![[Two Plus Two Publishing]](/images/2+2.gif)
Stealing in a limit game is an activity with very little future.
I might play A9s from your position but I need a real hand to raise with. So what do you do if one of the solid players reraises you which is exactly what I do to someone thinking they can steal my blinds.
It is my opinion that first in in late position should nearly always enter with a raise. Limping in from here doesnt make sense. If the hand would play better against many players you know you will not have that. Further, it is entirely possibly that the hand is the best now and will stay that way against only a few players.
Can you explain your reasoning for limping from here?
Interesting hand from this evening's $30-$60 game at the Bellagio. I am in Seat #3 as the big blind with the QsQh. #5 and #8 limp. #9 raises to $60. Only the button calls until the action gets to me. Rather than re-raise I decide to just call since I am out of position and my re-raise will not eliminate anyone. The other players call. There is $320 in the pot and five players.
The flop is: 9d7d4h
I am sure the loose, aggressive player in #9 will bet since he raised pre-flop. Rather than leading, I decide to go for a check-raise because I want the two limpers to have to call two bets cold if they are on draws. I check. #5 checks. #8 bets $30. #9, the pre-flop raiser, just calls. The button calls. I now raise to $60. Only #5 folds. There is $560 in the pot and four players.
The turn is: 6d
Obviously I am now worried about a Diamond flush. With three opponents it seems quite likely someone has made a flush. However, I don't want to be in a guessing mode by checking and calling. I bet $60 in case no one has a Diamond flush and I can at least make anyone with a singleton Diamond pay to see the river card. #8 raises to $120. #9 folds. The button calls the $120 cold. I figure between the raiser and the cold-caller someone probably has a flush and I have no outs to beat a flush. If neither player has a flush there are straight, two pair, and set possibilities. I have no outs to beat a straight, I have two outs to beat a set but of them is the Qd which could give someone a Diamond flush. If someone has two pair I could have 4 outs with the Qc and the board pairing. I fold. There is $860 in the pot and two players.
I have the following questions:
1. Should I have 3 bet pre-flop from my big blind?
2. Was I correct in check-raising on the flop rather than just betting out?
3. Was I correct in betting the turn?
4. Was my fold correct?
I will post the results later. Thanks!
1. Yes. How do you know a re-raise won't eliminate #5 and/or #8? I might have just called with A-A or perhaps K-K, for the reasons you mention, but with Q-Q I re-raise.
2) Yes. The most likely bettor is indeed #9 or button and with this flop, and you having Q-Q and thus vulnerable to an overcard on the turn, I would go for the check-raise.
3) Yes. I believe it is correct strategy to tend to bet hand which, if already beaten, have no outs to beat the already made hand and to check those that would have outs. I believe that your raise on the flop makes it more likely that someone would believe you do have a flush, not less likely.
4) Yes. Even if you have the best hand at the moment, there are just too many cards that could come on the river that you're not going to like.
The pot is laying Jim about 11-2 for his two expensive street calls at worst (everyone may check on the river). Without getting into a lot of analysis. If Jim has the best hand going 40% of the time (it's probably better than that) and 50% of the cards will beat him on the river (the chances of a drawout are probably much less than 50%), then 20% of the time Jim will win what's in the pot. This would still give him 4-1 on an 11-2 shot. Looking at it another way if Jim had the best hand going on the turn 30% of the time and 50% of the cards would beat him it's about break even.
The river is: 6s. Both players check. I feel sick. The button wins an $860 pot with the TdTc. #8 had the 9s8s. My pair of Queens would have been good. For what it is worth, I think the majority of the time my hand will be no good on the turn and the fraction of the time it happens to be good it will frequently get sucked out. With the current layout there were 17 outs to beat my hand (A Diamond, a non-Diamond Five, a non-Diamond Ten, a non-Diamond Eight, and any Nine) out of 42 unseen cards. So the fraction of the time my hand is good it will only remain good about 60% of the time. Nevertheless, this was very discouraging. Of course, I said nothing to anyone.
Jim wrote:
"Of course, I said nothing to anyone."
Until now. :-)
I just read the previous post, "should I muck KK" and wondered about my play with them cowboys.
I'm on the button in a weak table. I have an aggressive image to everyone. All fold to me and I see KK. I raise. The guy on my immediate right says, "You raise anything when no one is in. You don't play the cards, you play the man." The SB folds and the BB calls. The BB is a guy who doesn't make fancy plays and isn't that experienced with Hold'em. If he has a hand he bets it, sometimes raises. He could've called with just about anything.
