![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
There is a common play I make which I am not certain is sound. Please give me your opinion.
A 'typical' game, not aggressive and not passive. I am in one of the blinds with something like say 97 suited and I call a pre-flop raise from a player who will usually raise only with big cards. I call because maybe two or three others called the raise.
The flop comes J72. I am first to act and bet my pair of sevens. If there is little resistance to my betting I may follow this to the river, that is, betting if I sense weakness or check calling if another bets, especially if others fold to me and the raiser. Many times the raiser had something like AQ and never pairs. Other times I improve myself and still beat his overpair.
"A 'typical' game, not aggressive and not passive. I am in one of the blinds with something like say 97 suited and I call a pre-flop raise from a player who will usually raise only with big cards. I call because maybe two or three others called the raise.
The flop comes J72...."
I don't see much sense in betting those lowly sevens when there are 3 or 4 others who have raised or called a raise pre-flop, particularly if the raiser would only raise with AA, KK, AK, AQ, QQ, JJ (if he'd raise with KQ, then he would probably raise with AJ as well). I count 21 ways for him to be holding a pair higher than JJ or three jacks (6+6+6+3) versus 20 combinations of overcards. So about half the time, it is safe to say, the pre-flop raiser will be raising your bet on the flop with a better hand. At least one of the other players is highly likely to be holding 2 high cards (to have coldcalled a raise or to have limped from early or middle position and then called a raise), and since that person didn't raise (or reraise), one can eliminate certain combinations like AA, KK, QQ, maybe AK and AQ which leaves AJ, KQ, KJsuited, QJsuited, JTsuited...
Your count of 21 ways he might hold a pair vs. 20 for overcards is seriously flawed. There are many more combinations of overcard type hands than high pairs.
Just consider AK alone: With four Aces and four Kings in the deck there are 16 combinations of AK. There are also 16 ways to make AQ etc.
you're right of course; so much for latenight arithmetic; so it's 21 versus 32. (if you add just KQ and AJ, the unfavorable/favorable ratio becomes 33 versus 48; factor in KJsuited as well and now it's 36 versus 48; factor in KQ, AJ, 99 and TT but not KJsuited, and the ratio becomes 45 versus 48).
however, there are certain players who will raise with worse hands, especially overcards or flush draws. and many who will raise with 88-TT (or who will call you down all the way). I should have said, then, that you will be raised by the pre-flop raiser as much as 40-50% of the time.
something else to consider: one of the other players who has called the raise will more often be holding a pair than had there been no raise, and the likeliest pairs they would just call a raise with are 88, 99, TT, JJ. will you be able to chase these away with a J72 flop and a single bet? I doubt it.
finally, and this point is frequently overlooked: those people who will typically raise with AK or AQ from early or middle position (I'm one of them) will often not raise when these combos are suited (in sync with S & M's advice). this tendency "softens" that 16 + 16 total for AK + AQ.
therefore I stand by the premise of my original analysis in spite of the inaccuracies.
Well said.
That's the problem with a post like mine which does not consider all of the exceptions, counterpoints etc. I was speaking in generalities rather than setting out a code of flop play against a steal raiser. I mean so much depends on so many factors so that is a near impossibility.
That said, I generally prefer betting out rather than checkraising because there are times, I am going to win the pot right away. In most cases, that would be fine by me.
On the other hand, if I were to checkraise, I find that guys don't let go even if they hold QJ and I checkraised with 97 on a flop of A73. It is a strange phenomenon really. If I bet the flop, they are likely to just fold . But if I checkraise, they are likely to call or worse raise me back.
That would be alright if I knew what they had but when they call, I can never really be sure what they have so it makes it hard to play the turn and river.
You said:
"I take exception with this comment also. I think there is a very good reason this should favor the preflop raiser. Mainly because the preflop raiser in your example HAS POSITION. I believe this should favor him slightly. Again skp, I'm not trying to shoot holes in what you're saying. I read most of your posts and find you think the game well. I'm just trying to pick up something from you on this. Of course you make a valid point that betting all kinds of flop is necessary to avoid being easily read. I'm just saying that position has its merits and if played properly, should derserves to hold its own even when a slight underdog."
I agree.
But what I am saying is that one way to neutralize the position disdavantage is to just bet out on the flop. In other words, if the flop is A93 and you hold KQ, you should consider betting out now and then. There is no reason to assume that this flop hit a steal raiser and in fact you may well have the best hand. By betting, you put him to the "fight or take flight" choice before he does that to you if you check and he puts in his automatic bet.
This is not something that most otherwise good players do often enough. In fact, I know that I don't it often enough. And some otherwise good players would never even think of betting when out of position with KQ on a flop of A93. Remember, I am talking here about playing against a steal raise. In that case, I like the S&M recommendation to pretend that the Ace is a deuce and play accordingly. So, you picture the A93 flop as a 932 flop against which you would play KQ. If you are going to play, why not bet instead of checkcall.
I am not saying that you should always bet here. Nor am I saying that you should always bet when you make 2nd pair etc but I am saying that you should favour betting as opposed to checkcalling or checkraising.
Nick makes a good point above how these plays tend to work a lot better when you are projecting the right image.
Anyway, there's lots to talk about on this topic. Maybe others can comment.
these comments by Raider and you are meaty but you both seemingly pretend that no one else has seen the flop besides 77 and the pre-flop raiser. I thought we were addressing the situation as posed by Nick with two or three others seeing the flop (which is why he decided to call the raise in the first place)?
Our comments were in relation to a different situation i.e. you are heads up against a steal raiser. We were not addressing Nick's hand with the posts you are talking about.
There are 2 recent threads which deal with the subject of betting out on the flop as opposed to check/calling and then betting the turn. In both threads, I actually favored (or at least didn't have a problem with), the 2nd play. Now, I'm assuming that your opponent is a good player who also views you as a good player. In other words, I'm assuming that you are not a weak calling station who often checks and calls as a matter of routine. If so, I think check/calling can actually be a strong play!
I guess what I'm saying is that I think this play has to at least be in every good player's playbook. Here's just one example:
You raise with QQ pre-flop and are 3 bet. Heads up. The flop is AA3 with a 2 flush. Now by betting, you are likely to get raised by any number of hands including some that beat you, and many which do not. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that against certain players, you are actually more likely to be raised by hands such as JJ,TT,99, and a flush draw than you are by an ace! Now of course you can re-raise, but I stand by my belief that many aggressive players in todays games are not likely to stop with the aforementioned hands, and likely will re-raise again! Also, there is the problem of when they DO have an ace, you are likely to get smooth called and popped on the turn. Not exactly a pleasant situation with QQ.
But what if you are known to sometimes check/call the flop, and then lead out with a very big hand? Of course when you have a big hand, your hoping to get raised so you can make it 3 bets on the turn. My point is playing big hands in this manner provides cover for those times you might not have a big hand, but play in the same fashion. You will sometimes lose less when a). You are beat and do not have to put all those bets in on the flop to find out. Or worse, b). You fold the best hand because your aggressive opponent kept the heat on. Another example would be sometimes playing 2nd pair in this fashion against an agressive opponent as in the thread "bet small pair into a raiser". It can be a cheaper way to play this hand against an agressive player, while providing a little more assurance that when you are raised on the turn, you are not laying down the best hand. The same cannot always be said for being raised on the flop by aggressive players.
Another reason I think this play is a necessary addition to one's playbook, is that is can provide cover for semi-bluffs on the turn. They become a bit more powerful when a good opponent realizes this might indicate a powerful hand by you, and his mediocre holding which was worth a bet on the flop, might not be worth continuing.
Again, I'm assuming that the player making this play, is not weak or normaly known to check and call. I'd be curious to get other's comments on this. .
= Raider
raider,
I only have time for a quick comment.
I think you have hit upon something important. The fact is that in today’s game it seems opponents often do not respect flop bets that much after you have come in with a raise. In your example above, checking and calling on the flop is very intimidating. This is especially true with the two aces out there. Why wouldn’t they fear a slowplay? The alternative of betting is so obvious that many opponents do not respect the bet (figuring that you missed the two aces on board) and would make a move with an underpair or all sorts of stuff as you suggest.
If you balance your play correctly and pick your spots, you can make your checks and calls as scary as your bets. Turning the weakest sounding play in poker (the check-call) into a weapon just has to be right if you know how and when to pull it off.
Regards,
Rick
It can be deceptive to bet out the big hands too. Good players will never put you on a huge hand if you bet it out on the flop as I do at times.
Guess what we are saying here is it is not good to be predictable.
When I stop and think about the opponents I play with on a regular basis at 20/40, out of a typical full table, maybe 3 or 4 players are astute enough to pick up on a move a sophisticated as this. Pick your opponents wisely.
I also play at 10/20, 15/30 and I would never consider this move at those levels. It would be lost on the players that have a hard time comprehending what is happening in the current hand.
I do like the move because flop bets are cheap. Getting two or three bet on the flop may make you lay down a winner. I know I have. By check/call on the flop and a bet on the turn you will have a much better understanding of where you are. If you get raised here, depending on the player, its an easy laydown.
Here's the setup: I'm at a full 10 handed $10 - $20 limit holdem game. I'm in the BB with Ac 5c. Folded to a late position player (LP) who limps, the button limps (tim) the SB folds, and I check my option.
