![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
15-30-20-40 HWP
Question>>> my last 600 hours I've played 15/30 and 20/40, I've kept accurate records. My findings are as follows; 15/30 average rate is $47.75 per hour, 20/40 average rate is $38.50 per hour. It seems to me that I earn more at the 15/30 swings are smaller, and hourly rate is larger. Is this because I'm playing with better players or the fact that I'm playing in loose aggressive games? In the long run can I earn just as much playing 15/30 as 20/40?
I'm betting yes.
This issue to a little to complex to discuss here in detail, but I have always felt that if you are an expert player and are playing against the same typical weak opponents (in both games) you will make at least as much in a $15-$30 game as a $20-$40. However, because of this the $15-$30s tend to burn out. Thus in the long run, unless you are in an area with a large population base, the $15-$30 will tend to get tougher faster than the $20-$40. (Because of this I have always recommended to cardrooms that they not spread the $15-$30 structure. However, no one listens to me.)
Mason (or anyone), After reading your essay on this subject and playing a bit at these levels, I would have to agree to a point. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you stated that a lot of the reason that 15-30 is more profitable is because people don't know how to contend with the 2/3 SB vs. the 1/2 SB. How about the case where both games are spread in the same area, and people are playing the 20-40 game like the 15-30; i.e, they are playing much too loosely in the 20-40 given that they only post 1/2 of the bet in the SB, but they are playing more correctly in the 15-30 by playing more hands than you would expect? would this reverse expectations and make the 20-40 a better game given that you play correctly in both games?
calling out of the sb when the pot is unraised is never much of a mistake. calling raises out of the sb is the problem. the 2/3 makes people call too many raises out of the sb. also, the larger blinds makes preflop play more aggressive, compounding that mistake.
scott
The almost automatic call makes it more likely that a hand will be multi-way. In this case, wouldn't more hands now become playable for profit?
Of all the concepts in Mason's books this is one of two that I feel he doesn't explain well enough. I wish Mason would write more about the differences between these two games
The other concept is the pyramids, but that's another discussion altogether.
But Mason, the $15-$30 games at the Bellagio have been going strong ever since they opened back in October 1998. They get several tables of $15-$30 going everyday. On the weekends they sometimes get 4 tables. The $20-$40 game at the Mirage on the other hand is not nearly as strong and they frequently end up being shorthanded and break up. I am not even sure that you get a $20-$40 game at the Mirage during the week.
As an aside, in the Gulf Coast when they spread $15-$30 it is usually with a $5 small blind instead of $10 small blind. This may have a substantial impact on the game. I prefer the $5 small blind structure.
Greetings,
Seems a few things i read in the April 28 Card player struck me as incorrect. Tell me if you agree.
In McEvoy 's Column he poses a series of Q's and gives answers. In Q 3, he asks: 2 players limp and you have 7 5 off suit in the small blind. YOu decided to call. The big blind raises. Now what should you do?
His answer is ," FOld. calling the half bet was marginally OK , but calling a full fraise withe 7-5 doesn't give you enough pot odds to justify a call."
Well this seems wrong in that when you called the half bet you were getting 3 1/2 to 1/2 on your call and after it is raised you are getting 7 to 1 on your call AND you get to close the action. So the pot odds are the same (7 tp 1).
The only reason to argue a fold is the BB now much stronger than the usual random BB hand and your chances of stealing on a "bad" flop are small. But if the first call was marginal then the second must be also.
Comments?
In Cappelletti 's column : He gives ," .. I finally pick up pocket kings and raise before the flop. The small Blind reraises; I cap it. Mercifully there is no ace on the flop (10 7 4). My opponent c hecks, I bet, he check raises (I evaulate this player to be slightly above average based upon about an hour of observation). SHould I reraise or call?... "
(He calls).
," Horror of all horrors, an ace hits on the turn! But he checks to me! WHats' going on? Should I check or bet?"
He bets and picks up the pot and his opponent had K's also.
Seems to me it would be better to check and induce a bluff a on the river (if SB has QQ, JJ, capp picks up an extra bets), and if the guy has an A he saves a bet on the turn. NOt to mention the bet on the turn opens the door for a chekc raise bluff on the turn which i think KK would have a hard time calling.
I think only when his opponent has KK is betting the turn correct.
All comments appreciated!
Thanks alot.
I'll just address the McEvoy question. I laughed when I read his explanation. You are right in that you are getting the exact same odds. He doesn't seem to understand that. However, you are also right when you recognize that the raise of the big blind makes your situation much worse.
In other words, suppose you had a hand that was correct to call the half bet but only very marginally so. Now you (correctly) call but the big blind raises. Even though you are getting the exact same odds, folding may now be the better play. Because the big blind is indicating that he has a very good hand, he may make it much more expensive for you to play the later streets, and it may be more difficult for you to end up with the winner.
I started to write this post to provide a couple of simple examples described in the next two paragraphs and then I went further (perhaps to bore myself to sleep ;-) ). I'm wondering if I am guilty of some fuzzy thinking and would like the forums comments.
I've made this small blind call (in a structure where the SB is half the BB) then folded to a solid player's big blind raise when I have a hand such as Kx suited with about two limpers. Now I believe the king has lost most of its value and the flush flop/draw odds are not there.
OTOH, I might make a small blind call with something like 86 offsuit with five limpers. Now the big blind raises. I don't like the raise but my call of the raise is made with more enthusiasm then my first call. My hand is not dominated by the big blind's cards and if I flop a draw I may be able to check raise for value or check raise a probable bet on my left if I make it on the turn or even river.
Going further, I believe there is an implied odds issue here even when the pot odds are the same. I think this has been covered a while back on 2+2 but with so many new posters it may be worth revisiting. Let's say in situation A you have a marginal drawing hand (such as McEvoy's 75 offsuit) in the small blind in an unraised pot versus situation B where you have the same marginal drawing hand in the big blind in a pot that has been raised. In both cases you are getting the same pot odds on your call (e.g. if there are three limpers you are getting 9 to 1 on a small blind call; if there is a raiser and three cold callers you are getting 9 to 1 on a big blind call).
Now the small blind call in situation A figures to be getting greater "implied odds" since the amount of money he can expect to make on later betting rounds when he flops well is about the same for both situations but is proportionally greater for the small blind call. But does this matter much?
What I am unclear on is how this effects expectation. In my example we have a five-way pot where the high card strength of the drawing hand is negligible (i.e., he will make little by flopping pairs). Now IMO a few things muddy the water. When the pot is raised, it is played more aggressively post flop (not to the advantage of drawing hands). This is balanced by the tendency for opponents to get tied on to the bigger pots (which should be to the advantage of the drawing hands).
Maybe the following examples provide some illumination of what I am trying to say. Let's say I have the following marginal hands with a choice of calling in the small blind for half a bet or out of the big blind for a full bet. Which is better?
Ex 1: A baby pair against two opponents (5 to 1 pot odds). I would like to be in the big blind since when this hits a set you will welcome flop action.
Ex 2: Queen small suited against three opponents (7 to 1 pot odds). I would like to be in the small blind since I want to draw cheaply and have a decent chance of winning by flopping a queen.
Ex 3: King ten suited against two opponents. I would prefer to be in the small blind. This hand is dominated in raised pots.
Ex 4: Ax offsuit against four opponents (9 to 1 pot odds) I would always call in the small blind but rarely in the big blind.
Ex 5: 76 suited against two opponents. The small blind is much better.
Ex 6: 75 offsuit against four opponents. It is closer since you may welcome the post flop action with this big a field.
Criticism and flames are more than welcome. I'm tired and hurting all over and want to balance the physical pounding I've been taking recently with some mental pounding ;-).
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
I was following this fine until you started with the examples. "Which is better questions" are not IMO very helpful when deciding whether a hand is playbale in a given situation. Put another way I believe it is much better when discussing the value of a hand in a specific situation to be as specific as possible such as you began with asking about Kxs to a bb raise with x limpers. That's a specific question that is relatively simple to approach. Of course if you ask Badger he may tell you to stop asking silly tactical hand analysis questions. But that's not my style. I answer any question even if I don't have an answer. I'm real smart like that.
When you say "Let's say I have the following marginal hands with a choice of calling in the small blind for half a bet or out of the big blind for a full bet. Which is better?" It's a , sorry, meaningless question. You never have a choice of picking whether you are in the BB or Small Blind. If you wish to analyze the merits of playing each hand from each position that is entirely different or maybe the same but just expressed differently. Either way. Have a nice day.
vince.
BTW - I believe you made a mistake by folding with the Kxs to the BB raise with two limpers. 7 to 1 odds when it gets back to you is worth playing almost any two cards. But remeber I'm looser than most. Just ask John cole. I had to restrain myself when he folded Q,Ts UTG in a loose 5-10 Holdem game. In fact I believe I asked " Did Rick Nebiolo teach you how to play holdem". I knew it wasn't Gary Carson or Abdul!
Vince,
I really was trying to bore myself to sleep last night when I wrote it as my script for triazalom ran out. I think the fourth cup of "Sleepytime" tea with valarian added (boy does that stuff smell bad) was just starting to kick in.
When I have my act together, I do want to discuss blind play before the flop in non steal situations. When you play as tight as me pre flop, they account for about half the hands I play.
BTW, John Cole has always been tighter than me. I don't fold QT suited in a loose game but the last few times I've played holdem at Foxwoods (albeit 10/20) it was not a loose game at all.
You said on the other forum that you lost over $100 in the 5/10 Omaha H/L game. Thats pretty impressive considering that the average pot in that rock pile is about $30.
Regards,
Rick
P.S. If you are coming to Los Angeles, email me and we should be able to set something up. There is someone else who wants to meet you.
it's not who i meant in the title, but i want to meet vince.
on another topic, my dad was in town tonight and we had a fancy dinner. instead of desert and the end i hand grappe. i am unsure of the spelling. but it is an after dinner drink that smells like paint thinner. it doesn't taste bad. not good either per se. but it tastes a lot better than you would think an inhalent would. i also had a nice scotch before dinner. that tasted good. we had a fancy wine with dinner. that tasted like wine. i cant tell good wine from shit. whatever.
scott
Scotch! 18 years old! You better believe you're gonna meet me! We'll see if you still feel the same way after I give you a good going over for your underage abuses. Send me the address of that school of yours and I'll try and stop by on my way to L.A.