Flop: Q98 rainbow
The BB bets. I figure he's got a Q. I raise. He calls.
Turn: 5
BB checks I bet. He calls. I remember thinking I hope he doesn't have two pair. I don't think he does because he would've raised.
River: T
There's a possible straight but I don't think he has it. I don't think he's the type of person who bets into raisers with straight draws. He's mainly a weak player but doesn't let a hand go if he flops top pair. BB bets. I raise. BB re-raises. Crap. I call. He show's QQ and I muck. What would you have done in this situation? Did I do anything wrong? Or is this moot? Thanks.
Stephen
I think you made two mistakes in this hand. One was by raising his river bet. It is very easy for him to have at least two pair by holding something like Q-10. Many players will call in the big blind with this type of hand. He also only needs one card for a straight so it is very easy for him to have that. He knows that you have a strong hand because you raised before the flop and after his flop bet and you continued to bet the turn so he must be able to beat your big hand when he bets into you on the river. I would have just called.
The other mistake I think you made, which is jsut a minor mistake, was raising BTF. I think if you have an image as an overly aggressive player, you are on the button and everyone has folded to you, I think you should just smooth call BTF. You do not want to simply take the blinds with such a good hand. At least half of the time I would simply call in this situation.
Although as it turns out it would not have made a difference in this hand.
"I think if you have an image as an overly aggressive player, you are on the button and everyone has folded to you, I think you should just smooth call BTF."
This just doesn't make any sense to me. Aren't you pretty likley to get put on a steal and called if you raise? I think it is best to raise with just about any hand you are going to play there ( except for those special cases covered elsewhere in the lit ).
If you are playing aggresively there but limp with the big pairs it is going to look pretty obvious when you do it. I have seen a few players where I can practically put them on AA or KK if they limp first in late.
D.
Buckshot B,
I would not raise on the river. When he bets on the river, he's either busting a move or he has you covered. Your raise has very little to gain.
Against typical mugs, I would just call, knowing that I may be wasting a potential extra bet. You can't call his reraise.
By the way, if the best he can do with top set is to check and call, he obviously thought you were on a bluff, or else your image makes him play weak-tight. You can beat this guy.
Richard Cavell
Buckshot B,
I would not raise on the river. When he bets on the river, he's either busting a move or he has you covered. Your raise has very little to gain.
Against typical mugs, I would just call, knowing that I may be wasting a potential extra bet. You can't call his reraise.
By the way, if the best he can do with top set is to check and call, he obviously thought you were on a bluff, or else your image makes him play weak-tight. You can beat this guy.
Richard Cavell
A friend (Hero from here on in) who is new to mid limit asked me about the following hand. I thought the correct play was crystal clear but we would both be interested in any other opinions.
Hero holds QT suited on the button in a very loose and moderately passive nine handed 20/40 holdem game. All but one limp and the cutoff raises. The cutoff is a tricky, loose and aggressive player who does not have to have much to make this raise or aggressive plays in general. The cutoff also knows that Hero is one of the tighter players at the table. Hero calls.
Question 1: Does anyone disagree with the preflop call and why?
Flop comes a T 8 2 rainbow with no cards of Hero’s suit.
Everyone checks to the pre flop raiser who bets.
Question 2: What should Hero do on the flop and is it a close decision?
If this gets any interest I’ll post some results or another question about the turn and river later in the day.
Regards,
Rick
My Analysis and a Twist,
Question one was added as an afterthought. I thought the pre flop call was sound and I would think so even if cutoff preflop raiser would raise pre flop mostly with overcards and overpairs. Of course this is somewhat silly as there are many sound raises with lesser hands against a large field in the cutoff (e.g. ATs, AJs, KJs, JJ, 99). And this raiser would pump it up with many more (as you will see).
For those who think Hero should have folded, note that a hand like QT suited usually makes most of its money when it flops the flush and or straight draws. In addition, it makes more than its share of long shot flops such as made flushes and straights, and its share of trips and two pair. And with position, it makes most of its money against the field, not the pre flop raiser.
I was surprised that some would throw away this hand preflop (although a couple of posters misunderstood the position). I don’t think it is close. The key is that you must play this hand well when you flop one pair, which is the point of question two.
Question two was the main point on the post. You must raise for all the reasons skp, Jim, and the others mention. This isn’t close, and I would raise even if I thought the cutoff was tighter and had a good chance of an overpair. With all that money in there, you absolutely must narrow the field, even if you somehow knew you were a dog to the raiser and perhaps one of the limpers waiting to pounce.
