Checking and raising is definitely worth considering, but checking and intending to call is hardly ghastly. As it was, even though you were ahead, you had the worst position and had more ways to benefit from the free card than AK (2 outs) or 67s. The 4 on the river called for caution, so the check and call was logical.
I think this is an excellent example of how incredibly important position is when you play these kinds of hands.
If you were on the button with this hand, and the preflop raiser with AK acted before you, you could have reraised him. This would tell you where he is. If he called, and it's checked around to you on the turn, you can bet out again knowing that he is probably on overcards. Etc etc.
I don't blame him for the raise. His choice is either to raise or fold. He has to put the heat on to make it more likely that the player between you will fold. This will greatly increase his chances of winning the pot if he spikes his A or K on the river.
Of course, a fold would not have been out of the question either.
-SmoothB-
Just one or two things, and I'll try to write more later.
a)Harris suggested folding preflop. This is insane, I think one could call in the BB w/any suited A or even less. Unless someone else will reraise (which is often unlikely) you expect something of the order of 7-1 on your call.
b)SmoothB suggests folding on the flop, even if you knew he had an overpair folding here makes no sense as you are getting 13-1 on your call and have 5 cards which will improve you to 2pair/trips, and 10 which will pick up the flush draw... A fold here is out of the question!
When I play HE I seem to either play too aggressively or too timid (yes, that's a weird combination). Here is a hand I played in a loose-aggressive low-limit game (i.e., some are very loose, some are very aggressive, some both). My play is a bit more understandable if you know that in the hand just before this one there was a lot of post-flop raising, with in the end a measly pair of 7's winning. Now I think my only correct play was on the flop, and maybe on the turn.
I have AJ one off the button. Two limp in (which makes me think they don't have excellent hands), I raise. Only the limpers call.
Flop comes T84 rainbow. Limper #1 bets, #2 folds, I raise. #1 reraises! Should I fold here? Anyway, I call.
Turn is a J.
#1 bets, I raise (am I going too far?), #1 reraises. I think I should have folded now, but instead I called again.
River is blank. #1 bets, I call (wrong?), and #1 wins with 2 pair.
Yes, you played too aggresively on this hand. Your raise one off the button with AJ is not too bad, but it is marginal. On the flop when you missed entirely your raise is horrible, then when faced with a re-raise your call is bad since you can hit your card and still have it be no good (as you saw). You sucked yourself in too far to let go on the river and you pay off.
One of the things that causes me to lose a lot of chips is to let the play of a preceding hand affect my play of a current hand. Try not to let that happen to you. Too many people pursue draws when they miss and then try to bet their way to victory merely because they try to represent.
By the way, T8 is not a good hand to call raises with, of course, but the flop hit them hard.
Thx for your reply. I went way too far...
I didn't mention #1's winning hand explicitly, but to my total amazement he actually held 84, not the T8!
84! AND CALLING RAISES? Where was this game?:)
Some will disagree but I I am on a hand like AJ and I don't hit the flop I am out of there with any action in the position you were in. I think it is a clear fold.
While it is permissable to over play some of your hands against idiots who play any two cards, there is a balance required. Pre-flop, your raise with AJ offsuit against two limpers is normally not good poker. However, if this is a special case because you are playing against a couple of real loose geese then raising is probably warranted here.
However, once the flop comes, raising is a very bad idea. The limper is almost certainly betting some piece of the flop especially since he is leading into you as the pre-flop raiser. The loose goose is not folding any pair so your raise will not allow you to win the pot outright. This means you are playing 6 outs at the very best and there will be times when you will be playing with hardly any outs. I think you have a clear fold on the flop. If you want to maintain some kind of image and don't want the "weak-tight" label stamped on your forehead then go ahead and call. In the actual hand, after being re-raised, your call was pure charity.
On the turn, you are continuing to pay out unnecessarily. What does it take to get you to lay a hand down?
Yeah, you played this wrong. Muck on the flop. You missed, the pot is small, and hitting your hand could get you in trouble.
Yeah...but do you fold after the first bet already, or only after the reraise?
I fold after the first bet, since anytime someone leads into a pre-flop raiser they almost always have top pair or better. This puts you in a bit of a jam, since the J or A may not be any good.
I have AJ one off the button. Two limp in (which makes me think they don't have excellent hands), I raise. Only the limpers call.
Good move, I'd do the same thing.
Flop comes T84 rainbow. Limper #1 bets, #2 folds, I raise. #1 reraises! Should I fold here? Anyway, I call.
Yes, the 3 bet poses a problem for you. You know he has a Ten or better hand. The question is how many "outs" do you have? The answer is anywhere between 0-6. You are taking the worst of it here.
Turn is a J.
#1 bets, I raise (am I going too far?), #1 reraises. I think I should have folded now, but instead I called again.
Same as the flop, if you beat you are beat, fold.
River is blank. #1 bets, I call (wrong?), and #1 wins with 2 pair.
#1 has shown tremendous strength, your call is nothing more than a crying call.
$3-$6 game, very loose with 5 or 6 seeing every flop. I have Ac Qc in middle position. UTG bets, I raise, 4 more callers for 12 bets in the middle.
Flop comes 8c 7c 2c. I check to slowplay, it gets checked to the button who bets, 2 call, I call.
Turn is a K (I forget the suit, not clubs). UTG bets, I raise, button calls, UTG calls.
River is 7d. UTG bets, I raise, button re-raises (uh-oh), UTG folds, I call.
Button shows pocket 8's for 8's full.
I know in loose, low-limit games you should rarely slow play, but at the time the flop didn't look THAT threatening to me. I think perhaps I ought have check-raised the flop instead of the check-call slowplay, or should I have bet out?
Please point out any and all Rookie mistakes.
no mistakes, the set would never fold. You played ok.
In low limit games you should almost always play in a straight forward nondeceptive manner. The pots are relatively large, and deception against typical opponents is not profitable.
You should BET the flop, BET the turn, and BET the river. And RAISE, RAISE, RAISE whenever possible.
I recommend Lee Jone's book. It will help you.
I have the Lee Jones book. I just tried to milk a bit more when I shouldn't have. Lesson learned.
Nothing you did would have made a difference. You still would have lost to the 8's full. He's not going to fold to any number of raises. I think you played it right. The set of eights was the one that shouldn't have been slowplaying. Anytime a flop is all of one suit, any set is extremely vulnerable. He should have been raising to knock out any single high clubs.
Your slowplay was correct, his slowplay was dead wrong.
His slowplay was absolutely NOT correct! Especially in a 3-6 game.
It seems to me that at the 3-6 level, the only hands that will draw out on you while your holding the nut flush are going to call you no matter how many raises that you put in on the flop. Do you disagree with this?? The hands that can turn or river a full house are either two pair or a set, excluding runner, runner. These hands aren't going anywhere. I would think you would want to keep in the single King of clubs or top pair so that you could get more money out of your hand, which is a favorite even against a set.
There is no harm in slow-playing this hand. Are you saying that the results would have been different if he raised on the flop? The only thing that would have been different is that he would have lost more money.
"It seems to me that at the 3-6 level, the only hands that will draw out on you while your holding the nut flush are going to call you no matter how many raises that you put in on the flop. Do you disagree with this??
No. But the point isn't to get them to drop out. It's to get as much money into the pot as possible.
"There is no harm in slow-playing this hand. Are you saying that the results would have been different if he raised on the flop? "
No. The results are the same regardless of how he plays it. But the money he makes had the board not paired may have been quite different.
I have just read the other posts and I seem to be in the minority here. With the majority of players acting after you, I still like betting out though.
I am not a fan of slowplaying but your situation is a notable exception. You have the nuts on the flop. You want to encourage players with a singleton Club to come in and take off cards when they are drawing dead. You played correctly and there are times when you are destined to lose a lot of money regardless of how you play it.
The guy with the set played poorly. He should play his set fast especially when the board flops all of one suit.
Jim,
I think slow-playing was correct, but should I have check-raised the flop instead of check-calling? In hindsight I think so. If he would have re-raised, I would have capped. Or just maybe he would have folded and I could have taken a decent pot, instead of trying to be so greedy.
Anyway, let me know where to send the $2 for my bad-beat story. ;)
No Rookie you don't want to "let the cat out of the bag" quite yet. I would just smooth call to keep the other flush draws around and then pull the trigger on one of the expensive streets depending upon what shows up on the turn and the river.
He's 3.5:1 to make a full house or quads by the river. He wouldn't, and shouldn't fold to a raise.
Keyser
If this is a 3-6 game with lots of bad players, they're coming anyway with whatever weird club draws they may hold. And, they're coming with gutshots (particularly if those gutshots hold an overcard club, e.g. Jc Th, Js Tc and probably stuff like Tc 6s). You might as well make 'em pay, since they're not going anywhere for one bet. Further, if they're bad but don't know it, they'll 'read' your hand for a Slick in hearts and start betting and raising with all kinds of crap-- mid pair, bottom pair, 83 of spades, etc. etc. As you keep raising they'll finally 'put you on' an offsuit slick with a big club. Of course, when you flip your hand over on the river, they'll all shake their heads and berate you for 'playing the nuts too fast', but by then you're dragging a 15 bb. pot.
I never slow play against bad players. Never. And I REALLY NEVER slow play against bad players who don't know they're bad. If you just bet out on the flop here, the last hand they're going to put you on is the one you're holding. To make matters better(better, that is, for you), this is one of those flops with two middle cards, which means EVERYONE has a piece. They've either got gutters, pairs or overcards, and they're going to play no matter what. So, charge 'em for the priveledge.