Vince.
Scotch indeed! Also if you keep imitating Zee with the lower case letters your'e gonna go blind! Hmmm maybe that going blind stuff was for something else that Zee does a lot of. I can't remember which. Aging, it's such a terrible thing!
actually the scotch was 18 years old. how'd you know?
bascially i am at 114th and broadway. if you're really gonna be in town email me and we'll set up a meeting.
scott
Rick,
Just to set the record straight here; yes, I did fold QTs UTG, but the game wasn't that loose at that point. There were two slumming 10-20 players at the table--both good players--and a few solid players. I had been playing for two hours, played about six hands, and was up about $300.00 because I won three kill hands in a row.
Later that evening, I did play QTs in early position twice when the game changed. I shouldn't have, though. And, even worse, I raised two players who played any two cards with 74s on the button, taking down a nice kill pot when the pair of 77 held up.
John
Sorry, John. It's just that Rick said that any game you were in was a loose one. That was why I made the comment. Shame on Rick for saying that!
Vince
Vince,
He's right. After all, we spent many years playing in home games together. Of course, Rick always wanted to play Acey-Duecy because of the +EV.
John
Though this issue may not be directly applicable to live play, I think it is interesting and may have some instructive value. It seems clear to me that calling with small connectors, trouble hands (as defined by Brunson), and potentially dominated suited cards (e.g., QXs, KXs, AXs) would generally have more value from the SB (in an unraised pot) than in the BB (in a raised pot)...assuming: 1) an equal risk of subsequent preflop raises in both situations, and 2) reasonable opponents who usually raise with their strongest hands and limp with their relatively weak hands. This is due to the increased implied odds from the SB, and the decreased likelihood of being dominated.
I used to assume the same was true of small-to-medium pairs, but I'm not so sure anymore. The smaller the pair, the less relevant is the domination risk (assuming a multiway pot), since you'll usually muck those little pairs when the flop misses. In addition, the increased post-flop action often generated by a preflop raise may compensate for the greater cost of calling from the BB. What do others think?
I'm not sure how close calling and folding are in this case, but I think that with the BB raise, you are much more likely to hit the flop alone, given the BB's show of strength. Usually, when rags flop, the SB and BB are the most likely to hit their hands because of the wider range of hands that they could be in with. With 7-5 you are usually going to muck after the flop anyway unless you flop trips, a straight, or two pair. Wouldn't this be an added benefit of calling here?
Sorry, I posted the previous without reading Rick's much more eloquent stating of the same thought process. Must be my Monday morning haze.
I was thinking of making the same point about a BB raise not necessarily being bad since you are looking for a low flop that hits you and nobody else. But with a hand like 75o you are counting on this anyway, even without a raise that indicates high cards.
I think Mason's point is that the BB has represented a hand with which he plans to make it expensive for others to play. What if the flop does come something like 874? You might have to chase this to the river while BB is giving no free cards or even raising you, and if you don't improve may still beat you with a big pair.
A better example is a flop of 962. Now there is a good chance you get bet out on the flop and you won't be around just in case your miracle card gets there.
Arguments that support calling even a half bet on hands like 7 5 off suit on the basis of having enough odds (in this case >7:1) to call have always seemed suspect to me.
First of all, in a 4 way hand, 7 5 offsuit will win 15.5 percent of the time. OK, this is marginally better than the 7:1 pot odds you are getting for the call - but this assumes that those other 3 hands are RANDOM. They aren't. The other 2 callers will have better than random hands, unless you are playing in the 2-6 game at the Excalibur. So knock a few percent off of that 15.5. Poof - now you have no positive expectation.
OK, lets say you decided to play anyway. That 15.5 percent is the % of the time you will win BY THE RIVER. Some of the time you will would have won even if the flop misses you completely but the turn and river are two running fives or sevens. Are you going to call the flop even if it misses you? No. So knock a couple more percent off of that 15.5.
So what WILL you play after the flop with 75o? What kind of flop are you looking for? If you flop a pair (about 1 time in 2) will you continue? I wouldn't. You must be looking to flop at least 2 pair or better. You will flop 2 pair somewhere around 2 or 3 percent of the time. Not likely. Trips or a made straight are even less likely.
What if you pick up an open end straight draw? 2 times out of 3 you won't make it but you'll put in so much money finding that out that you'll wish you had saved that half bet.
I won't even mention the fact that you are doing this with the worst possible position. And, what happens if you DO flop 2 pair? Lets say you have 75 o and the flop is 10 7 5 rainbow (lucky for you.) 2 pair seems great, but then if the turn and river are 2 running deuces your 2 pair are worthless to the guy playing A 10 s.
The point is, even though looking at the mathematics very superficially may make it seem as though you actually have positive expectation when calling something like 75 o for a half bets, in all practicality I can't see how it can be justified.
Play well, SmoothB
The odds of flopping a pair with 7 5 offsuit are about 1 in 3, not 1 in 2. Sorry for the typo.
Play well, SmoothB
I'm playing 3-6 at the Trump Taj on Saturday. I've been here for about 30 minutes. Barely any preflop raising, a lot of people seeing the flop.
I'm the button. 4th position raises, 3 callers, I call with KQd, SB folds, BB calls. Flop comes out AAA (no spade). Everyone checks to me, I bet to see how everyone felt about the flop (everyone gasped as the aces came out). BB raises, Preflop raiser calls, everyone else fold, I call (bad call? raise to bluff?)
Turn comes out 3c. BB bets out, PFR calls, I raise. I'm sure no one has an ace based on their reaction to the flop. I figure it's too late to bluff an ace since i only called on the flop. BB might have a good K. PFR I figure has a medium pair, and my bet here is to kick him out pretending to have an Ace. BB calls, PFR folds, I re-raise. I figure I beat his K. PFR was my only threat. He calls. River comes out 9d. He checks, I bet, he folds. Everyone is amazed to see I do not have an ace, especially PFR, who (he said) had pocket queens. BB admits trying to bluff.
I do not pretend to be good at holdem, but I think I can beat the game in AC. Bring on the fire and criticisms.
These trip card flops are a race to see who can make the biggest full house. If someone is lucky enough to have the quad they are going to have a ball. I think the AAA in particular is tough since the almighty Ace is so popular to start with especially in the game you described (little pre-flop raising).
With your King and Queen you're a strong contender and probably should bet just like you have the Ace. Consider that if a K or Q does come you might only get a split or even one third pot. You need to make people leave, though the QQ won't. Imagine someone with 92s winning when a duece comes on the river?
Seems the BB bet almost has to be ignored in terms of representing an ace. An Ace in the hole sure won't want to drive anybody out.
Interesting play. Played well. What are you going to do when they stop gasping ?
I think you played it well. Remember, not everyone plays Ace anything, even at the low limits, so there's a chance it was folded pre-flop. But there's slightly less than a 20% chance that anyone was dealt an ace to begin with anyway.
And don't for a second buy that "I had two queens" pile of garbage. If he truly believed you had an ace, I mean 100% sure, he would have folded on the flop because there wasn't a card in the deck that could help him at that point...or more likely on the turn. On the river, faced with a single extra bet, he's going to fold Aces full of Queens? I laugh at that.
Either there's a 99% chance he's lying, or a 1% chance that he's the biggest pushover in the history of poker. Take advantage of that.
BTW, don't show even your bluffs. They don't call, they don't see. Let them think you had the ace.
Dan
Never, never, never show your hand if not called!
No way is anyone folding aces full of queens if there's a bad beat jackpot.
Also, you seem pretty sure that the preflop raiser doesn't have an ace based on his flop play. I don't think it's anywhere near as clear cut as you do. In my opinion, the majority of 3-6 players who flop quads would wait until the turn or river to raise.
Suppose you are in a game that is loose to the point where the average min. starting hand is only 98 offsuit and up, any pair, any 1st or 2nd nut flush draw. (Roughly almost all of HPfAP top 7 groups.) Many flops are seen by 6 or 7 players with usually no pre-flop raise. This last bit may be relevant in that an AA, KK, QQ .. would usually lurk.
If the BB is first to raise and you are next to act, how good of a hand do you need to re-raise with, given that you might expect half of those opponents that need to call two more bets will fold. Or does it matter how many fold give the min. starting req. above?
Also assume the BB is raising with a reasonably tough hand.
Thanks for all responses, especially those that do not have a Carson/Negrau... what's his name reference in it.
Here's an observation. If 6 or 7 folks see the flop most of the time the quality of the hands is very low. get yourself a deck and deal it out face up. You'll see right away that the 6 best hands include some real garbage, T7o, Kxo, 43o and lots of other Group 9 crap. In my long lost first copy of HFAP I calculated the percentage of each group out of all total possible hands. Group 1-8 was 25% or was it 40%? It damn sure wasn't half.
Regarding your 3-bet question I would pass on raising the big blind without AA or KK but in the game you describe I'd have raised with these hands already.
-Fred-
UTG ,you're in for a call ? Unless U have slowrolled AA or KK why would you raise now ? You might want to fold a few group A hands or touble hands now, if you are sure the BB has AA or KK and not many will call. If you think the BB has 99,98s etc, have at it with your Big card hand. Now is the time to thin the field. What size game is this ? No offence, but the only thing i can think of so far is garbage in , garbage out.
Sorry folks. I should have stipulated that there were 7 callers in before the BB raise. There is a real opportunity to get dead money in there with a re-raise, so I don't think you need as good a hand to justify it. I'm thinking any group 1, 2, 3 or pair as big as 77 ?? Again, since the min. req. are small you have a weak field. Of course the BB may have you beat before the flop but you increase your chances by thinning.
This is a very common situation in loose LL.
So much depends on what you think of the BB. If you are sure he has AK or some other none pair big hand maybe you can reraise and out play him. If you read him wrong you then have problems. Or you can play for the odds to flop the set with the whole crowd by calling. I think you're trying to seperate the men from the boys or the imaginative from the unimaginative. Perhaps the players from the played ?