The flop is 2c 4c 6h. I bet out, as I've been playing fairly tight and both opponents are aware of it (they ac are both the type that actually pay attention to the game). LP folds, and Tim raises. I respect his play and don't think he is making this play without a minimum of 2 club overcards. I don't rule out the possibility of an overpair or a set. I call (would anyone give up here being heads up with just a flush and straight draw for half a bet?), and the turn is the As.
I check and he fires again, I'm trying to put him on a hand, and am now ruling out an overpair, the only thing i can think of that he would limp in on the button that that hit was a set or a flush draw. I call again. The river is the 6d, making the final board 2c 4c 6h As 6d. I check and he bets again. He wouldn't make this bet unless he was very certain he had me beat, or had no hand at all to show down. I called. Comments? will post results later.
Respect is one thing but that shouldn't get in the way of aggresive poker.
When the Ace hits on the turn, you really should play it much more aggresively (be it with betting out, checkraising, 3 betting or whatever). You probably have the better hand and as well the best draw.
Imagine how handsomely you might get paid off on the river if a club hits and you catch Tim with smaller clubs. With all that strength you showed on the turn, he would be hard pressed to put you on a flush and is liable to lose 3 or 4 big bets on the river betting as well.
In short, your hand on the turn is a monster - play it accordingly.
I check the turn hoping for a bet from my opponent. Do I check raise? I am a believer in raising when you have the opportunity but as skp states this hand is a monster on the turn. Not many cards can beat you or you may just be beat already. I believe that the best way to play the turn here is to check-call. And check raise the river in almost all cases except if a club comes then you must bet out.
Vince.
The problem with checkcalling the turn is that you miss out on some major river action (and an extra bet on the turn) if both of you happen to make clubs on the river i.e. if you checkcall the turn and bet on the river when the club lands, your opponent may not even raise you with Qcxc as he now has reason to fear that you may have made a bigger flush (He probably would raise anyway with Kcxc as he would think that you could not have Acxc given the checkcall on the turn). On the other hand, if you checkraise the turn and both of you make clubs, he is going to give you some major action with any 2 club cards in his hand.
And if he folds to the turn checkraise...well, fine...just stack the chips. This business of checkcalling with a pair of Aces because you are either way ahead or way behind is a good enough concept but you should not let it interfere with your ability to max out on what might be a very profitable situation. Besides, I think that play makes more sense when the board is already paired i.e. if the flop was Jc9d9c and you bet with Ac5c and are raised, it makes sense to checkcall the turn if you have an Ace as in that case you are either way ahead (if he has a Jack) or way behind (if he has a 9). One of you will be playing a 2 outer. More specifically, there is no way that your opponent could be playing a 5 outer.
The checkcalling concept has less application with the type of flop that Doug had. He had a monster hand on the turn. They don't come by often. I think he should play it much harder.
I had top pair no kicker with a very big draw, but as far as a made hand, mine was quite weak.
Top pair plus nut flush draw plus gutshot = monster hand.
The monstrosity (?) of the hand is magnified by the fact that the Ace appeared on the turn after you had bet the flop i.e. you can throw in deception as one of the elements in the left side of the equation above.
You have top pair (even better, its an ace so no overcards) in a heads-up situation. You also have the nut flush draw and an inside straight draw. You got a monster my man. Play it fast.
Skp,
Your probably right.
Vince
I think you're both wrong, next time in that situation I'll just catch my flush, thats a much better play.
Doug
That does help.
Vince
first skp says: "Respect is one thing but that shouldn't get in the way of aggresive poker"
i agree. and if the foe in this hand above is good enough to bet out with good hands he's also smart enough to try to read your hand and bluff or semi-bluff. definitely. chances are he knows you fear his holdings and his betting/raising plays right into that.
secondly, this is the second skp post ive read tonight that he's hit so right on and it wasnt super obvious either.
"he's hit so right on "
I know. Don't you hate that!
vince
He turned over 4,6. A weak two pair that turned into a boat. I put him on a much stronger hand on the turn, A checkraise in fact might have gotten him off his hand. However he said he put me on a flush draw and figured the ace hit me.
No way a check raise loses this guy. He and I probably put you on the same hand. Maybe I was right and skp was wrong about how to play this hand. I'm so confused. Where is the mighty Oz when you need him.
vince
Well, if you checkraised the turn, it is highly unlikely that you would have been 3 bet. And given that the top card on the flop paired on the river, it is reasonable to assume that you would have just checkcalled the river. So, you would have lost 3 big bets if you played the turn aggresively. By playing passively, you lost 2 big bets. Not a very big deal when you consider the upside of playing it aggresively on all those occasions when you catch him with hands like 77, QcJc.
Note that even when his hand is 64, you have a whopping 20 outs on the river with your Ac5c. Couple that with the number of times, he might play the same way with something like 77 or QcJc, you have to play it hard on the turn.
O.K. already!
Vince
LOL
Sorry, Vince...I pulled a Sklansky and posted under your post when I meant to post it under Doug's post.
I like to bet out on the turn here. There's a very good chance you have the best, and if you don't it's the cheapest way to find out. If you are behind you have outs.
You have a very borderline call on the river. If I'm up against a player that respects me, I muck. What do you think he thinks you have? He told you on the flop he wasn't scared of your 6. The ace on the turn should be a scare card for him. Now the river pairs the lead card on the flop and he still bets out. That's a pretty scary board for him to bet into with a pair of 7's or 8's.
...but not scary at all if he holds a busted flush draw i.e. QcJc.
River folds in this type of hand is a definite no-no in my book. You just absolutely have to call unless you are up against someone who just will not bet here without a hand that beats your ace and will bluff just once in a blue moon.
Hello,
Earlier I posted a couple of hands where my opponents were overly aggressive and somehow I had to back down a little bit with my pocket aces.
The following hand came about a week ago in a 15-30 HE game.
I sit in the game and don't play a hand outside the blinds for 2 rounds and finally I am dealt the Ad As 2nd to act and I raise.
A player in the cutoff who seems rather knowledgeable about the game cold calls. The player in the BB is a decent player, who is a good stud player, but there is no stud at this club and plays a straightforward game, 3-bets. I cap the betting with my pocket aces and the cold caller calls 2 bets cold once again (what can he have?)
The flop comes the 7h 5d 4h. BB bets. I raise. Cold caller reraises. BB calls. I cap the betting.
At this point my first thought is a flush draw, 77, 66, 55, 44, or any over pair. But I can beat most hands he is trying to represent at this point, that's why I cap with my 2 aces. I put the BB or QQ or KK.
Turn is the 2 of diamonds. BB checks. I bet. Cold caller raises. BB folds. And this is where the question is: do I fold at this point? reraise? just go in check-call mode? I don't think the 2 hit his hand, though he could have the Ah3h. If that's the case I only have a 3 to split the pot. I doubt this. But at this point I am thinking set and just decide to call him down.
River is the 6h. Board is now 7h 5d 4h 2d 6h. I check. He bets. I call. He shows the Ac8c for the 8-high straight.
I was shocked when I saw his hand and how aggressively he had played his gutshot draw. I think he might've put me on two kings and figured he had the gutshot plus the ace on the flop, the double belly-buster on the turn including the ace as an out and hit the straight on the river.
My question is faced with so much aggressiveness on the flop and turn is it a good strategy to just check and call due to the size of the pot?
Any comments welcome.
Carlos
Against a tight opponent you could have folded at a few different points but now that you know this guy is capable of an atrocious play like this, you have to discount his action going forward. Checking and calling is probably right, although that board is pretty hideous for you.
I'm not quite sure opponent's play was quite so atrocious. With the small flop, he probably figured it missed both BB and Carlos, so his re-raise on the flop was designed to get him two free cards to hit his inside straight or an Ace that might also, in his mind, win for him. On the turn, Carlos correctly points out that he now has a double belly buster and thus that many more outs. More questionable in my mind is cold calling the raise with A-3s pre-flop.
In answer to Carlos's question, yeah, with A-A I would go into a check and call mode here. You're not going to win much more by betting if you've got the best hand, but by check-calling you lose the smallest possible amount when you lose the hand.
I don't think the board was so hideous for AA. This is confirmed with the way your opponents played so strongly when they really had nothing until the river. You are going to win many of these type of encounters - i.e. where your opponents are going to stay in and play hard with only draws. You should loosen up. You could beat these guys many times with lessor hands than big pairs.
In short handed aggressive encounters, whenever the flop hits me with high or even middle pair, especially with an accompanying draw of some kind, I would bet the shit out of it. Aggressive opponents are going to give you a lot of action with just overcards.
I think this board is horrible for your hand, and unless I know my opponent played that bad going into the hand I would have folded on the turn. However even with a board that scary I'd check/call this opponent down with an overpair in future encounters.
There is no way you can fold on the turn with that big a pot. Why fold on the turn? A raise here has semibluff written all over it. There are two flush draws out there, none of which have been completed. The only straights that have been completed are 5-8 and 3-6, both of which are extremely unlikely given the nature of the preflop betting. In all likelihood the raiser has a pair-draw combo or two pair, in which case you have outs if the board pairs one of his non hole cards. Check calling is really the only way to go.
x
Hello,
Hold'em is a game of bets saved, or extra bets one. I can't count the number of times I was playing too loose and went back throught the night and added up all the bets saved and hands I should have thrown away but got sucked into. Guess what, had I played appropriate startes, and save bets where possible, I turn a loss into a small win!!