That said, our hero should have just made a crying call on the river. Another one of Guy Downs' golden rules is this: "When a bad player leads into or raises you AFTER you made the last bet/ raise on the previous round of betting, you are ALWAYS BEATEN." This rule, by my estimate, is right on at LEAST 95% of the time, and maybe more. In fact, if I could give an aspiring player just one nugget of wisdom, this would be it.
I'm surprised I am in the minority on this. The poster flops the nuts in a very loose game with many players yet to act and everyone agrees he gets the most money in the pot by checking this hand?
Loose players will likely draw to queen high (and worse) flushes, top pair/no kicker, middle pairs, etc. with this board. And when the button raises and the poster re-raises, they are likely to call here and again on the turn as well. Not to mention if you really get lucky and someone else flopped a flush with you.
I bet this hand in this game EVERY time!
This thread is really lame. The poster played it right and got rivered. The button played it right, what's he supposed to do, 3 bet the turn? Fold? BTW, I hardly consider what the poster did as "slow playing".
I think the button should 3 bet the turn since he has two or three(?) opponents with 10 redraws to beat a flush and a flush may not be out there 100% of the time.
In HPFAP I was studing Appendix A : Probability chart on page 309. At the bottom of the page four common hands are listed, 1. Straight flush draw, 2. Flush draw, 3. Straight draw, and 4. Two pair or gut-shot draw. The numbers co-incide to these hands on the chart. My question is the number of outs they figure for some of these hands. The straight flush draw is listed as having 9 outs for 35%. But I figure it for 17 outs. The flush draw is listed as having 8 outs for 31.5%. But I figure it for 9 outs. The straight draw is listed as having 15 outs for 54.1%. But I figure it for 8 outs. The two pair or gut-shot draw is listed as having 4 outs for 16.5% and I agree. I am either reading the chart wrong, or it could be a type-o. Or I I need help in figuring out my outs. Could someone explain this chart to me?
Thanks, Ray.
There is a misprint here. It will be corrected in our next printing.
didn't you notice a mistake in ray's numbers?
here's a hint: how many outs does a straight flush have?
scott
Straight flush draw is also a flush and straight last time I looked.
The important thing Ray is that the chart itself is correct in that it gives the correct winning percentages with two cards to come versus the number of outs. What is incorrect are the first three footnotes. Footnote #1 should be "flush draw" instead of "straight flush draw". Footnote #2 should be "straight draw" instead of "flush draw". Footnote #3 should be "straight flush draw" instead of "straight draw". Footnote #4 is correct as shown.
Thanks Jim, I changed the footnotes in my book.
Scott after a little more thought I now realize that a straight flush draw has only 15 outs due to the two flush cards giving you the straight flush. But I am glade to see someone is always ready to slam you when you make a mistake.
Actually I think he was thinking the sf draw was a 2 outter.
nope. ray got it right.
and if you think ray's original numbers are correct, then i suggest you take the 5,6,7 and 8 of spades out of a deck of cards. then go through the deck taking out all the cards that make at least a straight. count how many cards you take out.
scott
Not interestd - I got it right - the writing was not real clear.
I was sitting 3/6 at empress Joliet, and was doing ok, had two guys that have their own bed in the poker room being that I have never gone up there and not seen them there, in thie game with me. The flop comes down 35djc. And they cap the pot, and move on to the turn that comes out with the 7d, and the fun begins, trash talk all the way from the guy on the end of the table about spanking the other guy and garbage like that, they both cap the pot and the river comes up blank. I am sure most of y'all know what happens, the trash talker turned the Ace high flush, while the other guy had the str8 flush. The guy on the end threw his cards across the table and went on a 10 minute bitching spree that would have embaressed a table of sailors till the dealer finally told him to give it a rest.
Fortunate for the rest of us he went on tilt and dropped 500 more in the next several hours.
Kevin
It's not easy to lose 500$ in one night playing 3-6, but I have seen it done. The worst beating I ever saw was a guy who lost 12 grand playing 10-20 over the course of about 20 hrs.
Twelve grand in $10-$20 after 20 hours? Did you get this guy's name and phone number and put him on your Christmas list?
Hell I would invite that guy to any and all game, would pick him up, drop him off, and probobly have neough of his money to buy him dinner afterwards.
It was a spectacular display. The guys name was Thomas-- he was a 2-5 player who was fortunate enough to have parents who loved him enough to put a ton of money in a trust for him. He was on the book for eight of it (bought four dimes worth of chips in cash), and the gamerunner was VERY concerned that this guy was going to split and never be heard from again. But, he just pulled out check book, wrote a check for eight dimes, and disappeared. Nobody's heard from him since.
The most peculiar thing about the story is that the check cleared. None of us could believe it.
I wouldn't have thought it possible. Heck, it isn't easy to do in a game several times that size.
I have two things to add:
1. I've made two straight flushes in my short hold'em career, and both times I busted someone who must've held what they thought was the "nut flush". You should see the puzzled looks on their faces when you just keep re-raising them on the end. And they always check their hole cards to make sure they've got the Ace.
2. The first time I played in a public cardroom, I lost about $600-700 in a 3-6 hold'em game. And I would've lost more, too. But then I put in about 8 or 9 raises on the end with the second-nut flush. The woman with the nuts was quite insulted at this act of disrespect and started screaming at me. "WHAT DO YOU THINK I HAVE??? DO YOU THINK I'M STUPID???" Since I already felt foolish for losing so much on one hand, I decided I didn't need to be yelled at, too. I quit. Good thing, too. I may have gone on to set the record for biggest loss in a 3-6 game (if I don't already own the record).
Bobby Choquette
Las Vegas
I play in a regular game w/ a mixed crowd, but lately, one player seems to be getting my money on a regular basis. He's an old guy who never raises w/ out a monster, but will call down hands w/ out raising w/ as good as top pair top two pair and down to no pair 1 over card. I know the response will be "HOW can you lose to him?" But my main problem is that I'm an aggressive player and it seems like he's giving me enough rope to hang myself. Example, he limps UTG I raise in button A8s blinds fold. flop comes 8 3 2 4 k and I bet it down to the river and check on teh end. He turns over pocket nines. I've run AK vs his AA and QJ vs his QQ when AKK and QJ hit the board and that might be why I'm thinking I'm playing so poorly against him. I think I should tighten up vs him, but then I see him show down a pocket pair that's 4th high pair as well as A6 nothing calling all the way down to the river in other hands. He's got me all mixed up. I'd like to think it's just the cards, but damn it's been a tough two weeks(down around 4500 in 10-20 and 15-30).
Sounds like your typical 2-4 player to me.
Obviously, don't try to bluff him. Sit on his left so you can raise and have him all to yourself. Take lots of free cards - you should bet or raise the flop almost everytime when heads up against him.
Besides that, don't be afraid to be second pair (or worse) for value, but accept that you won't know you're donating to him until the river, which you should still bet for value.
And respect his raises.
Is he always losing with junk against the same player or players ? Do you think he could be playing on a common bankroll, calling down his partner with crap but only playing good hands against you ? This is just a thought that came to mind, he seems so rockish against you but a loose calling station against others. This type play would certainly mess with my head. They always say beware of home games, or maybe he's just lucky against you, I've seen that many times where 1 player seems unbeatable against you but then gives your chips to everyone else. Maybe you shouldn't try to isolate him for a while. Maybe you are over aggresive and he plays off of that. You must admit A8s isn't a great steal hand against an UTG unless he has no clue. Good Luck.
Just curious, is this at Turning Stone?
As for advice, keep betting you good hands and don't bluff. Also avoid isolating him preflop, like that A8s play you mention.
That's a hell of a lot of money to be down after two weeks, particularly if you're playing quite a bit of the 10-20. Unless this guy's gotten ALL of it there may be other leaks somewhere in your game.
As far as this kind of player goes-- I'd pay attention to whether or not he just plays like this heads up, or if he plays this way in multi-way pots as well. Some guys only play like this heads-up, figuring they 'have to keep you honest', but tighten up in multi-way pots, figuring that there are other sheriffs at the table.
Aside from that, I don't worry about these kinds of players too often. The way you get in trouble with these types is by pushing unimproved slicks and draws, and getting scared when you do flop a hand (like, for example, checking on the river when you flop top pair top kicker against a player who will call with almost anything). Bet 'em when you have 'em, and take the free cards when you don't. You'd be amazed how often you'll win with an unimproved KQ after checking the turn and the river.
This guy might be a great reader of people and you may be giving off tells check your self.
The guy might be a really good player and you might be under estimating him. Are you confusing aggression with loose/maniac play. He seems to be playing you like I would probably play a maniac.
If I were you I'd just avoid this guy or tighten up.
Hey Rounder,
I'd just like to say it was a pleasure playing with you in Reading, and thankyou for introducing me to this site.
I hope we can welcome you back to England soon, and perhaps we will be able to tempt into our little cash pot-limit 6 card hilo omaha game next time you visit :P
Anyways.... Im glad you got home safely..... without too much of my money in your pocket..... and look forward to future discussions on this message board.
Kind regards,
Keith
Keith,
I'd have liked to play in the PL HE games but since you choose to start the tournaments at the ungodley hour of 9pm it is just to late for a old guy like me to drive 40 miles to my hotel (on the wrong side). :)
I'll be back. I am real interested in the big one on The Isle of Man - and the other tournaments look real juicy in Europe.