Here's one. I would like comments concerning a decision Thursday night. I won't mention the establisment because I have no axe to grind. Opiniuns welcome.
1-4/8/8.I'm in the BB w/T7o and watch the normal 4 limpers take the flop.The SB dropped rather than put in a dollar. He's the best player in the game and I'm fortunate to have him on my right. UTG is weak tight conservative player. Cut off is loose passive forein tourist that will bluff or call with any hope. Flop comes Q98 two hearts. Couldn't hope for better and needed it ( I'm stuck like chuck ). I check my open ender and UTG bets, 3 call including the LPT in last position. I checkraise my open ender and get a call from UTG and LFT. I did this to see if if there was already a made straight. If there was I wanted to know before I hit mine. Turn is a 6s making a staight for me. I bet my dog hand , UTG calls after pausing a second. Now while LFT decides on a call the dealer turns and burns. 5d, the LPT now throws his hand into the muck. The whole table explodes and a floor-man is called. The situation is axplained and the floorman calls for the card to come back be reshuffled and a new river dealt. In the mist of this argument, (I wanted the 5d to stay because it had no effect on myself or UTG because we had already acted also LFT cards could not be retrieved anyway as they were now hidden). LFT offered to put $8 bucks in the pot but I refused this because it was not his fault and there's no reason for him to pay, besides I wanted him out in any case. I just wanted the present river card. Well I didn't get it, finally after the decision the 5h was dealt making a 3 flush. While complaining about my impending dome I check call my opponent. He had a set of 9's and I took the pot. Every thing was OK with me until the smug floorman says "see that didn't change anything did it ?" as he walked away.
I think his decision was wrong and it may have cost me a bet or two because I like to check raise, but now I couldn't be sure my opponent had no flush. So I was reduced to calling. Comments ?
Headcase,
I don't like the floorman's comment but that is the way the decision would go in Los Angeles. If the action is not complete, the card must come back, even if the last action would have been to fold.
Regards,
Rick
If the decision river had paired the board this may have put me over the edge, in that the last thing I would suspect was a full house and it may have cost me a couple more bets. I still don't like the decision, neither UTG or I took an advantage if the 5d had stayed, and it's the card that was meant to be ! Maybe I should never get stuck, I finally got even and went home.
x
There has to be one solid rule in this situation. Your point is valid but based on misinformation. There cannot be two different rules when action is pending which you are inadvertently implying. What happens if Lft holds his hand and is given the choice of the card staying and he mucks his hand or him calling and the card comes back. This gives one player an advantage. His hand being mucked has no bering on the decision because he had information that you two didn't therefore to prevent confusion and a good deal of heat the card must come back. Dealers are human.
I would not call that a great flop. The Q really hurts your hand. Somebody could be drawing to a higher straight or you can be drawing to half the pot if somebody has a straight.
Again on Saturday at the Trump Taj. 3-6 hold em.
I'm in middle position. All fold to me, I call with KQs. An old lady (OL) who plays any connecters calls. A fat girl (FG)who reads a magazine if she isn't in calls. An old lady (BOL) next to her calls, who might be the best one at the table. Button folds, SB folds, BB limps.
Flop comes out Kd Js 2c. I immediately get reminded that KQ is often the second best hand. I fear the AK and I check. OL checks, FG checks, BOL bets. BB folds. I call, OL calls, FG calls. I immediately think I am beat as of the moment. 4 in for the turn.
Turn is Qc. What would normally be a good card for me suddenly doesn't when I realize the straight possibility and upcoming backdoor flush draw. I bet out, making people react to me. OL calls, FG calls, BOL raises. Everyone calls. I then think I might be overestimating them and think they might just have Jacks or something.
River is 5d. I bet out, OL calls, FG calls, BOL raises, everyone else calls. I think this is bizarre. Results later.
Bring on the fire and wrath please...I can take it
John
Make sure you re-read you post before you send it out this one is a little confusing, especially when you say everyone else calls, how many people are cold calling 2 bets on the river.
Yeah I would say you played this hand suboptimally in many ways, I would raise with KQs in middle position, but limping isn't too bad if you are going to get lots of loose calls behind you, but they wont call your raise with garbage.
On that flop you should DEFINITELY bet out, since there was no raise before the flop AK is probably not out there, and you are likely best. On the turn when raised I would probably just call her down, because of the various straight possibilities, although you might be able to lay this hand down on the the river if you check and it gets bet and raised.
Oh and in your other hand with the AAA flop I think you played way too aggresively because people in low limit games virtually never lay down a full house, and when you get checkraised and called you know you are beat, and should really fold (suspecting that person who called 2 bets has the A).
Shawn Keller
I also think this is bizzare, but I'm guessing BOL flopped a set.
No offense, but I don't like anything about the way you played this hand. First, I would have raised first-in, from middle position, to gain control and force out (or charge) the trash hands that want to call behind me (this is low-limit after all). But limping in this situation isn't terrible. On the flop I think you MUST bet out (unless you have some reason to believe that BOL will bet so you can check-raise). If BOL raises you, then you can tentatively to put her on AK or KJ, but probably not AT. If she raised me on the flop, I'd probably try to check-raise her on the turn...if she 3-bets the check-raise, you can probably safely muck the hand (unless you have greatly over-estimated how good she is). If she just called the check-raise (or anybody else did), I'd be inclined to just check-call the river. The reason for this is to try and induce a bet from a hand like KJ or save money if she was waiting to blindside me with a monster. It's been quite a while since I've played low-limit though, and maybe I'm not thinking right for this game. All other opinions are welcome.
Steve
OL - QhJc FG - KhTh BOL - 2h2d
OK, so I was half correct. The set wasn't exactly slowplayed. And while I didn't say this in my original post, because others had already mentioned it, I think raising KQs is a something important to consider. If your playing is respected at this table, the BOL, who you consider to be a good player, would have mucked her 22 without a second's hesitation. Unless she was Roy Cooke in disguise. Then there's nothing you can do.
Dan
Here's a general rule that I use to play my hands. Learn it, love it, or ignore it. Your choice.
I will never play ANY two cards where, if it hits my hand, I will be afraid to bet it.
If you're going to play KQs, you have to be very happy when a king or queen hits. If you worry about AK, you shouldn't be playing KQ to begin with. Similarly, if you make a flush, you have to be very happy with your hand. If you constantly worry about Axs being out there, you should not be playing KQs.
But it's more than that. You made a good pair on the flop and were afraid of AK. Fine. Then you hit two pair on the turn. Now you beat AK big time. But suddenly you're worried about A-T being out there. Where was A-T on the flop? Did it suddenly appear in someone's hands because the mere possibility of a straight is now there?
Something tells me you lost this hand. I don't know how, exactly. My guess is a set that was slowplayed. If so, there was nothing you can do. But assuming you did win the hand, you probably could have won a lot more money. I'll now look at the results.
Dan
Greetings,
Here are a few hands which I thought I played well but Wasn't sure. ALl comments apprecaited!
In an agressive 6 handed 5/10 game I limp w/ QJs in early postion , another calls an agreessive player on the button raises and all call.
The flop comes A K 8 rainbow. All check to the preflop raiser who bets , all 3 others call.
The turn is a T making a two flush.
I check intending to chekcraise, but it gets chekced around.
The river is a blank, the blind bets out I just call as I suspect he might be bluffing, and I want the calls behind me, (maybe one might raise), and if i raise pbly no one will call except the initial bettor.
Did i play this hand too passively? One freind of mine said I shoudl know by now that the guy in the blind will pay off no matter what, and so if you just call on the river you might make 2 bets, but if you raise you'll definitely win at least one more.
Here's another in a typcial 10-20 game.
2 limp I call w/ K J o, The BB raises and all call (SB folded). The flop comes K 8 8.
BB hasn't done much raising at all during the session and isn't overly aggressive.
He bets all fold to me, I raise intending to get to the river as cheaply as possible (eg check behind him during the turn, and call the river).
The turn is a small blank, I change my mind and think I can represent the 8, and there is some chance (small though) I have the best hand, and there is a decent chance he'll fold.
He calls.
The river is J. He chekcs and I bet, He calls w/ Ak and says ,"nice river..." I think I think somehting like you shouldn't comp;lain if you re not going to bet the turn, but don't say anything.
SHould i just fold on the flop ( i don't htink so). Is the bet on the turn ill advised?
All comments appreciated!
Thanks
If you were worried about knocking people out you should have bet the turn a check raise is sure to thin the field maybe end it right there. Bet the turn. Raise the river.
Can't fold top pair top kicker. BB could have raised preflop with a lot of hands you have beaten. 99-TT-QQ His check on the turn tells me he was worried you had the 8. He was gonna see the river anf you got jucky to snag the J. Can't see you playing the hand any differently.
If you folded the KJ on the flop you should not play KJ.
Hand 1: I would bet out on the turn. There's no guarantee the preflop raiser will bet, as the board could look fairly scary to him at that point, and there are many hands he might check. A Q or J could cause you to lose half the pot. Don't get into the habit of check-raising the nuts too often, because observant opponents will realize you probablydon't have the nuts when you bet.
On the river, I generally don't like the "call and go for the overcalls" play with the nuts because you lose the chance to get into a raising war with a bettor who thinks he has the nuts, and someone else with aces up could easily call 2 cold on the river. One exception might be if the river bettor is very timid and would only bet the nuts (these types do exist at the low limits), in which case you know you're splitting the pot.
Hand 2: Does raising the flop and betting the turn really represent an 8? Many players would slowplay an 8 until the turn, and either way, do you really expect AK or KQ to fold there? Betting the turn isn't necessarily wrong though. I would often bet with the intention of checking down the river if I didn't improve against an opponent who'd bet AK/KQ if the turn checked through (so I'd have to spend an extra bet anyway.) I would often check if my opponent is likely to bluff the river if the turn checked through, or bet a hand that he'd fold if I bet the turn.
-Sean
I raise first one in in middle position with AQo. 1 very loose cold caller behind and the button (pretty solid) calls. The blinds fold.