Epilog: Hero just called the flop along with the entire field. The turn comes an offsuit 3 and all check to the player in the cutoff seat who bets again. Hero just calls again as do all but one of the limpers. On the river a deuce repeats. All check to the player in the cutoff seat who bets again. Hero calls and all others fold. Cutoff shows a T9 offsuit and Hero takes down a big pot despite playing so weakly post flop.
Now a Twist: Let’s say the pre flop action was the same (seven way action for two bets with our Hero calling the cutoff’s raise with QT suited). Post flop the UTG player bets (let’s assume he is one of the saner players at the table.) and all fold to the player in the cutoff seat who just calls.
Question: What should Hero do now?
Regards,
Rick
If UTG is sane and is not seeking a checkraise, it means he wants people out of the hand rather than in for two bets. Therefore I would have to put UTG on AT or JTs and not a set. Cutoff simply calling denies an overpair. 16 small bets, I just call.
raise or muck. It would depend a lot on the early bettor. Most likely I would raise and hope to check it down (assuming I don't improve)
If the UTG player wanted to narrow the field, a checkraise would be much more effective. If he bets out, anyone with a pair or gutshot has odds to call one bet. He can almost be sure that the pre-flop raiser will bet though and then be able to knock out the 4 people between him and the cutoff with a raise. If he bets out he cant be sure that the cutoff will raise.
Except that the people sandwiched between UTG and preflop raiser have a very tough time calling a bet BEFORE a preflop raiser who very well might raise and UTG might reraise. So, the poor people in the squeeze have to contemplate putting in three bets rather than 2 if it doesn't get checked around and 0 if it does.
Folding is unthinkable with 18 small bets in the pot. Even if hero is dead to a Queen that is a big enough pot to play a three outer. A sane player will not bet into a crowd here without at least top pair so the Queen kicker is questionable. The problem with raising is that it could get re-raised and there are only two opponents since most of the field is already eliminated. If you raise you might finagle a free card on the expensive street but I think is being too picayune. I would just call.
That's a closer decision, but if the blinds were gone (i.e. - I closed the action) I would consider taking one off. If the blinds were still around (and reasonably solid), I would probably dump it in this spot. If I had a backdoor draw of some kind, then I would go ahead and take one off, anyway. I think this decision is much closer than the original two questions.
If the UTG player is betting into 7 players, he is unlikely to be semi-bluffing so I would put him on AT, KT, JTs(it is a loose passive game so its fine to play that hand UTG, 88 or 22. The most likely hand is KT or AT though. I would just call on the flop and see if I can suck out. This is a tough call though. If you can put him on top pair with a better kicker than a call here is easy, but you are practically drawing dead against a set(although you can't always be paranoid about being up against a set). I would at least call the flop. However, if the UTG player is the type of player who would only 3 bet you with better than top pair, then I would raise and see where he is at. If he 3 bets then muck(he is unlikely to have 2 pair 10-8 so most likely a set in this scenario). If he just calls then take a free card and call a bet on the river.
Hi Rick,
What's with the Hero thing. I thought Hero was me. Fickleness will not get you anywhere with me.
Jim Brier gave the correct answer so all I can do is add a wittle bit. I see that my good buddy SKP believes that a preflop call is close. I believe Oz has said before that preflop is not where the money is. So what is right? What if the button hand was 7,2o. Would a call be correct? Close? The answer is that as Oz has stated, preflop play is always a close decision. Calling with 7,2o in the sitution you describe may seem ridiculous but the fact of the matter is that calling with the implied odds in your example would not be a mistake.
Vince.
Vince,
You're still my hero (even though I'm pissed you didn't stop by and say hi when in Los Angeles and you were WATCHING me from the f__king rail). Anyway, in these posts "Hero" is the most anonymous and non-gender specific word I can think of to describe any third party I write about. And believe me, in the card room my friends and I like to remain anonymous (more or less).
Regards,
Rick
P.S. If you are in town again email me since I have relocated.
The reason it is close is that the preflop raiser is to your immediate right. If the raise came from somewhere early and 5 players coldcalled or something, you would have an easy call with the same hand in late position.
I generally prefer not to be the first coldcaller of a raise. That said, I would still call here.
skp,
Not to belabor this thread, but you know me, if something can belabored, I'm the one that can do it. The decision to call here or not is not one that lends itself well to EV anlysis. If it did then describing it as a close decision or not would be relatively easy. Believe it or not if the decision is a close one, what makes it close is purely psychological. It has to do with the way the decision maker views the game of poker. Your last sentence, I believe, bears me out. skp wrote: "I generally prefer not to be the first cold caller of a raise. "
There is more to this subtle little statement than meets the eye. In fact it points to the fact that humans view things differently and consequently react differently, albeit in a small manner, to the same situation. These small differences are really the essence of poker "playing". If poker were merely a mathematical exercise, like craps, there would be no "play" to the game.
belaboring.