You'll be seeing me back real soon.
MIKE
I posted a UK trip report and some hands on the tournament BB.
Greetings,
here are some hands where I am still not sure I took the right course of action. All comments appreciated.
1)10/20 "typical"
4 limp and I call on the button w/10h 8h. Blind call.
The flop comes 9h 8c 5h. All check to me I bet, 3 call and player directly to my right (who was stuck to the gills and complaining to no end about it), now raises. I thought to keep the most people in for my draw so I elected to just call (I think this is a mistake, as I strongly suspected he was on a flush draw which makes it very unlikely to come and if I reraise It will pbly become heads up...and I so I pbly have a better hand than him), i call and all call...
The turn is 2s. All check to palyer to my right who bets I call and 2 call behind me.
The river is 7h. A card I was very leary of. ALl check to player on my right who confidently bets, I reluctantly call, player in 1st positioin checkraises! Other folds and the player to my right goes all in for 10. I call (is a raise in order, as it very unlikely they BOTH have me beat but the 1st player was new and i thought it was unlikely hed reraise w/ o decent flush). Well the player to my left had Ah x h and the first player had a 6 for straight!
2)10/20 game w/one maniac 3 to my left and the game is on tilt.
In 4th position I raise w/ AsJs, 4 cold call (maniac included) as does the big blind. Flop comes J 8 4 rainbow w/one spade. BB checks I bet and all call.
Turn is another small spade. Check I bet 2 call BB checkraises. Now this player could easily do this w/spades as I suspect. I could just call but I doubt the flush is now coming and would like to get rid the field and reraise. All fold, to BB who just calls.
River is a small spade, he bets I raise he calls and he shows a small flush.
Is the reraise on turn correct or should I let more people in w/the nut draw? The 1) hand was in my mind even though it was a few weeks before and i was annoyed w/myslef for not reraising teh flop. Considering the temperment of the table I thought I could even get some cold callers even though I was getting a bit of respect from them...
3) Same 10/20 tilt table (this time I have fallen prey to tilt).
3 limp maniace raises button cold calls I decide to call w/ KhJc as it seems they are raising every hand. (A huge error I should fold even if the maniac is raising K 3 s, JTo and the like, and if I will play I should reraise if there is any chance I can thin the field otherwise fold). All call behind me.
The flop comes
Ah Jh 8h. I bet 3 call button raises, I call (and immediate get annoyed w/myself) as do the others.
Turn is 7c. I check (?) all check to button who bets, I mistakely raise all fold and he just calls. (Now it looks as if I have the flush but, there is no way the button will fold and this was the main idea w/the play).
The river blanked off, I bet he calls and lose to a small flush... (Horrible!)
I think my judgemtn was way off toward the end of the night as I hadn't played at tilted talbe in a long time and never at 10/20. I realize you need hand that play well in multiway pots even though your implied odds aren't as good if the preflop action is 3 bet or capped w/ 5 or more coming. And it is very hard to thin the field...
SOrry if I wrote too much. All comments appreciated, as are comments on how to play w/maniacs or tilted tables.
On the first hand when six of you take the flop, your bet after being checked to on the button having both a pair and a flush draw is okay. If it were just a non-nut flush draw I don't believe I would bet into 5 opponents but I think having a pair gives you some additional outs plus you may have the best hand. When check-raised by the guy to your right, I think re-raising is a bad idea. You almost certainly don't have the best hand, your draw is not to the nuts, you will not drive out anyone on a better draw than you, and you could get raised again. The rest of your plays were fine although when check-raised at the river by a player in first position, you have to realize that you are almost certainly beat but I think I would call because of the pot size.
On the second hand, when check-raised on the expensive street I don't like your re-raise. I believe you need a better hand for this move. Agreed you have top pair/top kicker with the nut flush draw but you could easily be up against at least two pair and possibly a set which gives the check-raiser the best hand and the best draw. Only a certified maniac would check-raise here on just a draw and even then these guys will check-raise their powerhouses as well since they get good cards just like the rest of us. Furthermore as you state why drive out other players at this point given your nut draw?
On the third hand, it was bad poker for you to be cold-calling raises with King-Jack offsuit against a large field regardless of what the maniac may or may not be raising with unless you were in the big blind. You should not even consider re-raising. You need to focus on the weakness of your own hand under these circumstances not on what one player may or may not have. If this were a steal situation or a shorthanded game than that would be different. On the flop, your bet is fine having both the nut flush draw and a pair but when raised I would just call like you did. With the Ace over card it is too easy for you to have the worst hand and I don't believe you want to necessarily drive out the other players anyway. Furthermore, it could get raised again by the original bettor. On the turn, of course you check when a blank comes. I don't like your raise unless you have some reason to believe everyone will fold which is very unlikely. I will concede that with you having the "King of Trump" so to speak a re-raise is very unlikely. When a blank comes, all you can hope for is a cheap showdown but one could argue (unconvincely in my opinion) that betting is your only chance of winning. I think you lost too much money on this hand.
Jim,
On the first hand I still think reraising on the first hand is correct, the player on my right was an OK player so we can assume his thinking makes sense and he wouldn't checkraise w/o anything other than a draw. If its a straight draw Im a favorite, if its a flush draw that bad in that he pbly has a bigger one than me, and it s good in that it is less likely the flush will show up.
Another point, you wouldn't bet say 9 h 5 h 2c flop w/ Th 8h on the button? I dont think I need a pair to bet here.
In the second hand part of the reason I thought to reraise is bc I seriously thought he was on a draw, and since his draw is semi dead (and thus unlikely to show up), I d rather win the pot now. Maybe Ive been quick to put peo[ple on draws these days but if I'm right I don't think reraising is that bad. Wouldn't I want to increase my chance of winning the pot since it is comparatively big?
As for the 3rd, I was kind of on tilt. I dont' usually play KJo. I was getting annoyed w/the seemingly unjustified raising, and pbly took unappropriate action. Seems one has to wait even longer in this type of game than usual and I was doing the opposite.
In a average low-limit game, where you have no information on the players other than the fact that some are much looser than others (pre-flop and after) how should go about calling one raise when the small blind is 1/2 the big blind?
For example are hand like J8s playable with 4 limpers before the raise?
How should you adjust your odds e.t.c
Sorry if this isn't very clear but im not sure really where you stand facing a raise that you cant have a good idea of what the opponent might call with. I tend to think that marginal hands should be folded as you still face reraises and will be at a positional disadvantage for the rest of the hand. With this in consideration letting $1 go in a 2-4 game isn't to bad
Here is my thinking on this subject. I know I am the lone ranger on this but it works for me.
I don't play in a hand for 1/2 a bet that I won't play for a full bet. As far as I'm concerned the 1/2 bet is in there and not mine any more I am not gonna play a bad hand in the worst position just cuz it is for 1/2 a bet.
Rounder this really isn't sound logic. You only call with cards you'd put a full bet in with? Why? You're getting twice the pot odds with the half bet! What if it was 1/100 of a bet to call? Would you only call then with cards you'd pay a full bet with? Of course not. The greater the odds the pot is laying you, the weaker a hand you should be willing to call with.
It never is 100/1 so don't make that silly arguement.
Like I said I'm probably the lone ranger on this so don't go getting your knickers in a twist over it.
It's not a silly argument. Ok, I've never seen a game where the small blind was 99% of the big blind, but with implied odds in a no limit game you do have such decisions. I like the $1-$2 blind no limit game at the Stratosphere. If I'm the LB and BB isn't aggressive, I call unraised pots with anything. It can't be too wrong; with a good flop I might get someone's whole stack. Ok, they might get my stack on a bad day, but then I sit on them and they never do it again :-)
Fat-Charlie
Rounder's advice might be overly simplistic but I think it is still good advice for the average player. Here's a hypothetical situation. Say your in the small blind and you have 6 limpers and you have J4 and decide to play your hand for a half bet. The flop comes J blank blank. The average player is unable to get off of this hand. He has top pair and top pair is top pair. He now becomes married to the hand esp. if there are no overcards on the later streets. This player is definitely better off had he not played the hand to begin with.
Bruce
OK Mr. "above average" player you played the J4 now you hit the flop (what do you want J44 flop) you are 1st to act what do you do now.
Reason I don't like playing trash is cuz I don't like putting myself in shitty shituations.
I wasn't suggesting that the 1/100 situation ever comes up in real life. I was simply extrapolating your logic to the extreme to illustrate the fallacy in your explanation. As far as the strategy you suggested, I don't think a new player will go far wrong following it. But I do think a new player should consider the problem with an eye to the implied odds he is getting with his or her call.
I am pretty particular about the kind of hands I call raises with. I get a kick out of the way you like to bash my logic - "average player" and "simplistic" - OK you guys go on calling raises with the J4's of the world and I'll go on mucking them. We'll see who wins in the "long run" LOL
:-)
Although I respectfully disagree with Rounder's reasoning sometimes in these situations I would like to point out a couple of considerations that would favor his point of view:
1. If the pot is unraised but has a lot of players in it that appear to give you good pot odds, this makes it harder for you to end up with the best hand. Occasionally you will make a flush only to lose to a bigger flush which will be very expensive. This is much more likely to happen when the number of opponents increases. When your draws are not to the nuts having more opponents is not necessarily better.