Flop comes K T 5 rainbow. I bet. Both players call. Turn comes another King. Do you bet?
Puggy
I would bet t al f it's just you and him, take it to him, beat him mercisly, make him cry, If it was me I would bet it all, that'll frighten him!
At this point there is 10.5 bets in the pot. A solid player who cold-calls your raise on the button is marked with a good hand after another player also calls your raise. I would be very worried about the button not the loose caller. Let us focus on the button for a minute and go through some of the possible hands he might have:
AA (3 Ways): I think he would have 3 bet pre-flop given the presence of the loose caller.
KK (1 way): Again, I would think he would 3 bet pre-flop.
QQ (3 ways): I would 3 bet pre-flop but some players might not. Keep this as a possibility
JJ (6 ways): A definite possibility.
TT (3 ways): A remote possibility because he probably would have raised your flop bet with a third player in the hand and now having a set of Tens.
99 (6 ways): A remote possibility since there are two over cards to his pair on the board and you raised pre-flop and then bet the flop.
AK (6 ways): A remote possibility because he would raised your flop bet having top pair/top kicker and a third player in the pot.
AQ (9 ways): A definite possibility because he would be getting decent implied odds here to go for a gutshot straight draw once the flop comes.
AJ suited(3 ways): A definite possibility.
AT suited (2 ways): A definite possibility.
I think I would bet the turn. You will drive out a lot of hands that the button could most likely have which are as good if not better than yours. In addition, you have some outs against trip Kings if someone has a King.
last week I read Worm's message about 333, man that game is great! i hope all play and credit Worm to this
I played the following hand in a loose 7 handed 4-8 hold'em game. I raise UTG with pocket jacks, a good player calls in late position, the big blind calls, everyone else folds. Flop comes K K 8. BB checks, I bet, good player raises, BB folds, I call. Turn is a Jack, I check raise, he reraises, I call. River is a six, he checks. Should I bet?
Thanks, Pete Mitchell
I raise UTG with pocket jacks, a good player calls in late position.
You said a good player calls. Would a good player call with K J against an UTH raise? How about pocket eights? I would say no. If he had pocket eights he would reraise to get the blinds out. I would have reraise on the turn and if he called bet on the river.
Pete,
On the river, don't you act before the good player? How can he check unless you have already done so?
Regards,
Rick
> River is a six, he checks. Should I bet?
From what you said of the earlier rounds, your opponent acts after you. How can he check to you on the river?
That aside, I would bet it. In my very non-expert opinion you shouldn't be afraid of KK since he didn't raise pre-flop, and if this guy is really a good player he wouldn't be calling your UTG raise pre-flop with KJ, K8, or K6 (though at 4-8 I wouldn't be surprised to see KJ).
Let us know what happened.
I got the replay of this hand completely wrong. The good player was in the small blind. I was not under the gun, I was 2 to the left of the big blind. So, an extremely loose player called UTG, I raised with JJ, good (but too loose before the flop)player calls in SB, BB folds, UTG calls. Flop comes K K 8. SB check raises me on the flop and I call. When a Jack comes on the turn, he bets, I raise, he reraises, and I just call. A six comes on the river and be checks. When I say he was a good player, I am mean relative to the other fish in the game. He still plays too many hands before the flop, and calls raises with hands he shouldn't, but he plays pretty well once the flop comes. Anyway, I got scared and checked behind him on the river. He showed King-rag for trips. I took down the pot with Jacks full. I think that a major factor in my play of this hand was what Roy Cooke refers to as the "Ready to Go" attitude. I was sitting on a nice win, and this was going to be the last hand of the night. When he reraised me on the turn, I can remember thinking "Oh great, he may have Kings full, and now I stand to lose a lot of chips on the last hand of the night if I go to war with him." I know that I shouldn't let this affect my play, but I did. It definitely kept me from analyzing the situation correctly. Sorry for the botched original post.
Thanks, Pete Mitchell
assuming your opp acts before you. the important thing is you will be called by any K and only KJ beats you. you are the favorite when called. it is also an unlikely spot for a check raise. i would bet.
assuming the opp acts after you. hmmmm. i think i still bet. and i'll tell you why.
a good player almost never calls an open raise. especially when that raise comes from an early position good player. and again esp when he is late position.
(you know, if you are second utg in a loose game cold calling with KQs or AQs or AJs may be correct. but it is so rarely correct i don't like to telagraph my play and just reraise with AQs and fold AJs and KQs.)
if he really is a good player then the the only hand i can put him on is AA. maybe KK. he doesn't mind the blinds coming in cause he has a monster and expects to be able to use his position to make up missed bets postflop. but that doesn't make sense post flop.
so, i think he has AKs or KQs and is not that good a player. he will call your bet. if he has KJs, then your read on him was terrible and he is not at all a good player. that's ok, you'll know better in the future.
scott
i forgot to say that in the future make sure what you say happened is at least possible according to the rules of poker. if you dont remember, make it up. but make it up correctly.
scott
Yes!
Vince.
This player expects you too call so he would not check with any hand that could beat you. He would not check with K,8 fearing a K,J in your hand. Most often he will have Kx or less that he will call with. You have a strong hand even with this board and it becomes stronger when the play occurs as you described. I'm not much on value betting the river but in cases like this it can't be to far from correct to bet.
I've been struggling a bit with my river aggression level/when and when not to value bet - especially in low limit games, where bad beats are common.
Example #1 - 6-12 hold 'em, loose passive game. I have queens in late position (cutoff seat). 4 limpers, I raise, blinds and rest call, we see flop 7-handed.
Flop: 10 9 2 rainbow. Checked to me, I bet, 3 callers.
Turn: Offsuit Q giving me a set. Checked to me, I bet. Player in small blind (SB) check raises, rest fold. My first thought is he has KJ for straight. I call and hope for board to pair.
River: 8. He checks. Now I'm not sure he has straight, and decide there's a good chance he has 2 pair or a smaller set. I bet for value, he checkraises, I call, he has K-J offsuit for nuts.
My question: Was my river bet bad poker? I was very aware that he only needed a J for a straight, but my feeling was that if he had the straight he would bet out. I only bet because I had top set, and could beat two pair and smaller sets. If I had had just an overpair (my most likely holding, I don't see how he puts me on a set), I almost surely would have checked. However, my opponent was a weak player who likes to slowplay (see example 2), and perhaps this should have induced me to check?
Example #2: Typical bad beat story (I know), but provides some insight into my opponent from Example #1. About ten hands before Example #1 I have black aces under the gun and raise. Early Position player ( the villian from Example #1) cold calls (two to my left), 3 more callers, we see the flop 5-handed for 2 bets each.
Flop: 7c 3c 3s. I bet, EPP calls, rest fold.
Turn: 10c. I bet, figuring I probably still have best hand (he wouldn't have cold-called in early position with hand containing a 3, right?), and if he has flush I have re-draw (Ac). He calls.
River: Qh. I check (bad vibes), he bets, I call. He turns over Qs 3s for fullhouse, drags pot, tells his neighbor, "You've got to slowplay it." IMHO he played it wrong on every round except river, when bet is no-brainer.
Anyway, given his playing style, was my river bet in example #1 definitely wrong?
Thanks,
Caddy
An old hold-em axiom sez 'when you turn a set someone else turns a str8'. It happens a lot and it makes sense.
Your river bet is bad poker. What hand is likely to call? None you can beat.
I strongly disagree with this statement. Many hands less than a set of Queens would call here. In my experience, it's a rare player who would checkraise twice here with the nuts. Most would checkraise the turn and bet the river with the nuts. The pattern of checkraise turn and check river when the river card makes an easy posible straight almost always denies a straight.
The key point is that the bet from the set of Queens will get calls from 2 pair hands sufficient number of times to make a value bet worthwhile.
Sorry, in example #2, 3s on flop should be 3h.
yeah right...
IMHO he played it wrong on every round except river, when bet is no-brainer.
Did he really play every round that badly? If you've been playing TA, he's playing you for a premium hand. If you have AKc, he can't drive you out until the end, and an early raise by him tips you off to not bluff. If you have a big pair, you're drawing to a 2 outer and in a bad way. With his play he probably doesn't lose any pots he'd win with early aggression, and he might pick up an extra bet or 2 on the end. How bad is that?
Fat-Charlie
Cold-calling my preflop raise from early position with Q-3 suited = horrible poker.
He gets dream flop - 7c 3c 3h, I bet. Isn't he supposed to raise? There are several players behind him who could have 2 clubs. So could I for that matter. I know lots of bad low limit players slow play here, but that doesn't make it correct.
Turn is a third club. I bet. Isn't he supposed to raise? Sure I could have two big clubs, but it's not that likely. It's much more likely that I have a big premium pair and one big club, so he gave me a chance to draw out on him cheaply.
River - Okay, I have to give him credit. That bet was the work of a genius.
I should pay more attention to these things. Yeah, the cold call was ugly; I was talking about after that. I missed the points about the 2 other players and the 3rd club on the turn. Thanx for not flaming.
Fat-Charlie
I was playing in a $30-$60 hold-em side game at the World Series of Poker at Binion's Horsheshoe in Vegas when the following hand came up. It is a 9-handed game with a $20 small blind and a $30 big blind. The big blind is in Seat #10. #1 and #2 both fold. I am sitting in Seat #3 with the Td9d. I normally don't open with this hand in early position but this game has been fairly passive for the last hour with very little pre-flop raising and several players taking the flop. I decide to "jump the fence" and limp in. #4 limps in, the button limps, the small blind limps, and the big blind does not raise. There is $150 in the pot and five players in the hand.
The flop is: Kd,7d,3c
Both blinds check. I bet $30 with my flush draw having 4 opponents, two of whom have checked to me. If no one has a King I could win the pot outright and I have a lot of outs if I am called. Only #4 and the small blind call. There is $240 in the pot and three players.
The turn is: 5h
The small blind checks. I now check. One of my two opponents could easily have a King and probably won't fold if I bet. If not, they are probably on some kind of draw and will call any bet. #4 bets $60. The small blind calls. I call with my flush draw. There is $420 in the pot and three players.