Check and call my good man... check and call
I agree. However, a different story had been holding a hand like TT or JJ and having the good player three-bet me from the BB. I am sure he thought the same way and decided to fold his QQ on the turn. But I think with pocket aces at this point a call was mandatory due to pot odds.
Carlos
I'm in the small blind with red Aces. All fold to a solid player one off the button who open raises. I consider just calling but see that the big blind is folding anyway, so I make it 3 bets. The big blind folds and the other player calls.
The flop comes K K J rainbow. I bet it and get raised. I call.
The turn comes a 9 of the 4th suit. How do you play the hand from here?
Puggy
If he bets the river I'd call but would never bet unless an ace comes. How else can you possibly play it?
I don't think the board was so hideous for AA. This is confirmed with the way your opponents played so strongly when they really had nothing until the river. You are going to win many of these type of encounters - i.e. where your opponents are going to stay in and play hard with only draws. You should loosen up. You could beat these guys many times with lessor hands than big pairs.
In short handed aggressive encounters, whenever the flop hits me with high or even middle pair, especially with an accompanying draw of some kind, I would bet the shit out of it. Aggressive opponents are going to give you a lot of action with just overcards.
Don't know how that happened.
Checkcall the turn and bet out on the river unless a Jack hits in which case you should just checkcall.
why would you lead-bet on the river? I'm not necessarily disagreeing, just would like to hear your reasoning...
Because in most instances, a flop raise by your opponent in a heads up situation is strong evidence that he doesn't have a King. Most players would wait until 4th street to raise if they held a King. In most cases, I would put the bettor on a Jack when he raises the flop. Thus, I would want to bet the river because he will likely just check it down.
Note as well that even if he does have a King, he may not necessarily raise you on the river as he may think that you have slowplayed a big hand like AK, JJ etc.
dont even read the others. skp's logic is flawless here. the others who said check/call are wrong.
which hands do you think a "solid player" would open-raise with before the flop one off the button?
any pair? any two high cards? including JT? Kxsuited but not Jxsuited?
from the opponent's perspective, would it be advantageous to raise with QT with that flop? should the 9 prevent SB from betting out on the turn (contrary to Andy Fox's recommendation below)? from the opponent's standpoint again, would you raise with JJ with that flop or wait until the turn against someone who has, after all, reraised your apparent steal-raise?
general observation: it seems to me that mastering the art of heads-up play separates the men from the boys at this level.
Depending upon the player.. in particular if he is agressive and likely to raise on the flop with trips then
check, call... check, call
If you are against a player who will more often than not raise trips on the turn, bet into him again on the turn, if you get raised, fold. If not, bet the river.
It is not likely he has TQ and is raising in an heads up situation with a 2/1 draw.
Bet the turn. If raised again, call and check-call the river, unless you make a full house, in which case bet out. If just called on the turn, bet the river again and call if raised, unless a scare card comes, in which case, check-call.
I'm in the big blind with AA, UTG loose player limps in, all fold to middle position play who is good after the flop, he raises. I consider re-raising, but decided to smooth call.
The flop comes rag, rag, rag, I check, UTG player checks, middle player bets, again I just smooth call deciding to raise after the turn.
Turn another rag,I check, UTG player checks, middle player checks, damn, plan foiled.
River another rag, but possible striaght with a 4, I'm mad at myself so I bet, UTG calls, middle player folds. Of course UTG has the four.
How bad was my plan, and should I have raised after the flop?
SPM, ...able to out smart himself...
Before and after. Bet out immediately. Being cute costs pots. They draw out enough without giving them opportunities at a discount. The short- and long-term advantages of being aggressive here dwarf the alternative.
By not raising you gave yourself ever chance to lose this pot and you did. Raise and win.
If this had been heads-up at the beginning, your plan would've been excellent. A-A will win a high percentage of the time heads-up without improvement. If this had been the case, I would say you played it very well.
However, you had a 3rd party, so your goal had to be to get it heads-up. You should've raised preflop, and either bet or check-raised on the flop. You lowered your winning chances substantially by leaving the other customer in the hand.
I'm sure you've realized by now that betting on the river was misguided -- especially since you were in a bad position, costing you two bets instead of one. Once you let them make a possible hand, just check-call.
you played this horribly from start to finish. Your game is a mess if you play like this. Also, please check where you are posting-this is for medium stakes games, I seriouly doubt you were playing any level above 3-6.
Hey, anyone can have a moment when they are at a loss of which action(s) is most productive.
Kinda like you did when making your response....
Kevin
WOW Stu!! Is your play as bad as your manners? If so… how about a little 30/60 heads up.
I think we all agree that the best way to get a free exchange of ideas is to berate and belittle people asking questions. Education is clearly for the people that already know everything.
Keep contributing Suburban….
Anytime you want to play 30-60 heads up, just name the day and place. I play in Neveada and California. Have been a pro for over 12 years. I will skin you alive. You are as live as SPM.
Glad to see you don't have an ego problem.
Stu,
Please re-read my post. I didn't insult your play... I insulted your manners. Apparently what appeared to be an insult was more like an accurate depiction of your personality.
Next time I head to Cali or Nevada I’ll drop you a line we can arrange a meeting and perhaps a game. If an egg such as myself can take a few of your chips, perhaps you will learn a bit of humility. But then given the size of your ego… perhaps not.
how long have you been a pro? I have never had a losing year in the last 12 years. Have won from 22,000 to 66,000 a year for this time period. Overall average of just under 50,000 for 12 year period. Whats your record ace?
I was out of work and spent 1999 as a pro. It was a very profitable year by your standards.
How could someone as superior as yourself be satisfied with such a meager income over a 12-year period? Maybe it's time to get a real job, no?
If you think averaging just under 50,000 a year playing poker is meager, you are a moron.
Stu,
You know poker better than you know people. Overall, the most important factor which influences our fate and fortune is the opinion of us held by others. Consciously forming that opinion isn't really phoney, because we are constantly forming it anyway. If you insult and slight other people, you're really mostly hurting yourself.
And I appreciate how hard it is to nurse a bankroll. Anyone who thinks full-time play isn't work is wrong. Keep thinking positive.
Jake
Personally....
I would've re-raised pre-flop. I'd be happy getting UTG's loose dead money in the pot, and if he calls another 2 cold, that's Ok too.
It looks like AA went down without a fight. Unbecoming of a super hero able to bend cards with his bare hands......
I agree with Earl that the presence of a third player makes it mandatory to make a move with top 1 pair at some point before the river.
Kevin
I hate to kick a man when he's down, but you didn't have quads -- you had a pair! Re-raise pre-flop. Pound them on the flop.
You had two opportunities to raise, BTF and the flop, and you instead made a dumb slowplay of a big pocket pair. When the turn comes, you gave your opponent the free card which beat you. I am surprised you did not get raised. Had you chosen to raise somewhere in the hand, or BET the turn (to avoid giving pot losing free cards), then you may have even won the pot. Tough lesson... Hope you learned something.
dave in cali
Suburban,
You can reraise AA in the BB for value. Perhaps you eliminate UTG. I then bet out on the flop... perhaps you get raised by middle position and can three bet it. If he caps it, check and call the rest of the way... otherwise bet it out on the turn and river.
Don't you hate it when it's unanimous that you played badly? Sorry, but I have to agree with everyone else. The only thing I would add is that when someone limps and there are a lot of rags on board it's not unusual to be looking at two pair, a set, or a straight if you've let them get to the river free or cheaply.
Although you didn't play this particular as well as you might have (and will next time), your error was not even in the same league with the poster above who saw fit to be sarcastic and rude. We're all trying to help each other here, folks. It's easy to post a hand where everything went perfectly. It's the hands that we had problems on that should be posted, and it doesn't help when someone adds insults to injury.
The way I play AA (and KK if no Ace shows up) is simple: I bludgeon people with them. At every chance I bet it like crazy, especially early in the betting. I refuse to be cute with it. I may slow down later with a very threatening board, but early on I let 'em have it. Why? Because disasters like this happen. Because that bet you gain when two players call your cap is equal to probably that one bet you gain by checkraising on the turn (let's face it, if both players call your raise on the turn AA is probably in trouble anyway). Guess what? I win small pots with AA. I win medium pots with AA. And I win huge pots with AA. Very rarely do I lose any pots with AA. Would the pots I win be slightly bigger if I sometimes saved my aggression for the turn, like you tried to do here? Maybe. But I also don't have to agonize as much over losing pots like these, and don't allow "mathematical catastrophes" to occur.
30-60. It's my first hand in the game and I've posted behind the button. All fold to the player directly to my right who raises. I make it 3 bets with Jc-Js. All fold to the big blind who caps (4 bet max.). Original raiser folds and I call. $320 in the pot.
Flop is Qh-Qd-7d. Original raiser grimaces noticeably. Big blind checks (!). I bet and he calls. $380 in the pot.
Turn is a blank. Big blind checks again. I bet and he raises. I call. $620 in the pot.
River is a black Ace, making board Qh-Qd-7d-2s-Ac. Big blind checks and I check. He turns over T-T and I win.
All comments appreciated, especially concerning my call of his raise on the turn.