Vince
x
#1 Definately call on the button. QTs is a good hand to play 8 handed for a raise. If he can reraise without anyone folding then that would be the best play. #2 Definately raise. With top pair, decent kicker hero may or may not have the best hand, but you need to raise to thin the field and prevent someone with middle or botton pair to suck out.
Dear Mr. Malmuth,
Thank you much for taking the time to respond to my post. It is quite an honor to have such a famous poker person help me.
I have, of course, read your books including Hold Em for Advanced Players, Poker Essays I and II, and, also the other 2+2 books--Inside the Poker Mind and The Psychology of Poker. I just did what you suggest and sat down and re-read Hold Em for Advanced Players and Inside the Poker Mind on short handed play. These books are great BTW. I can read them over and over again. I know that people try to beat up on you on the internet, but I don't know how anyone can become a competitive poker player without studying what you have written.
I am pretty clear what to do with hands that are clearly worth checking and calling to the river, as you suggest, without improvement--AK, AQ, AJ, and pocket pairs when there is only one overcard on the board. If the flop is not terrible for my hand, I follow a mixed strategy of checking and calling to the river hoping to improve or win unimproved and bet into the lady or check raise her occasionally for variety. I don't know for sure, but checking and calling 2/3rds of the time and betting out or check raising the other 1/3rd is what I will try.
The hands I am not clear about are the intermediate hands where I have limped, been raised by the Asian lady, we are heads up on the flop, and the flop has not helped me or may reasonably have helped her hand. Hands in this group include two big cards without an ace-- KQ, KJ, KT, and QJ when I have not paired or gotten a draw on the flop and medium pocket pairs, 99, 88, and 77 when there is one AKQJT card on the flop.
With the two big cards, I am afraid that she has Ax and I am beat unless I pair on the turn or river. I will improve my hand only about 20% of the time and there is the possibility that when I do improve by pairing up, I will still be beat. When there are only 5 1/2 bets in the pot, the implied odds are not there for a call. Do I have to give up the pot when I check and she bets or I bet out (semi-bluffing) and she raises?
If I do check and call in this situation, I am also uncertain about the effect on my standard deviation. Since I am betting on a 1 in 5 chance, even if the pot is laying me better than 1 in 5, my standard deviation is going to increase a lot (I think).
With the medium pocket pairs, I am a little foggy. When I have an overpair I bet and raise. When there are two AKQJT cards on the flop and she bets I fold. My uncertainty is when there is only one AKQJT card on the board. I know that the higher the card that flops, the more likely she has a hand. So when a jack is the only high card on the flop, I should be more likely to check and call to the river and when there is an ace on the flop I should be more likely to check and fold. Also, the relation of my pocket pair to the non AKQJT cards on the flop should also enter my thinking--if my pair is between top and second pair, between second and third pair, or below third pair. I guess a mixed strategy is correct here also --sometimes check and call and sometimes check and fold. I am not sure with what frequency I should apply these two strategies. It seems a very complicated question. I will have to think about it.
When I have a medium pocket pair, there are two AKQJT cards on the flop, I check and she bets (which she does almost 100% of the time) is there any alternative to folding? Should I fight back by sometimes betting out or check raising or are my chances so slim that mucking is correct?
The final situation is where I am completely lost. What happens when I get a small piece of the flop, e.g. one AKQJT cards and two small cards flop and I have middle or bottom pair. Your book says to ignore the top card but when I bet out or check raise with middle pair I find that I am getting raised by the lady and many times end up calling raises and bets with a mediocre hand. I have no clue whether I am beat at that point in the hand, she is betting a draw, or she has a hand weaker than mine. Should I just grit my teeth and check and call when I am raised or re-raised and have middle pair or less or should I raise and re-raise as John Feeney describes in his "Out on the Edge" Chapter?
Love and kisses,
hklahehottie
P.S. If I ever see you in Las Vegas I would like to introduce myself. Do you mind fans bothering you when you are playing?
Have you read the section on short handed play in the 21st Century edition of HPFAP. This section is very different from the short section that was in the all book. I think that it will answer your questions.