The river is: Jd
The small blind now bets $60. I call having made my flush but worried about the small blind suddenly betting out with perhaps a bigger flush. #4 now raises to $120. The small blind calls. There is $720 in the pot and it costs me $60. What should I do?
I will post the result a little later during the day.
Calling the river is automatic. Your flush should win more that once in 13 plays here but not much more.
I'm no longer in love with T9s up front. Too many things can go south with that hand and making under flushes is not the only one.
Definitely call. You've got the 3rd nut hand here, though if you beat another flush, they have to have 5th nut or worse because of your 9.
I say that the small blind could bet out on the river when the diamond comes with perhaps 2pair just made (K-J) which he was going to check-raise the turn. He obviously sees the diamond, just like everyone else, and wants to represent that he has the flush. You call. The problem is that #4 raises, knowing that SB bet _and_ you called. If #4 has a 2pair also perhaps, or just in general if he thinks that he can beat the SB because he doesn't put the SB on the flush, he could raise. What he would have to put you on at this point is maybe middle-over-pair such as 10's. What you have to put the SB on now is a crying call, because I think he'd raise with with the nut flush.
Strange idea here. Would a raise be out of the question? You mentioned that you called because of the SB out-of-the-blue bet, but would he only be calling the raise on the river with the 2nd nut or nut hand? If the answer is no, then the issue comes down to what you think #4 has. I might be crazy though...
You have to call in this spot. The small blind had been check-calling all the way, so he may have a flush, but he's probably going to bet out with any size flush, given the small field. #4 may see the third flush card hitting the board and see this as sb taking a shot at the pot, subsequently raising with two pair (KJ maybe). There is a danger of the sb actually having the goods (suited ace) and reraising but that is a chance you have to take, given the size of the pot. Third nuts I think should be shown down in this situation.
PS Let's say you do call. Would you call again if the SB makes it 3 bets?
Sorry I didn't read the whole thing correctly. I thought you were after #4 for some reason. I still think you have to call here. I'm not worried about sb since he just called the raise. #4 may still have him on a steal and you on a single pair. THere is a very good chance #4 has the goods, but I still think you have odds to call in this spot especially since you will be last to act.
I'd make the crying call because the pot is large, but you're probably beat.
12-1 on the call....I think this is an easy call. Since you didn't raise on the river, #4 may not put you on the flush and could be raising something like KJ for value. The SB, having had to only call 1/3 of a bet, could have anything...probably 2 pair. You said the game is pretty passive, but don't comment on the tightness or aggressiveness post-flop (or your image at this point), so this is just a generalization. But regardless, I can't imagine that a fold for one more big bet could be correct here, barring some very strong indication that you are beat.
Steve
Call.
I would not expect to win in this situation that often but just enough to make the call slightly profitable.
some factors are
-The small blind could have a lower flush then you.
- You acted as if you were not on a draw by betting the flop so you don't scare the raiser that much.
- #4 bets the turn indicating maybe he is not on a flush draw and picked up something else.
- this is not the place to save money
D.
With no raise from you I think you are saying you do not have the nut (or second nut flush). #4 may be putting you on a big K and trying to kick the SB (and maybe you too) out of the hand with two pair. He may be putting the SB on a weaker flush because SB didn't push the hand through a smallish field. Call
At this point it's $60 to you with $720 in the pot. Your fold or call will end the betting. Unless you know something about your opposition compelling enough to fold, you have to call with your 3rd nut flush. You need to win in this situation more than 1 in 13 times to show a profit. I think you'll be showing a profit.
As for the other players:
Since LB only needed to call 1/3 bet BTF, I think he could have anything including A-little or Q-little of diamonds. But I think he would have re-raised the river if he holds the nut-flush. So I assume he does not have Axd. If he has second nut, the best he could have is Q8d. I think this is a questionable holding for 1/3 bet and absolute worst position on all betting rounds. He could have 56d or 64d which puts him with a gut-shot and a medium flush draw on the flop - this may be enough for him to call a single bet on the flop with only one person left to act after him. But his betting on the turn indicates he does not have 64d. He could also easily have KX or Kx suited or not. So, it's difficult to put him on a hand. But we can put him off of hands and the only ones I can't put off of that might beat you is Qxd.
I believe #4 could have Axd or KJ. He called your flop bet figuring he needs callers to justify drawing to the nut flush. Then when you show weakness on turn, he bets figuring he may be able to pick up the pot right then with his KJ or continue drawing to the nut-flush. When Jd hits the river he either makes his nut-flush or kings up and figures he can either re-raise for value or re-raise hoping to force one of you to drop and increase the chances of his two pair holding up. I think Axd is more likely. With KJ he would have re-raised your flop bet to thin the field.
Hope that wasn't too scattered.
-Michael
This can be dangerous, but I would say you could sometimes consider re-raising and folding if #4 or the SB makes it 4 bets. It's a very rare player who would make it 4 bets with a hand that you can beat.
The small blind having the second nut flush is a concern, since the $20 small blind would mean he would probably play any suited queen preflop, but would he have just called #4's river raise with the second nut flush? It's worth considering that the $20 small blind means the small blind would probably play any two suited cards, including small ones that you can beat.
As always it really depends on the opponents, but there are some times when re-raising is probably correct.
-Sean
Unless this is a trick question, where you will make an argument for reraising, I hope you are not trying to save a bet yet again Jim. David Steele's answer was perfect. He obviously knows mored about poker than machine vision systems.
I challenge David Sklansky to a machine vision dual at dawn.
I propose grey-scaled-normalized-correlation-heuristic hill-climbing-based search as the event.
David, are you related to Jack Sklansky the machine vision expert? He was at Cal Irvine I believe.
D.
Yes. He is my cousin. My father was his professor of mathematical logic. Mind if I have him stand in for me at the duel?
Cool! I have actually met him before and know some of his work fairly well.
D.
This brings up an interesting story. I think I witnessed something of a statistical singularity a few months ago. At a 3-6 game 5 players saw the flop unraised.
The flop was something like K-T-2, all clubs. Small blind bets, big blind raises, UTG reraises and it is capped by a fourth player. All four bettors see the turn.
Turn is a blank (something low and red). Everyone checks to the capper who bets, he gets checkraised by the big blind and everone calls. The river is the 3c. It gets checked around! When the cards were turned over, all four players had two clubs in their hands, they had all flopped a flush. The most amazing thing was that there were 12 clubs on the table and the only one not there was the ace (which explains why everyone was too scared to bet the river). The big blind won the pot with his queen high flush.
I don't know how often something like this happens, but I would predict that you would have to play a LOT of hands to see four players flop a flush again.
Jim: You mention in your question that you called the turn and the river because of your flush possibility..You always knew that if you made your flush there was a possibility #4 of SB could also make a flush? Knowing this you called..You made your flush..It seems to me you've got to call..
Jim,
I'd call, and I'm not sure you're beat. One possibility might be 6d4d for the str8 on the turn and the made flush. I'm not sure how tricky these players are, but I wouldn't discount the raiser holding the Ad for the big scare card, having limped with AKo. It might make sense for him to try this against two opponents.
Of course, I play LL games only, but your bet on the flop, check on the turn, and call on the river when the flush hits indicates a small made flush very often in the games I play in, so I'm probably way off.
John
I have noticed that no one has questioned your call of the SB's river bet. Did the thought of immediately raising his bet ever occur to you?
The small blind could have any number of hands that you can beat from two pair, possibly (KJ), or even a slow played set of 3's, or 7's even a miracle set on the river (JJ) wouldn't be out of the question. It is very unlikely for him to raise before the flop with any of these hands, and with him getting 14-1 on his pre-flop call, he could have virtually any two cards.
From the information given I think he is betting his hand for value on the river with the Jd being a scary river card for his hand unless it is KJ or JJ and he just improved dramatically. If you raise his bet you eliminate the possibility of a position raise as a steal by the #4. Also you know that if the #4 does make it $180 and the SB calls two more bets, which he would only likely do with a flush, you can seriously consider folding the third nut hand even though I am pretty sure you have the best here. I am interested to hear the real results.
Dony
I call too much money to fold and I've got a good hand.
Well, I made the long call for $60. #4 won the hand having the Ad5d for the nut flush. The small blind mucked so I don't know what he had. I posted this as a problem because it was my "going home hand" after being stuck $1100 for 7 hours of play. I was thinking during the walk back to the car that I made a "steam" call. I remember that Mike Caro talked about making bad river calls in one of his articles when you know you are beat especially with a third player in the hand. If you assume the probability of the small blind leading out like this on the river and calling a subsequent raise without a flush is say 20% and the probability of #4 raising the river bet after it is bet and called to him by two other players without a flush is 10%, then overall my play had about a 2% expectation. I blew $60 to try and win $720 which is about 8%.
I am glad that all of you thought at least calling was the right play since that was the play I made.
The other reason I posted this was because I read books, articles, and posts on this forum about how rare it is for one flush to lose to a bigger flush. Yet I see this phenomnenon at least once every time I sit down and play hold-em for 6-8 hours. Unfortunately, this time it happened to me
Thanks for your responses.
Interesting that if you'd won that one pot, you'd be down less than 1 BB per hour (instead of down almost 3BB/hr) for a reasonably long session. Isn't it amazing that a couple bad breaks on a couple pots can be the difference between a nice win and a substantial loss?
Actually, as I think about this further; $-1100, at 30/60, at Binion's, during the tournament, against a table of people who choose to compete against a collection of the world's top poker players, really is an insignificant loss. You'll probably make 3X that amount tomorrow. Wish I were there doing battle myself. It's got to beat working 9-5. Thanks for continuing to share your insights. Hope retirement is treating you well outside the occasional abberant day.
Not a pretty picture but...would you really have been as likely to play the hand if you hadn't been stuck? Would it have been your "going home hand" if you were up $1100? Just a thought.
"if you assume the probability of the small blind leading out like this on the river and calling a subsequent raise without a flush is say 20%..."
Don't you need to consider that they may have smaller flushes? The probabilities are probably high enough then.
D.
Fold. SB has a better flush but my guess is you lose to the A4d from #4.