In this kind of situation, the bloated pot from the preflop action compels you to go to the river with any big pair. The 4-bet and check-raise give you a lot of information about the strength of his hand, but it does not let you distinguish TT/AKs/AK from AA/KK/QQ/AQs/AQ sufficiently well to make a laydown given the big pot odds. You're getting 9:2 odds and those hands are 22:16 (hands you beat : hands that beat you, assuming one queen out), so you're a straight up favorite if he would play all those hands that way. Even if you assume he wouldn't always play that with with AK, it's still enough to call.
The interesting thing would be if he bets the river when an ace hits. You would be getting 11:1 odds, and you've got plenty of odds to call if he would sometimes be out of line with other hands or if he would always play TT that way, but not if he would not play any other hands and would only play TT that way half the time. In my opinion, your opponent made a mistake by not betting the river, since he had a good shot at pushing you off KK or JJ. His play on the turn was good even though you wouldn't fold JJ, because it likely would have gotten you off AK.
-Abdul
Excellent observations, Abdul! I don't want to meet you in a table! :-)) Marco
"In this kind of situation, the bloated pot from the preflop action compels you to go to the river with any big pair. The 4-bet and check-raise give you a lot of information about the strength of his hand, but it does not let you distinguish TT/AKs/AK from AA/KK/QQ/AQs/AQ sufficiently well to make a laydown given the big pot odds. You're getting 9:2 odds and those hands are 22:16 (hands you beat : hands that beat you, assuming one queen out), so you're a straight up favorite if he would play all those hands that way. Even if you assume he wouldn't always play that with with AK, it's still enough to call."
This whole first paragraph went over my head like a lead balloon. Sorry for being slow, but I don't get it. All the above hands which Abdul mentions with the exception of TT, beat Andy do they not? How is it he is a favorite if his opponent would play those hands the same way?
I'm sure Abdul is saying something very important here. I'd like to understand it. Can anyone help?
On the turn, the board is Qh-Qd-7d-blank, where blank could be, say, 5s. Andy's opponent checked, he bet, and then Andy called but wondered if he should have folded. I said he was locked to the river with any big pair heads up in a pot that was 4-bet preflop.
On a board of QQ75...
Hands JJ that beats: TT/AKs/AK
Hands that beat JJ: AA/KK/QQ/AQs/AQ
Clear?
Once the ace on the river comes, then there for the first time Andy can consider laying down his hand.
-Abdul
x
.
Would a player really cap the betting and not just call three with AKs/AK and AQs. Wouldn't a player lay down AQ for 3 bets?
Rob
Many players have a cap or fold mentality in this situation.
Especially here. The first in raise may have been an attempt to pick up the extra dead money created by Andy's posting. So Andy's re-raise (with 1 bet already in) doesn't necessarily mean a very strong hand.
= Raider
Thanks, Abdul. I thought the decider, for me, was the presence of the 2 diamonds on the board, making it possible he had A-K of diamonds or (less likely, since he 4-bet pre-flop) even A-J or A-T of diamonds. Plus the apparent presence of a Queen in the orignal raiser's hand made me think he might play this way with a smaller pair than my Jacks. And you're right, I don't know if I call if he bets the river when the Ace hits. I don't think too many players would still bet T-T on the river in that situation.
By the way, player was unknown to me, but he had played two hands while I waited to post and had seemingly played very aggressively the two hands I observed him play prior to this one.
This is one case where 4 betting AKs in the BB might be appropriate. Not for value, obviously, but to isolate the button. The first in late position player raises which would be appropriate with a hand like QTs. The raise from the cut off and the re-raise from the BB would require that hand to call 2 bets cold. All the less than premium late position raising hands should lay down here. If you have to call 2 bets cold with AKs why not add one more bet in an effort to isolate which would substantially increase your odds of taking down the pot.
The huge mistake by the BB in this hand is not betting the river. His check raise on the turn eliminated the possibility of the cutoff playing AK etc. and he was not raised so the button also does not have a Q. Bet the river and win the pot. The cutoff has to think this is a semi-bluff that hit his out. JJ has to fold if the river is bet.
Be thankful you won this hand.
Yes, awfully tough to call the river when the Ace hits. BB played very aggressively but then checked the river (!) Once the Ace hits, he should indeed have bet, because it would probably get me to fold K-K or J-J.
My first trip to LA. The players are not as wild and crazy as I expected. Some are fairly loose though. I'm feeling pretty comfortable in the game.
I'm 2 off the button with Qc Tc. The blinds are not tight or loose, but the button is fairly loose. I see the player to my left getting ready to fold. Everyone folds to me so I decide to open raise. The button cold calls and the blinds fold.
The flop comes 8s 8c 7d. I bet and the button calls. He could have an 8 here or he could have as little as 2 overcards.
The turn comes a rag (3s). Do you automatically fire another bet here?
If so, are there any turn cards where you would not bet?
Thanks, Puggy
Betting is debatable. One card I would often check is a ten.
Would you check raise with the ten?
I guess I don't understand why you would check the ten but not check the queen as often. With the ten, there's more free cards that could hurt you (A, K or J) if your opponent decides to check behind.
Puggy
It one of those things where if you are ahead you are not ahead by much and if you are behind you are way behind. Check and call may be the best play if a T hits. In fact, I'm surprised David wouldn't check a queen also.
As far as betting being debateable as Oz states. Abdul makes a good case for betting. I'm inclined to believe that just as good a case can be made for not betting but I'm tired so it will have to be someone else.
Vince
Could it be that a queen is easier to bet because it is outside the straight zone, making it less likely you will be semi-bluff raised?
= Raider
No, Raider, that could not be the reason. You love being semibluff raised when you hold top pair, because you aren't going anywhere.
No, Vince, when you are ahead with QTs on a ten high board versus a preflop late cold caller, you are likely way ahead. The reason Sklansky is willing to give a free card when a ten hits is that now his QTs dominates AQ, KQ, and QJ. (I swear that whenever I give a free card here, my opponent hits his 3-outer.)
If a queen hits instead on the turn, QTs is still dominated by AQ, KQ, and QJ and will furthermore get raised by them if it bets, so checking is also fairly advisable here. Your opponent ain't got no Q9s. You are either way ahead, or way behind.
-Abdul
Very good.
But why does Sklansky go into great detail on RGP and need a translator here ???
Erin,
I've heard David Sklansky sub-contracts out his posts to a "Mini-me" (or "Mini-Oz") for his work on this site. He is paid by the post, not by the number of words.
Regards,
Rick.
Righhht! Baybay.
Vince.
I'm not so sure I agree with giving a free card just because I may dominate the cold caller. Although I must admit I think the logic is quite correct. I'm sure you must couple this with the possibility that you are beat. Plus if you are ahead when you check you may induce a bet from your opponent on the turn and/or the river. I think pot size must also play a role in your decision. Where is Oz when you need him.
BTW - I probably accept Abdul's response without qualification because it sure makes sense.
Vince
I think it's important to bet here, to get him to fold ATs or whatever it is that he's chasing you with. If he calls again, then concede on the river with a check-fold.
Obviously, if he won't fold many better hands, or if he will call with many worse hands and then bluff you out on the river, then you should reconsider. Another player to be concerned about is the type that is very tight preflop and nearly impossible to push out of the pot postflop.
However, in my experience most $15-$30 players are way too loose preflop and way too easy to push out of the pot postflop heads up. Instead of adjusting your postflop strategy to be more passive, consider tightening up preflop if you get yourself into trouble in spots like this. QTs was a clear open-raise here, but there might be some other hands you could muck to effectively strengthen QTs here, like 44/T9s/A7.
-Abdul
Adbul,
Do you think that playing tight post-flop and then hard to push out of the pot is a good strategy against aggressive opponents or those that bluff too much?
I find myself calling a few players with AK every once in a while.
Carlos
You mean "tight preflop" and then hard to push out of the pot postflop. Yes. This makes it quite easy to beat overaggressive bluffers.
-Abdul
The obvious must checks are A K 6 or 7. I like the check with the T as well. If any of these cards come check fold is appropriate.
I would probably bet otherwise.
I have found that many loose players will call the flop bet with almost no draws but will continue past then only with good hands or good draws. Fire once more. If you get called, I would check and fold any river bet. It would be very doubtful that he would cold call you pre flop and then pay for two more cards with a hand that doesn't beat yours. BTW, I like the preflop raise even though you don't think the blinds are real tight.
im on the button 8 5 diamonds,i have a very tight image,pretty cheesy hand,tight game,1 middle early limper,rest fold to me ,i raise . hoping to get 2 callers at the most,bb and limper.
if both blinds fold,all i have to worry about is one player not connecting with the flop,if cards are high i can bet ,since my raising preflop must make my limper think i have some of that and he wont try a bluff checkraise if he also doesnt connect.i the flop is garbage like what i am holding ,i can bet and might get payed off by a checkraise bluff.
are plays similar to the 1 i described above profitable plays or almost even money.im leaning towards profitable because youll only have 1 or 2 other players against you,plus your superior position and representation of strenghth(preflop raise)could win you the pot without improving.
I'd say not profitable. Especially when the limper and/or one of blinds play well.
IF they play well maybe that is the guy you want to be bluffing - no future in bluffing a calling station or maniac - they won't lay down a hand, will they(?) and they don't play well.