2. When pots get raised this usually means that there are some quality holdings out there making it harder for you to win without making a flush or a straight. In other words if you flop top pair it will be much more difficult and more costly for you to have it hold up as the best hand given the presence of a pre-flop raiser.
In many of these situations I don't believe that Rounder is giving up much by just folding weak hands despite what appears to be good pot odds.
Excellent points. I'd also add that there are a lot of hands that can't be saved by the pot odds in a 10-handed game. If you hold 93o your only real hope against a lot of active opponents is a flopped open set or two pair, 27-1 if I recall. And since you'll pay so much when you get snapped or outkicked, you need a lot more. There just aren't going to be enought bets in the pot to ever justify it.
In the situation you described I would call the single raise with j-8s,with 4 limpers in the pot,and the key words being AVERAGE LOW LIMIT,where anyone can have anything. I think rounders advice is solid,but something tells me his typical opponents are a lot tougher than yours!
Here are my minimum hands for calling a raise in the small blind expecting a 6 way flop AND no re-raise:
AQo - I won't shade this down Axs All pairs K9s Q9s JTs - Abdul's work suggest playing suited connector down to 54. I'm not interested. He also suggests Kxs and some others like KJ.
The only good thing about your position is that the action on the flop will likely check to the raiser and you can then pop it to thin the herd.
-Fred-
IMO, J8s is not a playable hand out of the sb for a raise. If there is no raise, you obviously should play it.
A more difficult scenario is where you have J8s in the bb and there is a raise in a multiway field.
I tend to call if the raiser is to my immediate left (i.e. the betting is closed when it is my turn to act)or if I stand to get some unreasonable action from some of my opponents should I go on to flop a strong hand. I tend to fold if the raise is close to the button. I do this because (a) there may be a reraise from one of the early position limpers and (b) more importantly, if the action gets automatically checked to the preflop raiser to bet, I have terrible position on the flop as I really can't be sure if the other players just "checked to the raiser" or checked because they have nothing.
I like the "Bob Ciaffone" rule on calling raises out of the small blind. The rule is that if you would not call a raise having the button with your hand then you should not call a raise with the same hand when you are in your small blind since having the button is worth half a bet. Now I am sure that there are exceptions but I think this gives you a good perspective. With regard to Jack-Eight suited, would you cold-call a raise on the button with this hand given 4 limpers? If yes, then call out of your small blind. If not, then fold from your small blind. Personally, I would not call with Jack-shit suited but it may be close.
Thanks all for the tips, its helped to clear some things up in my mind
The small blind is just another bad early position to me. I would not play J8 or even J8s in the SB with a total of 4 players unless I want to just vary my image. I would call 1 raise and possibly 2 if I thought there would be a total of 5 players staying with J8 and hope for a good flop. These runner, runner hands definitely show losses. Overall, I would say toss it and wait for better position. Position and high cards is/are thekey to HE. When patience and agressiveness meet, you will show a nice profit.
Although you have 1/2 a bet in the pot, this is not enough to change your calling requirements very much. You will be badly out of position for the entire hand, so you should only call raises with a decent holding. The rule of not calling a raise in the SB unless you would also cold call on the button is a pretty good generalization.
J8s is the same as J8shit when it comes to calling raises. Perhaps in the BB I would call, but in the SB I would fold unless perhaps there were 7 or more players, (even then it is probably a fold).
Position makes a big difference in HE so you have to play the SB very tightly. If it was 3/6 with a 1$ SB this would be even more true. You have some leeway if there is no raise and the SB is 1/2 a bet, in that case you can play some pretty trashy hands because you will usually be getting good pot odds to call. You just have to be pretty sure that the BB will not raise before you play trashy hands.
Dave in Cali
Other than taking the Lewes Ferry to NJ and getting to AC that way, there isn't anyplace to play in Delaware, is there?
They have bus trips from places nearby to AC. Also, the ferry is 26 only bucks and the ride from Cape May to AC is under 50 minutes if you obey the speed limit on the parkway. It's an easy trip, but make sure you can get on the ferry (i.e reservation or don't rely on the last one on a weekend)
I've been playing at a 9-seated 9-18 Hold'em game for several hours when an attractive middle-aged Oriental woman sits down in a recently vacated seat two to my right. She is wearing expensive sylish jewelry and clothes. Over the next hour and a half or so, I see her get beaten with QJ by KQ and with second-pair/ace kicker to top-pair/mediocre kicker. She has raised just once, in late position with ATsuited, and just called a raise from mid-position with QQ. I am on the button with KToffsuit. There are two limpers, then a raise by this woman, fold, I fold.
The flop came QJ6, 2-suited. (Of course a 9 fell on the river, nuts for me had I joined the fray.) She eventually won a decent-sized pot after betting the flop and turn and checking the river.. Can you guess her hand.
"...attractive middle-aged Oriental woman..." "Can you guess her hand."
Is this an exercise in prejudging players? I have no problem with that. If I were in the hand I would credit her with a wider range of possible hands than the average player based purely on your description. I would not fold a hand of medium value on the river under most circumstances. since she checked the river she obviously has some kind of hand, JT at a minimum although some goofy SoCal players will over play worthless pocket pairs. This is 9-18 after all.
In this situation I'm not going to try to guess and rely mostly on the strength of my own hand.
-Fred- ...willing to use all information regardless of it's political correctness.
AQ
AJ suited is the obvious answer. Any pocket pair is also a possibility, as is AK.
I'm going to say she had pocket 8s.
I also say A-Js.
Pocket aces. If I am right do I win some sort of prize?
Is that your final answer?
3
8,10 sooted!
Since you took the time to post this hand, I would have to guess that she did not have much and just decided to raise with something as bad as 72.
My original guess was the same as rounders, AQ. But now i think I have it figured out...she had K-10.
mike
scratch that...she checked the river....had to be AQ..
Could she have had the kt and tried for a check raise or was she in last position?
I'm not sure she is that aggressive. The 9 on the river and check makes me think she has the AQ - according to Sklansky I'm the worst analyzer of hands around here so I am probably wrong. :-)
Jeezzz. The "Q" key is not even close to the "G" key.....how did you do that??
She had QJ.
The Q in Guess was either a red herring or a valuable hint :+}.
Sounds like AK or chicken on the river with AQ. KT is not out of the question either, a rare live one is too nice to bet the nuts after they have "already won".
Pocket two's
I got some flack for "quess." Quess = question + guess a la James Joyce. I did forget to mention that both blinds folded (I think) when she raised pre-flop. There were two calls in any event.
I had two round-trip tickets to Maui waiting here had anybody pinned the tail (and if you believe that, I'll look forward to you anteing up for a little 3-card Monte) but, well, you all guessed about as well as I did. AQ came in first, AJ was next. The answer is J2suited.
I tried to provide as much as I could about her appearance and betting habits so you could approximate my perspective....
My guess was 72 or something as bad and I would think that J2s is pretty close to "bad". Did she keep on playing these type of cards the rest of the game?
J2suited is much better than 72suited. With J2 you can often (about 30%) hit a flop when jacks will be top-pair or middle-pair. Against two limpers, that is the best hand as much as 45-50% of the time I would guess. Maybe a computer simulation is in order.
I left soon after this hand.
I need some input on two hands. JJ and TT on the button when it's three bet to you. You're playing in a mid-limit game, with a couple of tight and loose players. Let's assume that the blinds will fold.
First scenario: Tight player raises UTG. Tight player reraises everyone folds to you. I will always fold under these conditions. Is this correct?
Second scenario: Loose player raises in early position everyone else folds. Solid player reraises in late position, it up to you. I will usually fold. Is this correct? I know that they might be trying to isolate the loose player,but so what.
Third scenario: Loose player raises UTG. Loose player reraises everyone else folds. I will call 80% of the time and raise the other 20%. It depends on how they respect my play.
Under the first two scenarios you are correct in folding every time since the likelihood of being up against an over pair is quite good. Even in those cases where you are not, then you are only a marginal favorite and when an Ace, King, or Queen shows up your hand is usually dead. This will happen most of the time.
The third scenario is less clear. The problem is that loose players raise with their good hands like the rest of us and you have two of them to worry about. It really depends on how loose they are and how the game has been going. You are still in trouble when an over card flops which will be most of the time. Are you likely to get severely punished when you have a second best hand once the flop comes or will they play passively? I will usually play but I would consider inserting a fold from time to time not just calling and raising all the time.
I think in the first and third scenarios you are ok. In the second I would consider playing depending on exactly how I felt about the solid player who reraises.
Also the loose player needs to be the kind of player who raises with all kinds of stuff, not the kind that plays every hand but only raises with big hands.
I don't quite agree with Jim B. that your hand is usually dead to an overcard here. You have position and if they don't hit the flop, they will have a hard time taking one off to actually beat you.
D.
Hi Dreamer, I feel you are correct in the first senario but if the solid player in the second example is constantly leaning on the live one, you have to make a stand so he dosen't keep taking you off hands. It all depends on the hands he's turning over. If he's showing big pairs and AK's, fine-leave him alone. When it turns to 55 and Ax - FOUR BET HIS ASS!!! Secondly, you should try to change seats to get yourself out of this spot. In the last example, forget about calling. Four bet and take the lead. If you call, you almost have to flop a set to win the hand as it will be one, and most likely two bets to go on the flop before you even get to make a decision. When you call here, anyone with QQ still feels pretty good about their holding. When you 4-bet you are in control on the button and you might even lose the original raiser which puts dead money in the pot. Also, this play will give you the image of an action player which can translate into lots of bets over the course of a session and the beauty is, most of the time you're not even taking the worst of it!! Mike Minetti
S & M recommend folding pocket Jacks when it's 3 bets (21st century, page 25). Also, Sklansky points out that the likelihood of the top card on the flop being either an Ace, King or Queen is over 50% (55.2%). I think you're saving money by folding pocket jacks or tens every time if it's 3 bets in front of you.