In reality, I make a crying call 'cause I don't trust my instincts and it such a nice big pot and I close the betting.
I thought #4 was bluffing with the Nut flush and straight draw. Turns out he was semi-bluffing.
The raise confirms that he has the nuts (I'll accept the 2% exception factor)
See, I just will not trust my instincts even for free on this forum.
I really enjoyed reading this thread. But I have one question which isn't really about the final decision to call or not. Once you flopped a 4-flush, could you not have checked the flop and then called if someone bets instead of betting outright? I think it's hard to believe you'd win this pot outright right after the flop.
Thanks,
Rahul
Yes, Rahul I could have done that. But I was hoping to win the pot outright by just betting since no one had shown any strength. Occasionally you pick up the pot by just betting the flop. However, with 4 opponents that may be 1 or 2 too many to do this.
Jim,
I think betting is generally the right thing to do but since you're not on the nut-flush draw, I think check-calling might be a good idea. What if someone who didn't show strength pre-flop got a great flop and raised your bet? I'm sure #4 would bet if you check in this situation and then you could just call. I guess it's usually better to take charge of the hand than to play passively.
Rahul
It is true that someone could be slow playing a powerhouse. I normally assume that people who don't act strong are weak until proven otherwise since fair/mediocre hands outnumber good hands. But of course as the number of opponents increase, the likelihood of what you are saying increases as well. I guess that is why they call this gambling.
Jim,
I have been busy most of the day so I'm late to the party but I'll briefly post without peeking.
I like the flop bet for the reasons you mention. I would be surprised if anyone disagreed with it.
On the turn, I might have bet if it is in fact a passive game since this was a blank. When I think of a passive game, I think of players who take one off on the flop but then fold the turn. But checking and calling can't be very wrong.
On the river, I would think the small blind has the flush, but not the nut. Queen suited has to be a worry but there are many smaller flushes he could have, since his pre flop call only cost 1/3 of a bet. The player in seat #4 has played his hand in such a way that I am confused. Maybe he has Ad Qd, but he could have some other holdings as well.
Bottom line: I'm getting 12 to 1 on my call. I'd guess the small blind has about a 40% chance at a higher flush. The player in seat #4 has bet his hand strangely (unless he has Ah, Qh). My call closes the action. So I call.
Belated Regards,
Rick
I haven't looked at the other responses, but you played it fine up to the last decision. And though there's a good chance you're probably beaten, I think there's enough doubt (You have the 3rd nut floush and the raiser just called on the flop...), and the pot's big enough, that you have to make a crying call. Now let me see what Nebiolo said. He always peeks.
I have AA - all red - and raised pre-flop. Three callers.
The flop is 3 medium clubs. I check and another player bets, two people fold, I check-raise, he calls. We both check it down to the river where I win. He had no club.
Comments?
It's very difficult to check raise a good player out of position to save money. They'll smell something fishy and continue to beat you down. Against more passive players, that can work quite well. I know of one person who is a very passive calling station (is there any other kind?). I can check raise my draws against her and then check it down all the way to the river if I don't hit, or hit and extract a lot of money. I save a lot of money this way.
That being said, against just two opponents, there's no reason to believe just yet that the flush is even out there. If someone does have the flush, you'll find out soon enough. If neither has even one club, they'll probably fold to a bet. With one high club, they'll stick around to see another one fall. Make them pay dearly for this right.
Dan
In your quest to save a little money you could very easily lose the pot giving away a free card to a single club.
Why are you worried about saving money when it seems like you have the best hand anyway? Seems very likely you are not up against a flush after you don't get re-raised on the flop. Your play on turn and river is much too passive. Bet your bullets.
KJS
I think you should bet the flop with your big over pair of Aces. It is highly unlikely someone has flopped a Club flush. The last thing you want to do is to give out free cards/cheap cards to someone with a singleton Club in their hand. You should bet the flop. If a blank comes on the turn, then you should bet the turn. If a blank comes on the river, then bet the river and expect to get calls from top pair type hands. Sometimes they will call with any pair hoping you raised on Ace-King with a Club in your hand.
You should have bet the turn when no help came. Check-call the river if you like to induce a bluff. Bet it since he needs at leat 2 pair to win but won't throw away top pair.
You missed 1 bet for sure but more likely 2.
I think this was a money saving raise but it was the opponent who saved money.
With your hand, you would prefer to win the pot without giving any more cards, so giving your opponent free cards is a terrible play.
After your opponent has just called your check-raise, there is no reason to believe he has a flush - most likely he is holding a high club or even top pair with a big kicker...the call definitely indicates he wants to see the next card. Thus, you should make it expensive for him.
If he actually had the flush he would certainly have bet into you on the turn after being checked to if he's even mildly aggressive. I don't think you would have actually saved any money if you were losing.
~DjTj
Although this story ultimately has a happy ending, I wonder whether I had any business being in the hand in the first place.
I'll pass along the important details, and wait for the advice/flames/kudos (whichever may be appropriate)
The game: 3-6 Hold'em
Dramatis Personae
Seat 1: Elderly woman, calling station, impossible to get out if she has any pair on the flop or any "credible" draw.
Seat 2: Reasonably good player, played with him a couple of times before. I know he has read ToP and HfAP. Generally solid, although perhaps a little overagressive on raising pre-flop, especially from big blind.
Seats 3-8: All loose passive players, varying caliber. Unimportant in this hand.
Seat 9: Me.
Seat 10: New player, visiting from out of town, seems to play very good cards, somewhat conservative, but aggressive when he's got something. I've got a reasonably good read on how he plays from observation and talking to him while we're both watching from the sidelines.
Seat 10 is the button, seats 1 and 2 are SB and BB, respectively. The game has been loose-passive for the two hours before this hand comes up.
PRE-FLOP
I have Ac 5c. 4 callers in front of me, I call, button calls, SB calls, BB raises. (Surprise, surprise.)
Everybody calls to me, I grumble and call, now the button reraises. SB calls, BB caps, we all call.
32 small bets in the pot.
FLOP: Jc 10c 4h
Hmmm, I've got the nut club draw. There's enough money in the pot to justify drawing to just about anything, but I get the impression that with me stuck between the two raisers, it's going to get very costly.
SB checks, BB bets, 2 callers to me, I call, button raises, SB calls, BB reraises, remaining two fold to me, I call, button caps, all call.
50 small bets in the pot.
TURN: Jd
Damn! Now my draw might not be any good. While I'm pretty sure neither BB or button have pocket Js, I could be looking at a higher pocket pair, AJ, or worst case, JT (Yes, I have seen BB raise 98s with many callers in front of him, so this isn't outside the realm of possibility.) Most likely, however, I'm up against a high two pair or three of a kind.
SB checks, BB bets, I call, button folds! SB calls.
Well, at least I'm not stuck between the two raisers anymore...
28 big bets in the pot.
RIVER: 8c
OK. I've made it. So long as there's no tight...
SB bets out. Knowing the way she plays, she'd have been betting top pair or a set, so I know she was on the flush draw and has made her flush. BB folds, shaking his head. No tight there. I now raise with the nut clubs, SB calls with 7c 2c.
I take down a rather nice pot, amazed that she called all that way with baby clubs, but wondering whether the same could be said of me...
OK. I probably shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, but I'm wondering whether I made the correct play under these conditions.
I think coming in for 3 one off the button with A5c was fine, and even calling the raise from the BB (knowing his tendencies). But should I have called the extra two bets, after button reraises and BB caps? Since nobody else dropped in front of me, I figured I'd stay for the flop, knowing that just about any draw would have positive expectation value. I certainly wasn't happy about it, though.
From the way the button played pre-flop, I'm guessing he had AK or AQ. About two hours previous to this hand, a similar situation arose where he just called with AK in late position, and when seat 2 raised, he then reraised.
As for seat 2 (BB), I'm not sure, because of his tendencies to raise frequently and on an eclectic selection of hands. The fact that he capped it lead me to think maybe AA or KK.
In either case, I can't be sure, since I saw neither of the raisers' hands.
Obviously, once the flop hits, and I have a draw to the nut clubs, I want to stay, but given that I'm sandwiched between the raisers, is that such a good idea? I figured that with a pot that large, and a couple of people staying in, I was getting excellent odds to get paid off if I made the draw.
So, how'd I do? Were my decisions sound, or was the $186 just sheer dumb luck?
Any advice on how to handle the situations where you've got a good draw, but you're stuck between two players bound and determined to make draws expensive?
I agree with your calls preflop. If it had been two bets to you in the first place, I would have folded. With the money already in the pot from the other players, I think your call was marginal but not bad.
On the flop, a lot depends on your reads of the other players. If you expect this aggression, I'd go ahead and raise the BB's bet. With a pot this size,you want to do everything you can to try and win it.
Best case scenario, you make the button fold his AK, then beat the BB's pocket pair when an ace hits. Your unexpected agression may also allow you to see the turn for just one or two bets, perhaps even steal the pot when the board pairs.
Worst case scenario, you see the turn for four bets anyway.
The last thing I'd like to add is that this is a pretty bizzarre way to play AK from late position. I would have pegged the button as a mediocre player with a strong drawing hand, maybe ATs?
ere's my guess at the situation: BB has AA (and DD has CC...). Button has either A - (Q or J) suited, or a high suited conector. But the odds are somewhat low that all four aces are out, and the button, if he did have an Ace, must realize that BB has aces, and therefore wouldn't reraise. So my vote would be on strong suited connectors. He limps in and, when BB raised, sees an opportunity to try and thin the field and get dead money into the pot by making a few people fold when faced with calling 2 bets cold.
As far as your play, your first call was fine. Second call of the raise was fine too. No problems there. Lots of players to keep your drawing odds up. Now you're faced with two bets cold. This is dicey. You know you're up against AA here. OK, maybe KK, but even if you hit your Ace, it's probably not any good. You really have to hit this flop hard because you know what's out there if you only slightly hit it. I'd rate the calling two bets cold marginal, though probably mandatory. Marginal because you would really have prefered to just limp into this flop. Mandatory because you're getting even better odds now than when you called the first time.