What I'm saying is that 85 does not retain enough high card value to be isolating most players, whether they be weak/tenacious or strong. The fact that there are also 2 blinds yet to act, adds to 85's problems.
= Raider
Depends - is the other player observent eneough to understand what is going on and is he good eneough to lay down a fair hand if you bluff well.
This play is more player dependent.
I have an idea.........let's raise 2-3, that way you can bluff the quality flops, and get paid off when the rags hit!!!!!!! The play probably won't see a positive E(v)if you could guarantee that you would be heads up with one person. With the blinds left to act, the play is pure pissing.
this play also only works as long as you do not have to turn it over. After showing rags for a raise you are not going to be able to use that move for a little while .
It is somthing to try but not very often, and i would do it with at least suited connecters.
I'm in a 10 handed 10-20 game. I've got Kh Kd in middle position. All fold to me and I open for a raise. The cut-off, the button, and both blinds call. The cut-off is a lady that is stuck about 2 racks. I recently watched her bet hard into a paired flop with just ace high. The button seems solid, but is making more then his share of preflop calls. The SB is new to the game, but wearing his MARGE 2000 hat, so i'll give him credit for knowing how to play. The BB is the typical old man rec player, not too tight, not too imaginative.
The flop is Js 9s 6h. Both blinds check, I bet, and the cutoff raises. The button calls, the SB mucks, the BB calls and I reraise. All call and we get the 10s as our turn card.
BB checks, I check (how bad was this? I'm hating this card, because in my thought process even if nobody hit a flush or straight, there is always a 10,J out there.) The cutoff bets, Button folds, BB calls and its up to me. I really wanted to call despite not really having any kind of draw if i'm beat. I figure the only card that would possibly make me a winner is a non spade queen and I fold. River is 2h, BB checks, Cutoff bets and BB mucks??
I have no idea what he could have called to the river then tossed it, a big spade I guess, and I assumed the Cutoff was raising on a spade draw, but possibly less then that maybee even as weak as A,J with the A of spades. Comments - criticisms appreciated.
You played it just fine. How can you not check and muck in this situation. There are tons of hands that have you beat, flushes, straights two pairs, sets… you name it you were beat.
With 5 players and this flop, it might not be a bad idea to simply call the cutoff's raise after she gets 2 cold callers. Of course you must be willing to bet the turn if a blank hits.
I think the point is that it's rarely correct to put 3 bets in on the flop if you're willing to check and fold the turn when a scare card hits.
= Raider
It is the nature of Hold'em to have a valuable holding turn worthless. If you can't recognize, or admit, when this happens you'll cost yourself a fortune. And multiple opponents almost guarantees you're beaten, maybe in more than one place. It just doesn't pay to be the sheriff.
Sorry jake-
I'm not sure if you're responding to my post or Doug's. Hence, I'm not sure of what you're trying to say.
= Raider
Sorry. Meant for Doug.
You said that the cutoff was just seen bluffing into a paired board and then you fold to her. Why does she deserve that kind of respect. If she has the flush your drawing dead, if she has a str8 you are drawing slim, if she has 2 pair you have many outs. And if she's bluffing again you've got the nuts (esp. when the BB doesn't raise). A bluffer is going to have to show me her hand everytime in this situation.
He would have been the second caller. One of them (at least) had a hand.
jake wrote:
He would have been the second caller. One of them (at least) had a hand.
Doug also had a hand....
= Raider
jake wrote:
He would have been the second caller. One of them (at least) had a hand.
Doug also had a hand....
= Raider
I'm not talking down to you, but a hand represented by the board, meaning a hand better than a high pair.
But kings are better than top pair... It may be the best hand and if not, can outdraw (but tie KQ) all likely hands that beat him with the exception of the flush.
All I'm saying is you can't go around making it 3 bets on one street, only to check and fold for a single bet on the next. You just can't! Let's agree on that.
My point was, that if he felt KK was in that much jeapardy, he might have considered just calling the raise with the intention of betting the turn if a blank hit. When the ten of spades came checking is fine. When the [stuck 2 racks and very possibly on tilt] lady bets and does not get raised by the [not too tight or imaginative] BB, calling on the merits of top pair/possible best hand, and 3 non-flush queens for the 2nd nut straight in viable.
When cutoff bets the river, I think Doug has an easy call. If the BB calls, now he's gotta do some thinking before overcalling.
= Raider
Why do you assume one of them has a hand? The bettor was just seen bluffing and the other player just called. How about if the BB had As-J? or Qs-10? or Q-Q? There are a lot of hands that you can beat that the BB would call with. I don't like the turn card but I think a call is definitely in order.
It doesn't pay to be the sheriff.
20/40 game, one very loose / aggressive fish UTG I am in BB with AKo.
fish calls...everyone else folds....I raise. SB (decent player) three bets - I figure him for medium or high pair (66-AA0 or AK/AQ/AJ/AT - he may do it suited or not as well.
fish calls, I call.
Flop is 56T - two hearts SB bets, fish calls, I call. Turn is a Kc.
SB bets, fish raises.
At this point, I put the aggressive fish on a weak K. KJ, K9, K8 ... with some chance of K5 or K6 (he's shown down a lot worse)....also, I think that the small blind does have a pair or trips or maybe AT ... and he'd fold if I three bet (if he doesn't have 2 Kings beaten), or four bet with trips. So I just call.
The small blind folds.
Before the river comes, fish checks-blind. The river is a 2h - three hearts.
I think about what he could possibly have been raising with, and then checking - and I figure it must be that he had a Kx, since he's afraid of my call - and he hasn't check-raised at all in the last few hours.
So I bet. He calls.
I show him my AK, and he flips over KhQh- for the 2nd nut flush.
The small blind says "I had you both on the turn, I had aces".
I thought the fish and the small blind both played horribly - the fish should have either bet out or check/raised...and the small blind should have called the turn.
I think they were both "pushed" into playing weakly because they were very afraid of my smooth call on the turn. The fish was afraid my call indicated Ahxh - and the SB was afraid it meant a trap call with trips (TTT or KKK). Still, I thought it was weak of both. Any thoughts?
Doc,
Nice little game your in. The play of your opponents both leave quite a bit to be desired. Releasing pocket Aces when raised on the turn is weak poker. Then your opponent makes second nuts and checks and calls. What is he afraid of? Your flop call to me is marginal. The small blind showed tremendous strength by reraising and I, perhaps may have passed on the flop.
Bruce
Worse than folding the Aces, (or at least equally wrong) was telling everyone he did so, whether he actually had them or not.
I think you meant your were the button not the BB based on your narrative. I think UTG played perfectly except he should have bet the river. He had correct odds to see the turn and when he had top pair 2nd nut draw he raised. This is good poker. Since UTG by your description is a loose fish the small blind must have put him on two pair and by your call he put you on a set I suppose. If he is super weak/tight, super rock his laydown made sense to him.(however not to the rest of the poker world)
yes, I am the button - sorry if it sounded like I was the BB.
UTG is a loose AGGRESSIVE fish - playing about 90% of the hands, and actually betting and saying "I missed" on the river about 15% of the time - lots of bluffing, and bluff raises. His play turned out to be very correct on the turn, but that doesn't mean that based on his play that he could have had what he had, caused he would've raised with a ton of other hands as well.
If I'm in the SB, I can not put UTG on two pair. He could just have had a heart draw or a weak K. So, I guess he was very suspicious of my smooth call.....he's not super tight by the way, I think he just outplayed himself here by reading too much into my call. I'm just glad that's all I lost.
I'm interested to know what other people's standard deviation per hour is (using Malmuth's formula in one of his books - I believe he's also discussed it here)....in 20/40 games with at least 500 hours.
Mine is $440 - I believe Mason had said his was in the $280 area (don't know if that's correct, I just seem to remember that as the number he mentioned) - that's a big difference to me.
What's your SD?
Mine is about $400 for California $20-$40, $320 for Vegas $20-$40. The looseness/aggressiveness of the game has a bigger effect on your standard deviation than your own looseness/aggressiveness. So, don't necessarily sweat your high standard deviation if the games are loose, though it probably wouldn't hurt to look for some more hands to throw away preflop.
-Abdul
Same 10 - 20 game as my previous post. I'm UTG with QdQs and open for a raise. Folded to the SB who calls, and the BB calls as well. Both are what i would consider reasonable players, I haven't seen any major moves made by either of them since I sat down, and neither had appeared overly loose.
The flop is 9s 8c 2c. Both blinds check and I bet. Both call and the turn is the 9h. SB bets out, BB folds and I raise. (I just don't see how I could give up against such a small field with my overpair). He calls. The river is the 2d, he checks and I check. I'd like to see if anyone else would have a different approach to this one, results will follow.
You must bet here. It is clear that your opponent has no more than 2 pairs. he will call if he has a 8. He will simply fold if he missed his draw. You cant lose this hand in my opinion unless your opponent loves to check raise the river in a head to head battle (if he has the 2 or the 9 which is not good poker unless U are a maniac lol)
Bet the river
He shows 9,7 and takes it down.
Doug,
I thought you said these opponents were reasonable? Calling with 97 (even suited) versus an UTG raise and no other opponents in a 10/20 stucture is horrible poker.
Maybe I made the mistake of putting my brain into your opponent's head ;-). At least he made the minimum on the hand.