Hands 1+2 I would fold. Hand 3 I would consider playing but would occasionally fold. I would not reraise because pocket JJ or TT will often have to fold on the flop when overcards come. You will often be folding even though you know that the previous two players are very loose and may not have squat. But despite this, when overcards fall to your TT or JJ you are very likely beaten (and you only have two outs) so you will have to fold anyway.
Hands like JJ and TT play best with lots of players (their value coming from flopping a set) or when you can successfully isolate one player and get it heads up. Neither hand plays very well with three or four players for several bets, you will only lose $$ in the long run this way.
Dave in Cali
This is a hand I played recently, and after discussion with some friends I have decided to post it. Game is fairly tight and very agressive. My image in this game is very tight and unimaginative. I'm UTG with KsJs and call, middle position player raises(MP)two late position players call (LP1, LP2), BB calls.
Flop comes Jc5c2s.
BB check, I check, MP bets, LP1 folds, LP2 raises, BB folds, I reraise, MP folds, LP2 calls.
Turn is a 3h, I bet, LP2 calls
River is a 8h, I bet LP2 folds.
My thoughts during the hands were as follows. I checked b/c I knew the MP would bet automatically and based on the subsequent action either raising or folding. When LP2 raised I felt there was a very strong likelihood he was on a draw. I considered folding but felt I might have the best hand, calling seemed bad because then I'm out of position against two tricky agressive players. Raising seemed the best option, I might have the best hand, and it helps me gain some info that lets me know where I stand. It also might get me heads-up against an opponent that might be drawing. And there was a small chance MP would fold a better hand.
My bet on the turn is automatic, if raised I know I'm in trouble, after he just calls I knew he was drawing, and when nothing scary comes on the end, I bet.
At the time I liked the way I played the hand but after thinking it over for a couple of days I'm not sure. Comments?
You need to realize that tight, aggressive games are the worst games to be playing in. When tight, aggressive players bet, raise, or cold-call legitimate raises they are supposed to have good hands. Pre-flop limping in under the gun with King-Jack suited is correct but just barely. Make it King-Ten suited and you should fold under the gun in a tight, aggressive game. When raised and called in 3 spots you almost certainly have a bad holding plus being out of position. Unless the flop hits you hard you should plan on dumping this hand.
Your flop play seems strange to me. How do you evaluate your top pair/excellent kicker holding in this spot given a pre-flop raiser and 3 cold-callers? If I think my hand is good than I would lead with it. Instead you check (not my play at all) and then the pre-flop raiser bets and gets raised. Now maybe the pre-flop raiser has AK or AQ (versus AA,KK,QQ,JJ, or AJ suited) and maybe the flop raiser is raising on a come hand. But what is the combined probability of BOTH these things being correct? Suppose 50% of time the pre-flop raiser has AK or AQ and 20% of the time LP2 is raising on a come hand having specifically two big Clubs. Keep in mind that this is a tight, aggressive game and LP2 would not be cold-calling legitimate pre-flop raises with two little Clubs or something like King-little suited or Queen-little suited and probably not even Ace-little suited. This means that 90% of the time you are huge underdog and 10% of the time you are a favorite. Why on earth would you 3 bet? It could easily get raised again and you whole line of play is predicated on your pair of Jacks being the best hand which you were unwilling to lead with initially.
Given what happened your plays on the turn and river make sense but I really think you got lucky on this hand.
It is not easy to laydown the top pair,kicker, backdoor flush so I kind of like your play on the flop for the specific read you have: Very aggressive raiser bets automatically + aggresive player raises with a draw.
The turn play is right.
The river you should probably check, you have the player on a draw so this is good time to try and induce a bluff instead of a fold.
D.
In this type of game I don't like playing KJs UTG. However assuming you do play the hand I prefer check-raising on the flop and leading on the turn. I think you maximize your chances of winning by playing this way. Your hand and where you stand has been very clearly defined on the flop. You have gotten rid of the initial raiser and you are heads up against a draw. If you lead on the flop and the initial raiser raises, and the draw reraises, than what is your course of action?
If you lead on the flop, get raised by the pre-flop raiser, and then re-raised by LP2 you have a clear and easy fold in a tight, aggressive game holding a troublesome hand like K-J and a Jack-high flop. This is precisely why betting your hand on the flop is vastly superior to checking and raising or checking and re-raising since you escape at minimum cost. The only way it could ever be right to hang around is if the pre-flop raiser is raising your flop bet with just over cards AND LP2 is re-raising with AcKc,AcQc,KcQc, or AcTc. The combined probability of both these things happening is very small and it will be hazardous to your bankroll if you insist on dumping hard earned money in these situations only to find out that you were badly beaten in at least one spot and frequently two.
Had Atwood led on the flop with his KJs and there was a raise and reraise and he mucked his hand he would have laid down the best hand and he would have been outplayed. Check reraising puts a whole bunch of pressure on the initial better who has to fold if he can't beat top pair esp. with him being in the middle.
Bruce
But this is playing results and is a sample size of one.
I think you were stuck between a rock and a hard place with this hand. I disagree with Jim Brier about lead betting on the flop. I think if you are going to call on the flop a check raise is the best play ( or in your case a check re-raise). This puts a lot of pressure on the initial raiser to call with with AK or AQ and drawing out on you, whereas, he would have more than likely have called 1 bet.
However, having said that, I agree with rest of Jim's analysis. KJ is a hand that more often than not ends up making the 2nd best hand, especially in a tight-aggressive game. The initial raiser and LP2 could have easily had you badly beat, especially if the initial raiser was holding an overpair. He more than likely would have raised you on the turn. As you stated, if you were raised on the turn, you probably would have been in trouble, but probably couldn't fold because now the pot is too large unless you were fairly sure you were drawing dead.
Like I said between a rock and a hard place.
If, like you posted, your image is tight and unimaginative, it certainly won't stay that way when you start showing KJs up front. My image is that of an action player, so I choose to muck this hand in that spot most of the time. Two exceptions would be if I haven't entered a pot in at least two laps or if the big blind is really live. In either case I would raise, which is what you should do to exploit your image. Mike Minetti
Lead bet on the flop, fold if raised twice, because if MP raised, LP2 will not reraise with a drawing hand unless he has AcKc or Ac2c. If MP raised, LP2 call, just call, on fourth street bet, if raised, fold.
LP2, if he is a tight, aggressive player would not cold-call a raise pre-flop with Ace-Deuce suited given only two limpers and the pre-flop raiser in my opinion. If you are going to put him on a Club draw it would have to be AcKc or AcQc or maybe AcTc or KcQc.
Regarding whether to bet or check-raise the flop, I favor betting because the preflop raiser (who you knew would automatically bet) is on your left; he might raise your bet with an inferior hand, helping you thin the field. If the raiser/automatic bettor were on your right, I would usually favor a check-raise.
If you believed your opponent had a busted draw on the river, why did you bet? If you are correct, you would be more likely to win an extra bet by check-calling.
IMO, you should have probably dumped BTF given your description of the game as being tight and very aggressive. KJs is just not a strong enough holding here to bother with UTG. KQs would barely be enough but then when it gets raised and cold called several times you have to be worried that you are badly dominated.
On the flop you checked when you should have bet. Trying for a check-raise with this weak of a holding in this type of game is probably a major negative EV play. I would be very worried that someone else had an overpair or a hand like AcKc or AcQc which you would be only a small favorite over. Also anyone with AJ will have you badly beat and will certainly not be folding. I would have thought that YOU had at most five outs on the flop, perhaps only four since the Kc is probably not a good card for you given the multiway pot. Someone is probably on a flush draw with overcards. You are most likely behind. Three betting only costs you $$ and allows for the possibility of your getting raised again. Your biggest fears should be the person with AcQc (which has 15 outs against you), or AJ (which gives you 2 or 3 outs to win).
On the turn you pretty much have to bet if you think the other player still in the hand is on a draw. If you get raised here you are probably screwed with at most 4 outs.
The river bet I don't really like. If MP2 has an overpair he will certainly call if not raise. There are very few WORSE hands that will call you here so your bet has little value. However, there are plenty of BETTER hands that will call. The only hands you are going to get to fold here are busted draws which would not have called anyway. Check the river.
I'm sure you won a nice pot, but you did get pretty lucky. Next time fold BTF.