After that, it's pretty much irrelevant. You hit that flop as hard as you reasonably could expect. You should be very happy with them raising on the flop. Stuck between two raisers? Who cares? As long as three other people are seeing each bet you're earning even money on your draw. That, combined with the money pre-flop makes this a very profitable situation.
Board pairs on the turn? Who cares? With that much money in the pot you're got quite an overlay on the "make it and still lose" contigency.
River. Ta Da. You won. Congrats.
Grand scheme of things, you really didn't do much wrong here. I'd be thankful that those raisers were betting your hand for you.
Dan
Your play was fine. The key here is that you are drawing to the NUT flush. In addition, pre-flop this is one of the few instances where it is right to call a double raise back to you since you have a lot of players and you are already half-way in.
As aside, we see here another example of where two players both make the same flush. All the conditions were right as well with many players taking a flop and several calling bets and raises on the flop to see the turn. Some very prominent posters on this forum (not to mention any names but you know who you are) advocate pounding the pot on a flush draw with lots of players and a large pot even when the flush draw is no where near the nut flush draw. But the error is in treating these situations as random probability problems rather than conditional probability problems.
20-40 hand:
I'm on the button with 5s5c. 3 limpers. I call. Strong tight player raises SB, Tight player 3-bets BB. I don't think either of these players would raise their blinds with less than AKs. All three limpers call. I call. Good call?
Flop: AhQh5h
SB bets, BB raises, all limpers fold. I think about it for a long time and three bet it. Good play? I seriously considered folding. This is the only time I've ever flopped a set and thought about folding on the flop in 1 1/2 years of holdem.
SB folds. BB just calls.
Turn: 2s
BB checks. I bet. Goood play? BB calls.
River: 7c
BB checks. I check. Good play?
allan
Pre-flop, you're getting 8:1 on calling a double bet, with the chance of a cap from the SB. I'd let it go. If the blinds are raising with strong aces, the only way you're going to see any action is if they flop high pairs. The board you got is about ideal, but if you're unwilling to bet an ideal board for fear of set over set, you should probably have folded preflop.
Your turn and river play depend on your read of the BB. I put the SB on KK or JJ (no heart). Seems to me that BB could have AA (3 ways), KK with a heart (3 ways, assuming SB has JJ, so maybe even less probable than that), QQ (3 ways), or AKs (3 ways).
AA and QQ will call the turn and river and beat you. KK will call the turn and fold the river. AKs will call the turn and river and lose. Your turn bet won't get a better hand to fold, so I think checking the turn through and calling the river would be the better play.
I would call. Hoping to hit a set. The SB folded because of the ace. The big blinds most likely hand is Ace-King. I'll bet his King is a heart. Betting the turn is good. But, I think you should have bet the river.
You and Niels both think betting the turn may have been a mistake. I agree but don't think it makes much difference. If the BB will bet the river with a set of Q's or A's after I check the turn, then I lose the same number of bets. If an A, 2, or Q comes on the river, I could save a bet by checking the turn IF I am capable of just calling with a full house on the river.
I read your result. Usually, two sets don't flop and I wouldn't worry about. You were just unlucky this time. But, from the way you discribed the situation, I was surprised that he didn't bet out on the river to make sure he got that extra bet, unless he was thinking that he was up against a set of aces.
Difficult hand. The following is cursory so take it with a grain of salt.
I'm on the button with 5s5c. 3 limpers. I call. Strong tight player raises SB, Tight player 3-bets BB. I don't think either of these players would raise their blinds with less than AKs. All three limpers call. I call. Good call?
Mandatory call at 8.5-1 in position. Tough break about your first bet though.
Flop: AhQh5h
SB bets, BB raises, all limpers fold. I think about it for a long time and three bet it. Good play?
It's very hard, but I think the raise is a justified attempt to knock out the SB, who might have a lesser heart draw and/or an overpair. A problem iwth raising here is that there's a real chance that you're up against a higher set but might not be able to smoke it out because of the flush threat.
SB folds. BB just calls.
Turn: 2s
BB checks. I bet. Good play? BB calls.
Only if there's a reasonable chance that he'd 3-bet in the BB without a pair after the SB raised. That's rare, so in most cases you should just check it down and call on the river if he bets into you. If there's a good chance that he'd raise preflop with AKs, the bet was marginal but good.
The only thing you know is that he probably doesn't have a flush. He could have KhKs (3) and think you've got the made hand. He could have AA (3) or QQ (3). He might just have a lone ace and be calling on the possibility that you've got something like KhTh (a bunch of these, but probably unlikely). It seems strange, but the point of raising on the flop IMO was to knock out the small blind. Once that's done, keep the money you put into this pot to a minimum.
River: 7c
BB checks. I check. Good play?
I think so. I'd say its' almost an equal probability that he's got AA, KhKx or QQ. Hope it was kings or worse.
oops, my previous response should be underneath Chris's post.
Also, I think three-betting the flop may save me 1/2 bet if it allows me to check the turn (or river)--but loses more if the BB or SB flopped a flush, or is more aggressive with a set.
Allan,
I'll post this one without peeking at the others yet.
You wrote: "I don't think either of these players would raise their blinds with less than AKs."
I think few players can be put on this narrow a range or holdings. I would think the small blind raiser (a strong, tight player) could have any pair TT or greater, AKs, AQs, KQs, and AK. If a tight player in the big blind reraises, then I would say he has any pair QQ or better, AK, AKs, and maybe AQs.
I think this is an easy flop call after the raises. You will be paying a high price but with five probable opponents (limpers don't fold often (especially here in California) even when they face two more bets) and likely aggressive post flop betting, you will usually collect a lot of bets on your sets. Note that you have ideal position with limpers between your likely aggressive opponents and you.
I like the three bet on the flop. The pot is too big to fold and you may be able to define your hand now. With the BB your only remaining opponent after your three bet, you are in good shape. Of course, you could be beat big by a set of aces or queens, but I think a hand such as KK with a heart or AK with a heart king is more likely. I think the big trips would cap the flop or lead at the turn if they just called the flop when a blank came.
I also like the turn bet. Now I think it is more likely you are up against a pair with a heart rather than a set.
I would bet when the river blank hit. If I'm wrong, it is only by a little, as the AK and KK will call for the size of the pot and the set will not check raise you because of the three flush on board.
Regards,
Rick
Your opponent doesn't have a flush and you are a comfortable favorite with your set. I think the call of the double bet was right before the flop. Playing aggressively as possible throughout this hand was right. I think a bet on the river was the right play.
Pre-flop, there are about 15 bets in the pot when it is your turn to call the double raise back to you. I am really not comfortable with your call since you are getting 7.5:1 which is about the odds of flopping a set. The problem is that when you flop a set you will not win 100% of the time. In addition, it could get raised again costing you 4 bets to see the flop. However, it is probably okay because being on the button you will get a lot of action coming into you if you flop a set.
On the flop your 3 bet is mandatory. It would be criminal to even consider folding. It is unlikely anyone has a flush and furthermore with two cards to come you have a ton outs to beat a flush even if someone has one. It is hard to believe that you have played hold-em for over a year and never flopped a set.
Of course you bet the turn especially when everyone checks. You probably have both the best hand and the best draw. If someone had bet you should raise.
You should bet the river when checked to. I think you missed a lick here.
Jim,
It is not the first time I've flopped a set, it is the first time I flopped one and considered folding it on the flop.
allan
... All three limpers call. I call. Good call?
yes, you're getting what - 16-2 or so on a 7.5-1 shot. Add in implied odds and, yes, good call.
I don't think either of these players would raise their blinds with less than AKs
SB bets, BB raises, all limpers fold. I think about it for a long time and three bet it. Good play?
Your concern is understandable, but maybe a little out of proportion to the real threat. I may be wrong, but I think you might be overestimating the raising standards of the blinds. I don't know who they were (The Analog Kid plays where I often play. But only now do I think I may know who he is. Did we play in a 20-40 game on Friday?), but I see a lot of raises in the blinds from players with fairly unremarkable hands. You can't fold. Your 3-bet was fine.
The river is sort of situationally dependendent. If your read was right, you've got that risk of the BB holding AA or QQ. But he may also hold AKs or KK with a heart or maybe JJ with a heart. So that makes it around 6-5 against having him beat. So whether to bet is very close. If your read was too "respectful", then a bet is clearly right. I'd probably err on the side of betting here, but it's close.
I wrote: But only now do I think I may know who he is. Did we play in a 20-40 game on Friday?
Uh, well, I don't think that's you, unless you posted this hand from the cardroom, because that Allan (Alan?) was there when I left this evening, before the time you posted. Are you the young guy who comes up and talks to Kevin sometimes? (Hope I'm not prying too much.).
Yes, I'm the guy who talks to Kevin. I usually only play 9-18 at Oceans.
Then BB had Pocket QQ's.
After 1500+ hours of playing hold'em (at a profit I might ad), I am still struggling to try and find myself so to speak. Experimenting with different styles, philosophies, etc. Would anyone care to comment on the following playing styles? Is one necessarily better than the other?
I have a friend who plays 20-40 almost exclusively. Although, he will on occasion play 10-20. He is by far one of the best tactical thinking players I know. He can hold his own with the best of them.
He is also EXTREMELEY conservative. By that I mean he would never play a hand like J9s QTs etc. in anything but last or maybe next to last position. This includes hands like KTs, QJo, etc. He also wouldn't dream of playing A7s in middle position regardless of how many limpers precede him. Although he does mix up his play, he will often just call from early position with AQo. I have also seen him limp first in from late middle position with KQo.
His basic philosophy is, "When I flop a hand, I like to have some degree of confidence that it is the best hand. That way I can play it aggressively and make top dollar. It's hard to do that with QTs, J9s, etc.
I also have another friend (who plays 10-20), who I believe to be the best, most winning, and toughest hold'em player I have ever seen (live anyway).
His playing style is quite different. Although he doesn't play marginal hands out of position, he will raise with just about any hand he wants to play. J9s from late and KQo from middle position (especially with no one in before him) are clearly raising hands for him.