Regards,
Rick
Rick,
See what happens when you let sorcerers mess with the poker populations?
I said they "seemed" like reasonable opponents. And I find this very common as a younger player, that people will defend their blinds much more often with much less of a hand against me, no idea why, but usually its ok with me.
Doug,
Of course I haven’t read the results yet.
If I were in the small blind I would often lead into the raiser on the flop with both the nine and a drawing hand such as JT or the four flush (especially with at least one overcard – of course I would probably have two overcards to the nine to even call before the flop). Note that when the top card pairs I will almost always lead again (into a small field). Often I will get the pot right there. But not everybody plays like this.
Your raise before the flop and bet on the flop are fine. When the top card repeats and the small blind leads into you, you have a dilemma. There is a reasonable chance he has the nine and you will get reraised if you raise. After all, he generally will not fear that you have the nine with an UTG raise. If not he will often have a draw. With aces and maybe kings I like the call here to save money when you are beat and perhaps induce a bluff on the river if the SB misses the draw. But with queens you are more vulnerable to overcards and may want a hand such as A8 or K8 to give it up right now. So I think it is close between raising and calling on the turn.
Given you raised on the turn and didn’t get reraised, I would usually bet the river after the small blind checks. They may call you down with an eight or an ace high (probably a flush draw) since there are two pairs on the board and the action does not indicate either are in the small blinds hand. I just don’t see getting check raised by a nine that didn’t reraise you on the turn.
Regards,
Rick
Unless I know the player very well i always call them down with a over pair heads up.
In your case i would have called the turn and river instead of raised, a good player should have reraised you on the turn, and bet the river if he had trips.
I bet the river here. If he has the Ace high club draw you will probably get called as will 10-10 or J-J. When he doesn't re-raise me on the turn I don't think he has a 9 and if he has a 2 you'll get that bet back in no time.
I think this topic is extremely interesting, mainly because it is just so tough to know where you are at.
Let's take this situation: A typical early position player open raises, followed by 2 cold callers, and you call out of the big blind with something like 98s.
The flop comes J 8 3. You decide to bet, and one of the cold callers (who is solid) raises you making it heads up. You call.
There are 6 big bets in the pot. The turn comes a rag. What is your gameplan from here on out?
You are about 8-1 to hit one of your 5 outs on the river. If you check/call both the turn and river, you will be receiving 4-1 odds from the pot. On the other hand, you may be ahead and really don't want to give your opponent the free card when he might fold to a bet. But you really don't want to get raised here either!
I like Rick's "stop n go", but the problem is that you sort of announce your hand when you make it, and if you fold a decent percentage of the time when you get raised on the turn, opps will start raising you with all kinds of stuff here because there's such a great chance you'll muck.
Seeking opinions!
Puggy
You shouldn't just be asking me, as there are a lot of good players running around here.
Preflop the cold caller should have something like TT-AA, AKs/AK, AQs, but a lot of players would also call with 88, 99, AQ, AJs, KQs, and QJs. It looks like there are about 40 hands that beat you and of course 16 nut no pairs (AKs/AK) that he might be semi-bluffing with.
This is not the spot to fire again on the turn and muck to a raise. The pot is too big, and you likely have outs. Your opponent might semibluff raise you twice with AK/AKs. In fact, if he would pull that stunt at least half the time that he holds AK/AKs, then betting out and folding to a raise would be worse than simply check-folding! You very nearly have odds to check-call with your middle pair versus a bigger pair, hoping to catch trips or two pair. This, plus your hopes that your opponent only has AK make it worth check-calling to the river - actually a very profitable play here.
If your opponent takes a free card on the turn with AK, fine. I don't think that's a good play anyway. He'll either pay you off on the river after letting you know you can value bet there, or else he'll fold but you'll be able to get a lot of value by betting your draws on the flop, giving him free cards on the turn (heh), and then firing to steal the pot on the river.
So, there is no question, IMO. Play like a wimpy calling station fish. Ignore any good players who disagree. :)
-Abdul
Thanks, Abdul!
Anybody else who's reading, please know that I value all your inputs. I just find that you (Abdul) are able to explain things in a very logical fashion that I find easy to grasp.
Sklansky sometimes answers my questions perfectly but it takes me approximately 7 follow up posts before I understand everything that he's trying to say :).
Puggy
Abdul's strategy can be improved upon. Against someone you dont know or can't figure out you should call on fourth st. but fold about 10% of the time on the river. Against others, you river calling percentages could be anywhere from 50 to 100 percent. (Under 50% could be right if you are not concerned about how that will affect future action.)
You have to consider all the hands you could have after playing the hand that way up to checking the river, and you will be folding only the worst of these. Perhaps in addition to 98s, you could equally likely hold A8s, K8s, Q8s, T8s, or 87s. In this case, to get the correct 89% calling frequency you should fold your 87s about two thirds of the time. (3 ways to make each hand, 6 hands, 18 ways total, 16/18~=89%.)
(It's probably also possible that you could have AK, T9s, and a few other hands, and there are other complications you could include, but I was trying to keep it simple.)
-Abdul
Ok. At the risk of embarressing myself, I'll ask a stupid question. What's wrong with simply folding?
There are 7 bets in the pot and you are aprox. 8.2:1 dog to improve. In addition, it's possible you are drawing dead to a set or QTs, or 3 outs to 99.
Also, how much of a blank can the turn be? It's likely to either put up another overcard, furthering the possibility that you're drawing slim on the river, or put up another card in the straight zone meaning more trouble even if the raiser was semi-bluffing on the flop.
As Puggy points out the effective odds are actually closer to 4:1 if you call the river. Obviously, if you routinely plan to continue past the flop and turn, you are going to have to pay off on the river, as Sklansky points out, since you can't just always fold.
Lastly, if the original pre-flop raiser is known to check raise, it becomes even more questionable to call the flop. I'd rather simply fold this hand on the flop or check raise it, and bet 4th street. Am I completely wrong?
= Raider
.
I assumed the action on the flop went like so: you bet, original raiser folds, one of the preflop cold callers raises, the other preflop cold caller folds. Therefore, it's heads up once it is raised back to you.
And now you want to fold at this point? There are, what, 11.5 small bets in the pot and it will cost you only one more to see if you can turn trips or two pair. Even ignoring the implied odds of extra bets on the turn and river, you've got odds to call. I haven't worked it out, but I'm guessing it's at least a two big bet error to fold here.
Once you get to the turn, it's close to a big bet mistake to fold after checking and your opponent betting, if your opponent would play AK (or similar hands that you beat) in this manner.
It's a grave error to fold on the flop, and it's also a serious error to fold on the turn against an opponent capable of semibluffing.
-Abdul
The biggest issue here is how well you know the other player.
I guess I just don't like to fire in this situation. Don't get me wrong I have done it. A better move here, IMHO, would be to check the flop. If someone in late postion comes in you can then raise. This will give you the advantage of making it heads up as well as representing a very powerful hand on the flop. Now if you bet out and are raised you know you are up against a monster. Lay it down. If you decide to check based on the turn, the likely hood of a semi-bluff betting again is reduced because you might just raise again.
As it's a solid cold caller who raised me I give his raise more respect. It's less likely he would be raising me with A-K here. I check and fold the turn unless I pick up a 7, 8, 9, 10 or Q. If I get help I pay off a river bet. This means that roughly a third of the time he's going to get called down which I think is enough to disuade people from running over me.
Riverboat game, 15-30 game, 4-handed (right before closing). I'm on the button with Q-6o and raise to pick up the blinds. The BB is a perfectly tight player who will dump anything less than a quality hand and the SB is a "veteran" who would know what hands are worth fighting over. (Incidentally, the SB is $10.)
The SB calls and the BB folds. Flop comes Q-6-8 rainbow. :-)
I bet, SB raises, I reraise, SB calls.
Turn comes 9, I bet, SB calls.
River comes J. Now if the SB has a 10, he has a straight (no flush possibilities). I think about this a minute and check. He bets.
Pot stands at $255. Do you call the $30?
Without any hesitation at all....
You act after the SB so he would have had to bet into you, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to check. And yes I think I would call, even if he is they type of player that wouldn't bet without being able to beat your hand, I just wouldn't like it as much.
I assume he bet into you (since he was before you), which is a little scarier than if he bet after you checked. But you just plain have to call.
Correct, he bet into me ... which made it nearly a lock that he had the 10. I called, he showed A-10 offsuit. He probably thought the single Ace was good on the flop, then picked up a double-buster on the turn. Since it turned out to be the last hand of the night, there was no tilt possibility as I reflected on the chances of him going from 13-1 dog on the flop, then 9-2 dog on the turn ... to a winner.
I'm assuming he bet into you on the river, which makes it a tougher call, but you should pay all but the rocks off here.
Based upon the 10-20, 15-30, and 20-40 games I play, lay it down without batting an eyelash.
Frank Donnelly
.
What if they came out with the hole card report and it showed quads and straight flushed were four std's above the norm? Would you quit? Would you keep playing? Please spare me the......."it won't happen so why worry about it argument" Its a hypothetical question. Besides, most of the posters opinion's on the legitimacy of the server change based on how they did in the last session or what they saw in the last home game. (I took my cheapshot and now I run)
Anything above or below 3 std deviations is off the bell curve. However the sample size must be big enough to be reliable. There is a test in statistics books to test reliability. ( I think it is the chi squared or something like that.) I had this stuff a long time ago in grad school. If the data is statistacally reliable based on sample size I would stay away for sure.