Dave in Cali
I played 40-80 holdem last night. The game played like a 3-6 game. The game was 9 handed and there were maybe 2 or 3 "solid" players. The main game was even juicier (my game was a must move game). One player was three betting preflop ~90% of the time with just about anything. Most of the time it was either three bets or capped before the flop and the action was typically four handed. Players were playing suited cards (connectors and non-connectors), non-suited connectors, and just about any pocket pair. The flops were typically capped on any type of flush or straight draw. Flops were also being capped by players with middle and bottum pair. On the turn the action slowed down. Players were checking and calling or if raised or check-raised they were mucking their hands if they had nothing. Obviously from my perspective I needed to make some major adjustments from my normal style of play. Seat location becomes very important. I want to be seated on the three betters left. Hand selection and how you play both pre-flop and from the flop on also become very important. I normally play with a tremendous amount of patience and have a lot of discipline. I really don't like to gamble. I like to think of myself as a solid player. However in this type of game I lowered my starting requirements quite a bit. I can go broke waiting for AA, KK, and AK. I will also be blinded to death waiting for quality starting hands. The overall quality of my opposition is so weak that playing more hands becomes imperative. KQo is a hand I normally don't play upfront or for a raise. Last night I four bet pre-flop twice with it and raised UTG with it once. Obviously this goes against the Jim Brier school of poker. I won two monster pots when I was up agianst KT once and KJ another time. In a game like this if you flop top pair with a half way decent kicker it's like the worlds fair. It becomes almost impossible to lay down the hand even if it is four bets to you by the time the action reaches you. AT, AJ, and AQ go way up in value. These become three betting and capping hands. Ace high, good kicker can often win a show down in heads up action. Ironically, I had pocket Kings once and I lost to T6o, when three bets on the button were called cold. I had pocket Aces once and lost and had pocket Queens twice and lost each time to pocket Kings. Anyway it was just another interesting day at the office.
Bruce
I think you have the totally wrong strategy for these type of games.
You need to play tighter and favor big suited connectors and big pairs. The unsuited big cards go down in value. The fact that your results for this particular session indicate something else is not so important.
If you were able to isolate some of the weak-raising players with KQ and AJo then it may not be that bad but you don't want to be caught in a 6 way capped pot with these.
BTW what are the driving directions to this game?
D
Capping with KQ and AJ if there is 9 way action is bad poker, but in a four way pot if your opponents are playing garbage and you have the best kicker will get you the money.
Bruce
The good players will come in with the right hands and the bad players will get dealt some good hands also. I can see no reason for putting in the raises yourself or cold-calling with offsuit trash big cards. I also doubt you can count on it being 4-handed, other players will come in and it will suddenly be 6 handed, 4-handed is 1 or 2 hands too many anyway.
The real value of an AJo against a trash hand is that you can win with your A high or make him fold. In these hands it aint gonna happen.
About the only time in any game I will play KQo or AJo after a raise is to 3-bet a weak raiser when heads up is a strong possibility. I would rather cold-call with a medium suited connector in those multiway pots you are seeing.
I think the key is whether your opponents are truly likely to have garbage. Against a bunch of loose limpers, AJo and KQo are reasonable raising hands. By the same token, if the players are so terrible that they are also raising and cold-calling raises with trash, I say go for it. However, once one or two solid players enter a raised pot, AJo and KQo are in trouble.
You raise some excellent points. Big unsuited cards with 9 way action are a recipe for disaster but with 3 or 4 way action esp. when one player is 3 betting automatically become very playable hands. If my opponent is three betting on every hand from my perspective if I am going to play the hand I might as well cap it and try to seize the initiative. What difference does it make if I put in three or four bets in before the flop? The extra $40 to play the hand is well worth it from a psychological perspective. My opponents think I am a tight ass so they wrongfully assume I have a group 1 hand. I just don't like playing small suited connectors in a capped pot unless I know it is going to be 8 or 9 handed. The same goes with small and mid sized pocket pairs. Even then I still am not real excited. It just adds a whole bunch more of volatility to my results. The hands I find to be most problematic in this game are pocket Tens, Jacks, and Queens unless of course you flop a set. They are very difficult to play when there is an overcard with a bunch of loose cannons. If you play big cards and have flopped a pair at least you have more potential outs if you are beat on the flop than with a big pair.
Bruce
Where were you playing?
do you think he is going to tell us? I wouldn't
Oceanside Good players may actually add some balance to the game.
Actually you won't get blinded to death waiting for premium starting hands. You are playing way too loose in this type of game. Your implied odds are not good so wait for the best starting hands. The key is having BIG pairs and BIG cards. None of that inbetween crap.
A couple of nights ago I was playing in my usual 5-10 dealer's choice game.
The game was Holdem and I was dealt pocket tens 2 away from the big blind. UTG raises. Now, UTG is a poor player, who raises too often on bad cards prelop (suited connectors, connectors, weak A's, and some other random junk, all done with total disregard of postion), and plays poorly postflop as well. I am seated to his immediate left because of these facts.
Based on my knowledge of the types of hands that this player raises with, I am pretty sure that my tens will be good enough to win the pot. I three bet to get the pot heads up. The game is very loose and a preflop raise will usually get at least 4 players, but my raises get respect and a 3 bet makes people think twice about small suited cards (a single raise is simple for them to play).
Anyways, I'm amazed, I do get the pot heads up. He just called my reraise. I flop top set with my tens and he bets into me. I just call. An A comes on the turn and I start raising.
Anyways, he had AKo, I won a monster pot, but I am unsure if my preflop play was correct. Also, would you slowplay top set head's up on the flop?
What do you think of my overall strategy for this hand?
In your special situation your play was good poker. I would play the same way against a maniac or a loose goose when I have a decent hand and I think I can isolate him with position. I also play the same way against someone who straddles. I think your slow play on the flop was good poker also in a heads-up situation with top set and it is right to wait until the expensive street to pull the trigger.
the only way I wouldn't slowplay any set heads up is if the board looked really bad such as 3 suited cards or a 3-straight on the flop. otherwise let him bet for you.
I'm in a 7-handed 6-12 game when I pick up Td9d in middle position. All fold to me. Seeing a weak-tight player in the BB, I decide to open-raise with my marginal hand. I am called only by the loose/typical player (LT) on the button. Flop comes AQ6r. I bet, LT calls. Turn brings a 4. I check (?) and LT checks. River brings a 3. I check (???) and LT showdowns KT to take the pot. Actually, I was momentarily confused/distracted after the river card fell; by the time I decided a bluff was indicated, I felt I had hesitated too long to pull it off. Comments welcome.
This is the problem with playing a medium suited connector in a shorthanded situation like this. When the flop misses you, you will frequently be trying to bet your way to victory since you don't have a hand to showdown. Once you decided to check on the turn you told your opponent you were weak so betting the river when a blank comes makes it hard to bluff him out. This is an excellent post because it underscores the futility of getting involved in shorthanded pots with small cards. You want an Ace or a King or Queen-Jack or maybe Jack-Ten not a medium suited connector. This is also why trying to steal the blinds with hands like Seven-Six suited or Eight-Seven suited is a bad idea. You have to ask yourself what am I trying to accomplish when I play in a shorthanded pot that is raised? I don't need to make a straight or a flush to win. Usually a decent pair will do it and sometimes even Ace-high. With a suited connector, even if you make a pair of Tens or Nines or Eights you are very vulnerable whereas when you make a pair of Aces, Kings, Queens, or even Jacks you are in much better shape. Of course you will hardly ever win with a suited connector if you don't at least pair. So now your only "out" is to pour a lot dough into the pot and hope your opponent folds. This is an expensive way to play this game.
Finally Jim and I can agree. In a loose game, don't try to steal the blinds from middle position with a hand like this. If you get called (and you likely will), it's going to be tough to play. Big cards rule when short-handed.
If it were checked to me on the button, I'd be tempted to just fold and let the blinds chop if it is a typically loose-ish game. I'd only raise if I thought there was a high probability of winning the blinds, and/or the players in the blinds were so predictable that I'd know exactly where I stood and all times.
Stu. you don't need my comments you know you missed 2 bets - maybe he don't fold on the turn but he'd be a fool to call you on the river.
We all know how timid the LT player is when the potential of his holding has deminished by the river.
Now those suited cards got you in trouble again didn't they. :-)
After both you and your opponent showed weakness on the turn and your opponent didn't seize the opportunity to bet when a blank fell on the river, you had, in my estimation, a better than 50-50 chance of succeeding with a bluff-bet. And it's doubtful he would have bluffed you back with a check-raise because the sequence you would have displayed of betting the flop, checking the turn with A & Q showing, then betting the river is consistent with a holding of a pair lower than ace or queen and higher than a 6; and had he held an ace or queen or, indeed, any pair higher than a 6, he would have most likely communicated that with a bet before the final opportunity arose for you to snatch the pot. On the other hand, KJ WAS the best hand one could have held with that board without making a pair....
Last night I met a few of the 2+2 posters and had a nice time playing at my "new" local club in Aurora.
It was a busy Friday night with the board chock-o-block full of names. I finally get seated about 10:45. I am on the 10-20 and 5-10 board the 5-10 comes up 1st they asked me at 5 am if ai wanted to play 10-20 :-)
I had to struggle all night hardley got a hand worth playing was down almost to felt of my $300 buy in but managed to end up a $213 winner on the night, after about 7 hours of play. 3+bb per hour. I'll take it.
Will be back today even though I hate the 40 mile journey and long long walk from the inconvenient car park and the low ceiling poorley lit smoke filled card room - Gosh I miss Arizona.
Rounder look for me there again, I had so much fun, and luck, that I had to go back today after a few hours sleep, and I do mean a few. As well it was a pleasure meeting you up there.