His basic philosophy is "I want to play as many hands as reasonably possible against weaker players. And I want to play those hands for a raise. I can get off my hands, and I will rarely lose as much to them as they will to me when I make a hand, especially a deceptive one. If I am the best player in a game, it stands to reason that I want to up the ante every time I play"
Now don't get me wrong, my 10-20 playing friend is still very tight. It's just that I have never seen anyone beat up a game so consistently. And while my 20-40 friend can beat some very tough games, I'm wondering if his conservative style is really the best approach after all?
A novice's approach: It seems evident to me you should take the best from both players and adapt your style to the present game you are in. I bet you can figure the rest.
Your second friend has it right, but that doesn't mean you should emulate his play. The truth is, the better the player you are the more hands you can play. In fact, if he earns 2% more per hand than you do, then he can play quite a bit more hands. The reason is fairly straightforward, the middle range of hands fall off very gradually in terms of profit that you can make. So if you can make just a smidgen more profit for those hands, many go from being losers to winner.
That said, a 2% edge is huge in poker, and just because your friend is good enough to play more hands doesn't mean that you are. Watch how he plays. If he'll let you, sweat some of his hands with him.
- Andrew
Andrew-
What you said makes a lot of sense. But 2% per hand seems to be a very intangible concept for me. I know from a hold'em software which I play, that I see aprox. 15-16% of the flops. This seems VERY tight. Certainly tighter than what a lot of experts can and do play. I'm trying to add a few more hands, but am unsure of where to find them. I am VERY tight for a raise. I think this is correct.
Could you give a concrete example of how someone can earn 2% more per hand? 2 people in and you have T9s 1 off the button for example. Whereas I might limp, you might raise. Or 76s same situation. I might fold thinking there isn't enough money to make the hand worth playing, and my friend might raise. Is this where some players can earn more per hand?
Brian,
The question of how you earn extra money is difficult one to answer. Playing poker last night I was considering it myself, and I began to think that in a game where everyones hand selection is roughly correct, the way to make more money is to manoeuver the betting so that you get the most money in when you have a big edge, and you limit your exposure when your edge isn't large.
But edge is hard to define. Edge comes from a lot of different places. The biggest thing you need to consider when thinking about how to play mediocre hands is: what kinds of mistakes are my likely opponents going to make. The answer to that question greatly affects which mediocre hands you can play, as well as how you should play them.
- Andrew
Post deleted at author's request.
Think of it this way, "How do you make any money on a hand?"
You do it by knowing when you're beat and folding, you do it by knowing when you're beat but can win with a bluff, you do it by knowing when you're ahead and betting, etc., etc.
If your second friend is making these decisions more accurately than you, then he is winning more/losing less with each individual hand, and his profitability for any given hand is higher. Thus, maybe he can play T9s for a profit in situations where you would lose a little. If so, he can play more hands than you and still be making money on each hand. It does not necessarily have anything to do with whether or not he raises with those hands coming in, but how well he plays them postflop, either by correctly folding, betting, raising, etc.
Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)
With regard to your first friend who plays $20-$40 you need to understand that most $20-$40 games are a lot more aggressive than lower limit games especially pre-flop. In a typical $20-$40 game most pots are getting raised so you do need to play tighter than in a lower limit game which might be more passive. Restricting the play of J9s,QTs, etc. to plays from the cutoff or button is not too bad in these games. Similarily with KTs or QJ offsuit. However, he is making a mistake in not playing Ace-little suited from middle position when limpers come in. Calling rather than raising with AQ offsuit from early position is okay although my style is to usually raise with it if I see players coming in on garbage. Limping in rather than opening with a raise from late position having KQ offsuit is a little too tight although the problem with this hand as opposed to say AJ offsuit is that in those situations where no one makes anything you usually have to bet the river with KQ since you cannot win showdown normally. With AJ offsuit, an Ace especially with a Jack kicker can frequently get the cheese at showdown without having to risk a bet. I think your friend is trying to minimize his variance at a slight cost in EV.
Your second friend may be taking advantage of the more passive nature of a $10-$20 game which is frequently populated by players who are playing tight in their efforts to move up from the lower limit games to the medium sized games. $10-$20 is a good game for doing this.
"I normally don't open with this hand in early position but this game has been fairly passive for the last hour with very little pre-flop raising and several players taking the flop. I decide to "jump the fence" and limp in. #4 limps in, the button limps, the small blind limps, and the big blind does not raise."
Jim, What reason do you have for limping in with that hand in early position? You stated that it was a passive game, so why not raise? At the 30-60 level if your going to play a weak holding you should raise 95% of the time if the players respect your play, you have a good chance of picking up the blinds and taking control of the hand. What do you think?
Because picking up the blinds is not a worthwhile goal for suited connector in early position. In addition, someone with a real hand might re-raise me which would really limit the field with me having to pay multiple bets to take a flop. The last thing I want with this hand is to pay multiple bets to take a flop against one opponent who has position over me. I want callers, not raisers, and I want multi-handed action so that if I get lucky and make a straight or a flush I can win a big pot.
Thanks for the reply Jim. Maybe I've been playing these hands wrong. I'll leave them to the pros. I'll just play them in late position in a multiway pot. I play in SO Cal where it's rare to play in a 30-60 passive game. That's why I thought you should raise with this hand if your in early position and your going to play it.
Loose passive 15 - 30 game. 4 player limp in, I´m on the button with AKs and raise, SB folds, BB calls, all limpers call.
Flop: K88 rainbow. Checked to me, I bet, BB and the first 2 player fold, middle position player calls, next one folds.
Turn: 3. 4th suit. The other player checks, I check.
River: 5. He checks, I bet, he calls, I win.
Any comments appreciated.
Regards
M.A.
Bet the turn if you get checkraised dump it. It's most likely he has a king bad kicker anyway. Betting the turn you risk the same amount of bets anyway if you are willing to lay the hand down. if you can't lay the hand down in this spot then playing the way you did is the most cautious.
Bet the turn , I would not be giving any free cards at this point. If you think he may be slowplaying an 8 then if he checks the river then check to close the hand and show it down. I am not to big on giving any free cards on the turn with 2 pair, top kicker.
Best of it !!
MJ
This is a flop free of any big draws. Your opponent has a king and inferior kicker, a slow played 8, a pocket pair or a lot of imagination and a piece of junk. Giving a free card on the turn presents very little danger since yout opponent has at most 3 outs if he holds KJ or similar and only 2 outs with a pocket pair. You have 2 outs if you're up against an 8 and you won't get a chance at them if you bet and fold to a turn raise. I'll play it like you did on this flop. Change it to two suited or K99 and then I'll bet the turn.
-Fred-
I agree, unless he is totally unconsious, check the turn, see the river. Free cards arn't always that bad if you can induce a bluff, or call on the river that you wouldn't have gotten.
He "knows" you have no 8, therefore he might represent one by checkraising the turn making your call more difficult. Kind of depends on the hombre'
m.a. you should follow through with a bet on the turn. At this point you have no reason to assume you don't have the best hand. Your opponent most likely has a King with a worse kicker. It is especially bad when your lone opponent checks to you and you fail to bet. When your lone opponent acts weak by checking and calling that is because he usually is weak. If he has a stronger hand than yours, like trip Eights, you will soon hear about it.
"When your lone opponent acts weak by checking and calling that is because he usually is weak."
In bigger games, I'm not so sure about "usually." Many players are more dangerous when they call the flop rather than raise. By checking the turn, you can entice a bet or call from a weak hand on the river from a player who probably would have folded into your bet on the turn.
I'm not saying that one should always play this way. But, as a variation in your usual play, checking the turn behind a lone opponent who checked can sometimes be a profitable play. In this case,I'd be less inclined to do it against the blind, who is more likely to have K-x than a non-blind limper.
Yes, this might be a good way to vary your play especially if you are playing against the same opponents all the time which frequently happens in higher limit games.
Jim Brier's response to my last post, brought to mind a dilemna I often face in loose games.
With hands like TT,99,AQo, etc. I'm more inclined to limp in from an early position. My reasoning is that since I can expect a lot of callers (regardless of whether or not I raise), why not minimize my investment with these hands until I see how I like the flop.
A friend of mine has an almost opposite view. He reasons that in these types of games, people will incorrectly call a raise cold. And while many cold callers collectively decrease the value of his hand, he figures any time people incorrectly put money in the pot, it's to his advantage in the long run. And whether or not he gets it from a particular hand is inconsequential.
Does this make any sense?
These hands are not the same. TT has a significantly higher chance of winning unimproved than does 99. AQ has almost no chance. With 99 and 88 I'll raise pre-flop only if I know my raise will keep people out of the pot. 99 and 88 want heads up action or 5 or more opponents. Three opponents is death. TT can stand a bit more heat and I'll usually raise with it.
With AQ I mix it up and raise often and limp some of the time. In games where many will call a raise then I'll charge them full price for playing crap.
-Fred-
"With AQ I mix it up and raise often and limp some of the time. In games where many will call a raise then I'll charge them full price for playing crap."
Right. And that's the point. You are charging people for playing inferior cards, while you have almost no chance of winning (with AQo) unimproved.
Can't the same be said for 99,88? And while I realize that TT is better than 99 and 88, you have very real problems against a big field when overcard(s) hit. So AQ and middle pairs seem to both be hands where you would prefer to play heads up, even though with pairs you don't mind seeing multi-way. I'm not saying it's wrong but why raise with AQo in that spot?
No, Bryan J there is a very real difference here. With AQ offsuit you will flop top pair/top kicker or top pair/excellent kicker about 1/3 of the time. There will be other times where you will flop a big straight draw and be getting the correct odds to play. The problem with 99 or 88 is that you will only flop a set about 1/8 of the time. There will be a few times where your pocket pair will be an over pair to the flop which is good. But in general, AQ plays better in a typical hold-em game than 99 or 88 especially when players are coming in on garbage.
"I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that..." if you're playing in a loose game, you're probably playing with people who will play any ace. If you raise with your AQ, you'll knock them out, but if you just call you get to charge them several bets on later rounds.
It's a different story if your raise will allow you to steal the pot after flopping nothing, but I find this is not normally the case in lose games.