I assume you are talking about Paradise. I did the tests of the flop, turn and river cards which were -- for 3-4 million hands which went onto their site -- completely normal.
If they posted all cards, and these cards for Quads/Str8flushes were abnormal, I would post it here, and then I would stop playing there. I believe that it is a virtual impossibility for them to post abnormal data on this.
Mark
Game is about 50% preflop calling -- very loose and moderately aggressive.
I get 9h9s on the button. Two limpers (both loose to very loose) to me, I call and the blinds call.
Flop is 3h4h8h. Blinds check, first limper (L1) bets, second limper (L2) pops it. I have seen a lot of hands in this game where L2 and others will raise here with a single big heart and certainly with a hand like Ah4s, which he is definitely capable of playing from any position.
I decide to three bet and see what happens. Blinds fold and both limpers call.
Turn is: 10h.
Check to me. I bet. Both call.
River is: 10c.
Checked around, L1 shows 5c6c, L2 shows 4c4s and drags the pot.
Please critique my play on all streets. Also, would you fold on the flop if L1 and/or L2 were more rational, "normal" type players?
With all one suit flopped there is better than a fifty percent chance that a flush will be made if not already in hand. Do not play all suited flops unless your a cinch to win if no flush is made or you can make a hand to beat a flush.
Frank Donnelly
First of all, I'm going to raise before the flop with 9-9. A lot of players will not, but I have a personal aversion to getting taken off by the blinds when they hit cheese they wouldn't have otherwise played. Next, on the flop, you can dump it. Calling 2 bets with the non-nut flush and other draws out there is just asking to get hurt. Even if they are on a draw, you are no favorite here (at least 11 outs for one of your opponents if all they have is any heart bigger than a 9).
Nice check on the river.
Betting the turn here is asking for a check raise. Mostly because the players are loose agressive. Check and get a free look at the river. If anyone bets on the river, muck.
Prefop - fine
Flop- depends but your play is ok
Turn- shaky bet.
There are not many hands that would fold to a bet but will go on to win when you check. In other words, you can't make a big boo boo here by checking in the sense of losing a pot that would be otherwise yours.
A bet is fine if your opponents are capable of dropping a hand with the King of Hearts or worse but not many players would given all that action on the flop i.e. if they take all that heat on the flop with the King or Queen of Hearts as a draw, they ain't gonna fold on the turn to a single bet.
I would check the turn.
If a blank came on the river, I would call one bet but certainly not a raise. I would likely also fold if I had to overcall.
If they both checked, I too would just check.
I would fold on the flop no matter what. The pot is only laying you 4:1 when you call the raise on the flop, and if you're not beat now you very well could be later.
I'm also not sure why you bet the turn.
Planet Poker 20-40 hand.
I am in the big blind with 8c5c. 4 limpers and button raises. Small blind folds. I call as do the limpers. We take the flop 6 handed.
Button is a solid player.
Flop: 5d5h6h
I bet. UTG (a fish) calls and button raises. I call as a bit of a semi-slowplay. UTG calls.
3 handed.
Turn: 2c
I bet. UTG calls. Button raises. I make it $120. UTG folds. Button calls.
River: 3s
I bet and he pays off with JJ.
Would anyone have done anything different?
If you were the button, would you have done anything different?
I wouldn't have called the raise with 8-5.
I probably raise on the flop, but I don't think bet, call is incorrect. I would not have called your raise on the turn with the J's.
Derrick
skp,
I like the way you played your hand, especially betting the turn.
Your opponent overplayed his hand on the turn. I think that he should have just called you down on both the turn and the river. Your position and play should have made him suspect that you had made trips on the flop.
If I were in your shoes, I would have done the same thing. If I thought there was a chance of a limp/re-raise, I might have mucked pre-flop. Seeing that Izmet and Abdul weren't the limpers, you were looking at 11.5 to 1. Not bad.
I thought the button's raise on the turn was a bit too frisky. I almost certainly would have paid you off, though.
Alarm bells start ringing when a small paired flop comes and one of the blinds bets. You are representing the kind of hand you are supposed to have in the blind. I think you played it well, and I believe the button can at least save bets here, if not outright dump it on the turn.
Well played. I like your call preflop with 6 way action including yourself. I have found that quite often when I lead in a situation like this I make the maximum. Nobody gives me credit for a Five and they assume I have a Six. The button lost about two big bets too many with his overly aggressive play. When you reraise on the turn he has to realize he has only two outs to win.
Bruce
yes, knowing you, I would have just called all the way through.
I wrote : "yes, knowing you, I would have just called all the way through. " - I wasn't clear here - this is what I would do if I was the button.
at most, I would have just given one raise on the flop, but not on the turn or river.
I don't read a lot of these kinds of posts, but I make an exception for skp.
I'm not sure where the slow-play comes in, because the only bet you missed was a raise on the flop. But that would have cost you the checkraise on the turn. Everything worked out well.
If I were you, I would have mad less on the hand, because I would have check called on the flop, and check raised the turn.
If I were the button, I would have dumped the jacks when you raised the turn.
I think there are several debatble plays on this hand:
1. Button's preflop raise with JJ.
I often don't make it with JJ in a multiway field for reasons that have been discussed on this board several times.
2. My preflop call with 85s.
2 things swayed my decision: There were 2 absolute fish in the game who would hang around a long time with just overcards so I was virtually guaranteed of getting a lot of action if I flopped big. Secondly, I was running real good that night (Up about $1500 at that time and ended up winning $2700 in 6 hours) so I felt that I had a pretty good image at the time.
3. My failure to 3 bet the flop.
Had there been more players who called my initial bet before button's flop raise, I definitely would abandon any notion of a slowplay and just pound away at the pot. However, given that I only had UTG (who could have any two cards the way he plays the game) and the button ( with a likely overpair), I though that this was a good spot to slow down a little. Note: I had already made up my mind to bet the turn no matter what.
4. The turn bet
Many solid players (like the button) might assume that I am betting the turn again with perhaps a 6 or a medium pocket pair to avoid giving a free card to his AK. Thus, many would raise again on the turn with an overpair and some may even raise again with AK although they may not bet it if I check.
Here, he had the overpair and raised. This time, obviously the pot is a lot bigger and I don't mind if UTG folds...hence, the reraise.
5. Button's call of the raise.
This is probably a spot where the button should fold as he should know that he is playing a 2 outer and he should further know that it is going to cost him $80 (not $40) if he fails to hit because he just will not be able to fold on the river if he calls the turn.
I will admit that I too would have a tough time laying down JJ here but I think it is the right thing to do. This is an area where many of us (including me) could probably improve.
I have two red kings in the cutoff. The local pro on my immediate right raises. I re-raise and the button (a semi-solid player) calls 3 cold.
The flop comes Ah,9h,8s.
Pro bets, I fold, button folds.
Was my fold a). Ok, b). Terrible or c). Borderline?
Thanks for any feedback.
Kevin
If you don't want to be viewed as a pushover (weak-passive), the correct play is to reraise when the Ace hits the board on the flop. The fold wasn't terrible, but you have to be careful about always automatically giving up when the Ace hits on the flop. Now, had there been more players in the hand, then the fold might've been a good play. I play in 15-30 games on occasion where it's not unusual for 5-6 players to take the flop. Many of these players will play any Ace, even for 2-4 bets preflop. When an Ace comes on the flop in that situation, I think you make more money by releasing immediately.
Thanks Earl.
Could you please read my "Effecitve Odds: The third player" post and respond?
I just can't decide if this was a weak fold or not. Thanks.
Kevin
You need to give us more information on the tendencies of the local pro. However, keep this in mind. Since you made it three bets you will almost always bet automatically on the flop. Thus if you have a hand like KK why would someone with an ace want to bet you out of the hand. Of course, he may have flopped a great hand and is looking for three bets, but against many players folding is certainly wrong. In fact, it may be correct to call through the river against some players.
.
Kev
I know this local pro and you made the right muck.He was on AK or AA and bet into you hoping you would raise and he certainly didn't want to give a free card with AK.He rarely goes for the checkraise on the flop and almost never slowplays a hand especially when there is flush draw. IMO a no brainer and you saved yourself money good muck. Lar
Thanks for responding Lar:
It's not that I was overly concerned about AA, AK, etc. Don't forget he was in steal distance. The fact is, he made a good bet into me, no matter what he had. He correctly reasoned I couldn't (or wouldn't) call because of the player behind me. See my Effective Odds post.
Kevin
Had I been heads up, I would have continued. Pro or no pro. However, it was the presence of the button behind me, which contributed almost entirely to my decision to fold. I didn't think it unlikely for someone who would call 3 bets cold pre-flop, to have a hand containing an ace.
While I couldn't precisely calculate my effective odds at the table, I figured the 11 to 1 odds the pot seemed to be offering me, could easily be reduced to about 7 to 1 if the button raised behind me. In addition, they might further be cut (close to 5 to 1), if the pro re-raised. All this, when I may already be severely behind and drawing to 2 outs.