Kevin
Rounder-
I don't want to take up forum space with non-related topics, but I'm just curious. How does a typical Friday night game at Aurora compare with the games in Arizona? Also, feel free to e-mail me if you need any info about the games or area in general. kljcorp@speedsite.com
Rounder,
I had spoken to you about a month or so ago and have been looking for you at Hollywood. I am out of town until wednesday and then I leave town again Friday until early August. I may try to get out to meet you Wednesday or Thursday evening if you are going to be there - I have to confirm my schedule before I can committ. Hollywood definitely has its drawbacks but the games are not one as they are usually very good games. I look forward to meeting you soon.
Michael D.
PS - Did you take all of that one big fishes money - you know - Kevin (just kidding Kev!!!)
Hope you arn't talking about this Kevin Michael D.....
I don't know about y'all but Hollywood's card room is just this side of a dirty ashtray with tables and seats. It is nasty, the air filtration is sad. The whole casino is poorly maintained, and I am questioning if their facilities are up to city codes. If it wasn't for the nice 5-10 game I doubt that I would ever return.
Kevin
Kevin and I tangled a couple of times and I think he got the best of me - I did get him to lay down a winner yesterday but it was just revenge since he did a job on me Friday - I an not sure to be around much next week playing in a tues night tournament in Des Plaines and may be there on Wed. we'll have to see we have frinds in from England until Fri.
Bishop,
No it wasnt you - I was just giving my buddy at 10-20 kljspeedcorp a hard time thats all. He is the one that was discussin the 3 handed straddle with me about a week or so ago. He is a very solid player and a definiet winner and I was just having a go at him all in good fun. I hope/am pretty confident that he knows I was just teasing him.
Rounder - I was at the Desplaines tourny about a month or so ago - I do not think you were there that night as I looked for you. I went out about 5th or 6th. If I get back in town in time on tuesday, I will be there. Good luck. Look for a few buddies of mine - Claude - will be wearing dark glasses, Tom Reed, or Wimpy. Just as for Claude or wimpy and people should know who they are. Tell them you met me online and if I am there, they will point me out.
Michael D.
Mike I played it once - on June 6th made 5th place and never really had a run of good cards. Geesh wonder what it is like to get a run of cards - seems like I have to do it the hard way all the time.
Rounder,
The other night I was playing 8-16 and won a $500 pot after sitting down for 10min. That comes out to 187.5 big bets an hour! Your 3+bb an hour is nothing!
I won $250 pot in a 5-10 game yesterday after playing 4 or 5 hands AA full of J's 2 flush draws and a made tree top on the turm gave me the big win. Let's see that is about 150 bb rate.
But we are playing with numbers arent we. :-)
Rounder how much is the b uy in on that tourney on Tuesday in Des Plains, I wouldn't mind trying it out.
Kevin
drop me an email.
n/t
I'm trying out an expiriment. To help sharpen my skills, I have started reviewing my Paradise Poker hand histories. To take it a step further, I have annotated and posted these onto my website so that others can make comments as well. While this risks a little by showing how I play every hand, I hope the gains will be worth it.
In my annotations I am pointing out where a play looks so suspicious that it is either by and extremely bad player, or collusion. Hopefully, this will benefit is all in helping to identify collusive play without having to make a thorough study, and disclosure, of how experts should collude.
The hand history that I have just recently put up has one instance which looks very suspicious (hand #39).
So feel free to refer comment on any hand or on my comments? Here is one to get started. On the turn I was "afraid of trolls under the bridge", and it probably cost me the pot. Does anyone think that I did the right thing by checking on the turn?
-Steve
Seat 1: hannesblitz ($53 in chips) Seat 2: rastus211 ($166.50 in chips) Seat 3: Walter34 ($259 in chips) Seat 4: steve ($208 in chips) Seat 5: BARBER ($35 in chips) Seat 6: roadhand ($174.50 in chips) Seat 7: moneybags1 ($197 in chips) Seat 8: Chipster ($210 in chips) Seat 9: craigt2k ($129 in chips) Seat 10: stony ($208 in chips) BARBER : Post Small Blind ($1) roadhand: Post Big Blind ($3) Dealing... Dealt to steve [ 2h ] Dealt to steve [ As ] moneybags1: Fold Chipster: Fold craigt2k: Fold stony : Fold hannesblitz: Fold rastus211: Fold Walter34: Fold steve : Raise ($6) BARBER : Fold roadhand: Call ($3) *** FLOP *** : [ Ah Qd Jc ] roadhand: Check steve : Bet ($3) roadhand: Call ($3) *** TURN *** : [ Ah Qd Jc ] [ 7s ] roadhand: Check steve : Check *** RIVER *** : [ Ah Qd Jc 7s ] [ 8h ] roadhand: Bet ($6) steve : Call ($6) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $30 | Rake: $1 Board: [ Ah Qd Jc 7s 8h ] hannesblitz didn't bet (folded) rastus211 didn't bet (folded) Walter34 didn't bet (folded) steve lost $15 [ 2h As ] (a pair of aces) BARBER lost $1 (folded) roadhand bet $15, collected $30, net +$15 (showed hand) [ Th 9d ] (a straight, eight to queen) moneybags1 didn't bet (folded) Chipster didn't bet (folded) craigt2k didn't bet (folded) stony didn't bet (folded)
I think you need to format these like typical hands that or posted here.
I[cant]undertanda[*&%$#]wordotherwise.
D.
I agree with David. It would be much better if you notate the hands in a clearer format.
The guy flopped an up and down straight draw and caught on the river. Why do you think this is collusion?
Sorry about the formatting. I didn't think it would turn out so awful. It looked good in Excel, and I copied and pasted it into the message.
This is not the hand where I thought there was any collusion. I was referring to another hand posted on my website. The point being that public examination of such hands will be helpful. But the hand in this post is another matter. I am just looking for criticism of my play.
I'll try to fix up the format.
Seat 1: hannesblitz ($53 in chips) Seat 2: rastus211 ($166.50 in chips) Seat 3: Walter34 ($259 in chips) Seat 4: steve ($208 in chips) Seat 5: BARBER ($35 in chips) -- SMALL BLIND Seat 6: roadhand ($174.50 in chips)- BIG BLIND Seat 7: moneybags1 ($197 in chips) Seat 8: Chipster ($210 in chips) Seat 9: craigt2k ($129 in chips) Seat 10: stony ($208 in chips) Dealt to steve [ 2h ] Dealt to steve [ As ] moneybags1: Fold Chipster: Fold craigt2k: Fold stony : Fold hannesblitz: Fold rastus211: Fold Walter34: Fold steve : Raise ($6) BARBER : Fold roadhand: Call ($3) *** FLOP *** : [ Ah Qd Jc ] roadhand: Check steve : Bet ($3) roadhand: Call ($3) *** TURN *** : [ Ah Qd Jc ] [ 7s ] roadhand: Check steve : Check *** RIVER *** : [ Ah Qd Jc 7s ] [ 8h ] roadhand: Bet ($6) steve : Call ($6) *** SUMMARY *** Pot: $30 | Rake: $1 Board: [ Ah Qd Jc 7s 8h ] steve lost $15 [ 2h As ] (a pair of aces) BARBER lost $1 (folded) roadhand bet $15, collected $30, net +$15 (showed hand) [ Th 9d ] (a straight, eight to queen)
Okay, I give up on formatting. I inserted a bunch of carriage returns, and it still didn't work out.
Here is the abridged version.
3/6 HE, I'm on the button with A2o. All fold to me, and I raise. Only the big blind calls.
Flop is AQJ offsuit.
big blind checks, I bet, he calls. Turn is 7 of the fourth suit. big blind checks. Fearing a big hand being slowplayed, I also check.
River is an 8. He bets, I call, he shows T9o for a straight.
In retrospect, I think I should have bet the turn, and folded if he raised.
Steve
I don't see anything wrong with your check on the turn here. Yes, a bet would've been correct had you known he was drawing. But you can't know that. With this board, you either have the best hand or are in deep trouble with your ace/worst kicker. Also, checking the turn may induce a bet on the end.
Your destined to lose no matter how you play the hand. I would bet the turn because your hand is very vulnerable. Your opponent, however will more then likely call and you will still lose except one more big bet if he leads and you call.
You wrote:
"I would bet the turn because your hand is very vulnerable. "
What do you feel his hand is very vulnerable to? He is either already beat (by a better ace, 2 pair, etc.) or his opponent has very few outs in which case a free card is not all that terrible. Otherwise, his opponent has a legitimate draw and would be correct to call anyway. Of course if you knew your opponent was on a draw you'd be correct to bet. But with this board, you can't be at all sure of this. A check on the turn also may entice your opponent to bluff on the end if he misses.
Did the small and big blinds often fold in this game?Trying to steal with A-2o is risky.
It was a close decision between raising and folding. I figured that I had about a 50% chance of stealing the blinds.
Ace-Deuce offsuit could easily be the best hand against two random hands. It most cases you are raising with the best hand and the best position.
I think it is close between betting the turn or checking the turn and there are compelling reasons for either action. Out of the big blind guys will defend against a possible steal raise with any suited King, Queen, or Jack and will call here if you bet hoping their pair is good or hoping to hit a hand. It may depend upon your opponent and his impression of you.
I think the play is ok.
BTW you can look at your formatting with the preview before you post it.
D.
Steve,
Use HTML tags to format your messages.
For instance, type br in between <> to get a line break and use p and /p in between <> to separate paragraphs. See online HTML guides for others.
KJS
If you are routinely raising with garbage hands such as A2o he could have thought that if he missed his open ender and hit a pair instead that those could be outs for him as well. I think betting the turn would have just cost you 6 more bucks.