Of course, the button folding immediately after I did, made me a little sick. It's almost certain he made a poor pre-flop call. What kind of hand can't continue heads up against a possible steal raiser, after I fold and am out of the hand? I was also unsure of how my nut runner-runner flush draw may have added to my hand.
After almost 2 years of playing this game, I continue to be amazed by how subtle differences can play significant roles at times.
The weak player often continues because he does not know any better, and thinks little. The decent player (in this case, myself), will sometimes incorrectly fold because he DOES think, while the expert may continue on at times, imitating the fish because he thinks most!
How I love this game!
Kevin
There's probably about a 50/50 chance that a decent (but not great) player holds an A-- AK (16 possibilities), AQs (4 possibilities) and AJs (4). On the 'non ace' side, there's basically pocket 8's through pocket Q's, of which there are thirty combinations.
The point here is that it's far from certain that the cold caller has an A. And it doesn't seem entirely likely that the pro has an A, for the reasons Mason stated.
I think you're overlooking something in these responses. The most important element here is NOT the price the pot is offering you. By far, it IS the number of players taking the flop. Three-handed, you simply can't lay down a premium hand immediately when an Ace appears. This is not only bad play, but sets you up to get run over. As for your button player, yes, players will quite often cold-call 3-bets with any pair, a couple of big suited cards (Ks-Qs, for example), and any number of hands. The correct way to play this is to raise the flop and go from there. Your "pro" was probably lead-betting to find out where you are at (and very likely has already figured out that you were playing weak-passive and if you didn't have an Ace you would lay it down).
Your "pro" was probably lead-betting to find out where you are at (and very likely has already figured out that you were playing weak-passive and if you didn't have an Ace you would lay it down).
I think the pro's bet was correct in any case, but I'm fairly sure he doesn't view my play as weak-passive, since this would not be an accurate description of how I normaly play. (Well, maybe slightly. But this seems to be more in my eyes than other's, since I'm always hearing about how aggressive I am. Because this guy is a pro, I guess it's possible he sees through what others miss).
I certainly see your point about the short handedness of the situation. But is KK still a premium hand with an ace on board, facing a bet with another player yet to act behind you when both of your opponents put in 3 bets apiece pre-flop? I wouldn't call this a premium hand anymore. Only one of them requires an ace for my situation to be near hopeless.
I apologize if I am being frustratingly ignorant here. These situations are difficult for me. While, it may have been the wrong play, I just can't see this as a "bad play". Heads up, I'm not likely to be run over here. But the pro had 2 players to run over in this case. The pot is somewhat protected, don't you think? Anyway, I appreciate your input Earl. Thanks.
Kevin
This isn't an easy situation, sometimes you truly are beat. But look at it like this, everyone is an underdog to get improvement on the flop. You only have 2 opponents. On top of that, think about what they may have started with and how they might have played it before the flop (particularly the "pro"). You should be able to glean some clues as to whether they have the Ace.
Next, you are in the middle. Your "pro" knows this and knows that even if you have the best hand that you will be reluctant to continue without having an Ace since you have a 3rd party behind you.
This is one of those situations where you raise 1) to protect your big pair if it's best, and 2) to push the 3rd player out of the pot, and 3) to find out in the hand where you are. The time to decide this issue is on the flop. Heck, your "pro" may even have a bad Ace and decide to lay it down when you raise.
Here, short-handed, folding isn't the best play, calling is worse, and raising is best. K-K is not an easy hand to come by, and short-handed, it still has value even when an Ace flops. Your goal is to find out how much value.
I really appreciate you helping me with this. Last comment...
Next, you are in the middle. Your "pro" knows this and knows that even if you have the best hand that you will be reluctant to continue without having an Ace since you have a 3rd party behind you.
For this very reason (as I already stated), I think the pro's bet was correct, regardless of whether he held an ace or not. But isn't this because the pro knows that my correct play is to fold in this situation if I do not have an ace? I mean, he's a pro. If he thinks this is the right play, shouldn't he be right? Aren't there times in poker where you are put in a position of having to fold a possible best hand because of a particular dangerous situation? Isn't this why weak players eventually lose all their money, because they are unable to recognize these potentially dangerous situations and/or are not capable of the correct play?
I hope you don't think I have never raised a flop with KK and an ace on board. There are times I'll even raise the turn with an ace on board. But what if the button calls my flop raise with a flush draw and/or the pro decides to take one off with something like K9s? How can I dare bet again? There's the possibility that I still couldn't go on to win the hand...
Quite often in poker, the best play is to either raise or fold. This is one of them.
1 weak limper, I raise in the sb with Ah Th. BB (semi-solid) calls.
The flop = 9d,7c,3h
I bet, BB raises, limper folds, I call.
The turn = 9h
I check, BB bets, I call.
The river = 7h
I check, he bets. After considerable deliberation, I decide he wouldn't have raised a straight draw, opting to keep the limper in. I fold and he shows a T8o bluff...
In hindsight, I think the BB played it well. Keeping the 3rd player in was not as important if he could outplay me which he obviously did.
How bad was my fold on the river? Thanks for all commnets.
Kevin
You played this much too passive, culminating in a terrible fold at the river. If you had put the heat on this guy all the way through, he'd never have had a chance to try and bluff you. It wasn't so much that he outplayed you as it was that you outguessed yourself by seeing a dragon behind every door.
Ok. But how best to keep the heat on? Unfortunately, I was out of position...
Even with AK or AQ, I may have re-raised the flop and led the turn. But my ten kicker, caused me to slow down.
If I had any doubt about him having a 9, I would have considered betting or check raising the turn, but I decided this would be foolhardy, since I couldn't be sure what he raised the flop with. Had I been last to act, I probably win.
Maybe the lesson for me here is, don't try to isolate a weak limper from the sb until I can play a little better post-flop?
Kevin
I've been on the road or would've responded sooner.
Being out of position can actually be beneficial and can help you keep the pressure on. When the 2nd 9 comes on the turn, if you bet, he will be very hard-pressed to call if he doesn't have a set of 9s. Further, even if he did, you have outs to hit your flush.
If you wanted to play passive the time to fold this was on the turn (or the flop). The pot was small and it's possible your drawing dead. Even with the board double pairing, it just doesn't make sense to fold this hand heads up on the river.
I think you should have lead out on the turn when you had the flush draw.
Its not clear to me why you would raise preflop with ATs in the small blind. All it does is force you to bet on flop even though you missed it. I understand you are trying to get headsup with a reasonable hand but I would have just called pre-flop.
Once the turn is another heart I agree with you calling the bet.
On the river I would tend to do a crying call with the flush although with only 8 big bets in the pot it is not a bad play to fold.
Ken
If you were going to call the turn, which I probably wouldn't even call the flop raise, then I would definately call the river.
The game was $30-$60 hold 'em (with blinds of $20 and $30) at The Bellagio on Friday afternoon. A moderately loose player raised in early position, another loose player called on his immediate left, an aggressive player made it three bets from the middle, an unknown player called the three bets in late position, and I called with two queens in the small blind.
The flop came 9-9-5, three different suits. I checked, the two players on my left checked, the original three bettor bet, the player on his left called, I called, and the other two players folded.
The turn card was a 7. I checked, the original three bettor bet, the remaining player (other than myself) folded, I check raised and was called.
The river was a deuce. I bet and was called. My hand was good and I did not see my opponent's hand.
Note: I didn't list the suits since they played no roles in this hand.
All comments are welcome.
How do you sleep at night taking money off those fools? Hehehe.
Preflop - fine
Flop:
I gather you just called for 2 reasons:
Either of the 2 players to your left could have a 9 (given that they are loose) but neither is likely to call with Ax given all the preflop strength shown on the hand. Besides, it is likely that the 3 bettor or the player to your immediate right also have an Ace so if it hits, you are screwed in any event.
Turn
Now that the 2 players most likely to hold a 9 folded on the flop, I may have bet here in the hopes that the preflop 3 bettor raised to make it headsup.
Having checked, I am not sure that checkraising will accomplish much. Given the size of the pot, I am not sure that the 3 bettor would fold even AK and definitely would not fold AA,KK or even JJ. Plus, you have encouraged the player to your right to tag along as he just has to call 1 more bet (instead of 2 had you bet and been raised).
I would like your raise a lot more on the turn if you had position on the flop 3 bettor as you could then just check down the river.
River
If you check, your opponent will bet AA and KK (and you have to call) but will check JJ (with which he will call if you bet). He may also put in a desperation call with AK. So, a bet is correct.
In sum, I probably would have bet the turn. Having checked, I probably would not have checkraised.
Plus, you have encouraged the player to your right to tag along as he just has to call 1 more bet (instead of 2 had you bet and been raised).
It was my understanding that this player folded the turn leaving Mason heads up. Does this change things for you?
Yes, thanks...I misread Mason's post but it really doesn't change my thoughts.
A few comments.
1. It's probably better to wiat to the turn to try to check raise because given the size of the pot the players on my left may call anyway with very little and my checking might give me a clue as to whether there is a nine out.
2. On the turn, I think there is a good chance that the original reraiser would bet an AK assuming he has it and now might fold to the check raise and thus not be able to snag an ace or a king on the river. It I lead and he has that AK he will probably call down. Given the size of the pot I must do what is most likely to win the pot quickly in case my hand is currently best.
3. I believe that you have analyzed the river bet correctly.