Obviously it is important to know your edge in a game. I play in a casino environment where the games can sometimes change by the hour. In a 10 hour session you may find yourself playing in 4-5 completely different games. My question is how does one go about calculating his edge? I realize the explanation may be too involved to be posted on this forum. But perhaps someone can direct me to a book or other resource for this information. Also, if someone can give at least some insight or a brief outline, I'd appreciate it.
For instance:
Assume a 10 handed $10-$20 limit hold'em game with a $4 rake and $5-$10 blinds.
Pre-flop: There are 7 players who play poorly before the flop. 4 of these players play solid cards but are insensitive to position. The other 3 players play very loose (TXs, etc.) and are also insensitive to position. Of the 4 that play solid overall cards, 2 of them are insensitive to raised pots playing dominated hands such as AXs, etc. The other 3 players including yourself play solid pre-flop with the exception of 1, who probably plays too tight given the weak/loose nature of the game.
Post-flop: Although every street probably needs to be evaluated on it's own merits, in the interest of space, I'll lump them together.
3 of the players are very insensitive to pot and/or implied odds, ie- drawing to gutshots, pocket pairs and low pairs when obviously beat and without odds. 2 players while aggressive, probably bluff too much and are excellent check/raise candidates on the turn. Our 1 player who is too tight pre-flop, is also weak/tight post flop. 4 players don't use their position well and play passively once someone has shown strength.
As I am writing this it is becoming painfully obvious that calculating your edge is not at all a simple process with so many variables to consider. It may have been easier if I just asked: Can you catagorize mistakes and say that 1 mistake such as calling a pre-flop raise with a dominated hand for example equals X dollars per hour, etc.?
There are several obstacles which come to mind when trying to pinpoint one's edge versus a pool of various opponents. First of all, few people play the same way all the time. One loose player may tighten up when down, say, 1/2 the buy-in while another may let it all hang out. Someone who's been getting burned time and time again with a valid approach may begin to play too defensively. Even if you could determine with certainty how a particular player would play a given hand in a given situation, you can never tell for sure when the risk-loving player or poor player might be dealt cards which override your advantage. I remember playing in a 1-4-8-8 game in Vegas when a guy sat down the beside me (on my right) and proceeded to start raising pre-flop about every other hand pre-flop. I was getting dealt junk so had to bide my time before I could lower the boom. Meanwhile, he was overpowering the rest of the table. Finally I'm dealt KK, reraise his raise, and his AA fling my cowboys off their fire-breathing steeds headfirst into the gravel pit. Also, don't forget that before you can get a read on another player's habits, you are often involved in pots against this player.
I think it safe to say that you're doing quite well if averaging between 1.5 to 2.5 big bets per hour over the long haul. Other than that, you just gotta do the best you can with the limited data at your disposal at any given time.
I wonder if I am losing $$$ on AXs. First, I define AX as anything less than A9. A9 probably plays slightly better than A8 and considerably better than anything lower. Am I right on this?
Unless the game is ideal, ie- fairly loose AND passive, I normaly muck A9s and below from early position. From middle position, I will normaly call if someone else has limped trying to lure a multi-way pot. If it's folded to me, I sometimes call, sometimes raise. I am pretty sure that I am not too far off so far with my assessment of A9s. But here is where I think I may be losing....
From late middle position when it is folded to me, I normaly throw away AXs. My thinking is that it is still too early too raise with, and too late to expect a multi-way pot. What's probably more important is that the worst case scenario is now more likely. It gets raised behind me and I find myself heads up out of position against with a garbage ace. Yet, I see many good players play AXs from this position. Does anyone think I am giving up too much by folding here in most games?
In mid to late position with no one else either raise with the hand or pass. I would only raise if there is a reasonable chance I might steal the blinds or be heads up with the blinds otherwise I would be inclined to pass. If you raise and you have two players calling behind you, your better off not playing the hand to begin with because your probably dominated.
Bruce
I personaly feel that i have lost a lot of money on Axs, I now will play only A4s and A5s in late pos. with 3 or 4 callers in front of me and no raise. Because i have a slight chance of the wheel draw. I will occaisonly raise with A9s as a steal, but other than that i throw it away, maybe other people do better with it than me but it has not been to good for me the last 2 years.
i had A9s tonight. Late position. [3-6] No raises, couple ppl fold, I raise, about 4 or 5 call. I flop top pair [AJsomething-rainbow]. My buddy who I play Hold'em many times hit the ace high straight on the turn.[10] [hey, at least it wasn't one of those super pros, like u guys, taking my money]
Anyways, I'm still in there because I think he's bluffing, and I get trip aces on the river.
Man, those are hard to fold against someone you play with. Unfortunately, I was wrong w/ my read and he played KQo in the small blind.
Grrr...
Too many people like to draw frickin' everything in 3-6 !!!
Oh well, I was part of a jackpot that reeled me in 342 buckaroos! So not a bad night at all. Hey, I'm only 18 and gonna start working tomorrow at eight bucks an hour. [at least I know for sure I can't lose money working like in poker] But hey, 50 bucks an hour [played for 6 hours] isn't bad at all
So anyways, ace-nine, in 3-6, eck! The heck with crap! Ok, have a nice day. Goodnight.
I am uncertain about Ace-Little suited as well. I treat Ace-Nine suited as Ace-Little suited although some authors like Gary Carson maintain it is a much better holding than Ace-Little suited because in an unraised pot the Nine kicker can easily be the best when an Ace flops. I normally don't limp in with it from early position unless it is a very passive game with hardly any pre-flop raising. This is hard to find at the $15-$30 and $20-$40 level that I play at. In middle position, Bruce makes a good argument for either folding or raising with it when everyone else folds. I am just uncertain so I usually just limp in and hope to see a flop cheaply but this may be wrong. However, I doubt that it is wrong by much. From late position (the cutoff and button) I will open with a raise since I can easily have the best hand.
If I could get a rebate on half my money from playing AXs in mid-late and late position when I raise after everyone folds I would be rich. Like I said before if I have a reasonable chance to steal the blinds I'll give it a shot otherwise I just pass. In So. Cal. that doesn't happen too often in the mid limits. Let's say you are heads up against the blind who is a reasonable player and you flop an Ace. With Ace rag now how do you like your hand? It's very difficult to play the hand with any degree of confidence and I find I will just check the river if I don't improve further. Many players and I am referring to good players overplay Axs from the back. They have a snowball's chance of surviving in hell of stealing the blinds and they just attack relentlessly with this hand.
One other reason I like A-9s better than an ace with a very small kicker, has to do with the(few)occasions when you flop two pair. Those tiny kickers are so easily couterfeited(I think that's the term)on the turn or river, I HATE THAT!
-Don
I know I've seen this one before, but I just don't remember when.
I'm looking for a hold'em tournament software game that I've heard about - based on the WSOP. Anyone know what I'm talking about, or have any recommendations?
I have Turbo, but I'm looking for something with a little more "entertainment" value as opposed to a study tool.
Thanks.
Check Masque Publishing under favorite links to the left.
I was playing on Planet Poker last night at a 5-10 table and was in the big blind looking at JsTs. Utg limps, fold, Raise by MP, cutoff calls, button folds as does small blind. I call the raise. Flop is Jd Td 4c. I have two top pair with a flush draw on board. I bet out hoping UTG would fold because he knows there might not only be 1 raise behind him but if I'm betting into the raiser I could very well reraise as well. Worked perfectly, he called. MP did indeed raise and I put him on an over pair or a big Jack. Cutoff makes it three bets to go. Cutoff is the only guy at the table I know and he could easily be on AdXd, KdQd, or even KQo. I can't rule out a set either, but I cap it anyway to see if UTG will call three bets and he does. Turn card is a blank (6h). Now that it's expensive and the draws are still live I bet out. UTG calls, MP calls, Cutoff raises. I'm thinking more and more cutoff has a set, but with the straight flush draw he would probably bet the same way. I reraise and it gets called around. I feel a little better for about a second when the Ace of Spades hits on the river. UTG bets out!! I'm thinking he got to broadway. MP calls, cutoff calls and like an idiot I call as well. UTG shows KcQc for the nuts and the rest of us don't show. While I'm waiting for the hand history cutoff asks me if I could beat JT. I said I couldn't but I wouldn't have lost to it either. He understood. I get the hand history and see that MP was on AhJh.
Cutoff then says, "Well, at least we made them pay to draw!!" I laughed and said, "It will be a while before these guys messed around with us again." "Yes", he said, "We really taught them a lesson."
Bart,
Well played in my opinion. My experience in live games is that players will rarely bluff on the river in that spot; they are almost certain to be called. On paradise poker however, I have seen stranger and often even hopeless bluffs on the river so you have to call. He could also be (very thinly) value betting something like AK.
Better luck!
Regards/
Good play. You did indeed make them pay to draw. Most of the time they will miss and you will get paid nicely, this time they happened to have gotten there and you lost. No big deal. The important thing is not the result but whether or not you played it right.
Dave in Cali
I used to play the small blind versus a raise very close to the way I would if I was the big blind. and thus, it turned out (at least it felt like) I was calling too many raises in the SB, but was ok in the BB.
And so, I've changed my strategy - I've been playing the SB as if it was the button. That is, I know if I face a raise, that I only have to put in 1.5 small bets (as opposed to 2 small bets if I was on the button)....but I have the disadvantage of acting first in the next three rounds...so that makes up for the .5 small bet differential. And