It seems to me that you are putting yourself in a situation where your opponent could be betting random cards, you are getting over 5-to-1 from the pot, and yet you fold a good percentage of the time. If this is the case, your opponent has a hughly profitable play to just bet everytime regardless of her hand. If it is likely that she is playing hands of some value, you should call a little less.
Addressing your final situation, you will need to make a judgment as to what your chances of you having the best hand (or improving to it if there are more cards to come) and then comparing this probability to the size of the pot. From what you describe you are against someone who is betting and raising with random hands that have no relation to the flop. When this is the case, you have to call a lot, and hands like bottom pair certainly are worth going to the river with and paying off. (Remember, occasionally you will improve and have the best hand even when she is betting something legit.)
MY FIRST SITTING AT A 20-40 I'M IN SMALL BLIND WITH 10-J SUITED. UTG CALLS, MID POSITION CALLS, I CALL, NO RAISE FROM BB. FLOP COMES 8-9-3 RAINBOW. I CHECK, BB CHECKS, "UTG" BETS, MID PLAYER FOLDS, I CALL, BB FOLDS....IT'S HEADS UP ME AND 3RD LEFT OF BLIND. A QUEEN FALLS/NO FLUSH DRAWS....I CHECK, HE BETS (WHICH I EXPECTED), I RAISE, HE CALLS. A JACK FALLS,"CHRIST" I BET, HE RAISES, I CALL AND HE SHOWS ME K-10. I KNOW THE BET ON THE END WAS STUPID, BUT ANY HELP WOULD BE GREAT. J
DANZ,
If you don’t want to use the shift key, go with no capital letters. All capital letter posts give most of us a headache. Plus small caps are cool – just ask ray zee and small caps scott.
There was nothing wrong with your river bet. Most of the time you will still be leading and most of the calls by your opponent will be with lesser hands. There was no way you could read him for KT and if fact, he played badly. He called your check raise on the turn with only six big bets in the pot. A jack was his only out and you probably had one. A king could hardly be considered an out (assume that he doesn’t know you have a straight).
Looking back a bit, I think you should have led at the flop with your four straight and overcards. That was the better play and I believe you overlooked it and wallowed in your “bad beat” on the river instead. It is crucial to separate the true mistakes from the times you were just unlucky. And in this case your mistake was subtle and on an earlier betting round.
Regards,
Rick
Danz,
I also would bet the flop if I were pretty sure I wasn't going to get raised, and especially if the guy to my left is loosish.
Your opponent played like a mongoose. There's nothing at all wrong with your river bet. Just say "Nice hand, Sir," and throw your cards into the muck faster than he can say "See the problem with the way you play is..."
Richard Cavell
Your mistake was not leading at the flop in this unraised pot where no one has shown any strength. You could win pot outright and you have a ton of outs if you are called including your over cards. Who knows but the UTG might have accidently played decent poker and folded. The rest of your play was fine.
I like to apply more heat with a nut straight draw like you had. Bet or Ch raise the flop here and play your made hand like you did. Some times you can do everything right and still lose - you might have lost the KT witha strong play on the flop - maybe not.
I think you blew this one early on...
If you bet the flop you almost always win this pot. Let look at it...
UTG puts in a semi bluff on the flop and you don't make him pay for it.
When no one raises him he continues on the turn and you check raise. Now bettors almost never fold to a checkraise cause they feel like it is admitting they were bluffing and ego just gets in the way of admitting that you got tricked into betting... So he calls with every intention of folding on the river if he does not catch his three outer...
If you bet the flop he has to fold especially with players to act behind him!
Sean
no text ;-)
I know but the raise came one to his right didn't it?? This leaves him open to a re-raise.
Winger,
Pre flop there all but one limped and the cutoff (the seat just before the button) raised. Our hero was on the button. Yes, a early limper could backraise (or limp reraise in Abdul speak) but this is relatively rare in a loose and somewhat passive game.
On the flop the big question was should Hero raise, fold, or call.
Regards,
Rick
In a somewhat tighter than average Los Angeles area 15/30 game I post a late position blind in the cutoff seat as a new player (I already had scouted the game a bit from the rail). I’m dealt a 6s5s. There is one moderately tight early limper, I check my option, and a somewhat loose, moderately aggressive and not too tricky player on the button raises (I’ve played him before and have “held” against him so I think he fears me a bit). The blinds fold and the limper and I call. Now some may not call here but it is at worse a close decision. I’m getting 6.7 to 1 odds and having only two opponents (albeit in a sandwiched position). Anyway, the pre flop call is not the point of the post but comment if you want too.
The flop comes an 8s8c7c. The limper checks and I check. Now some would take a stab with a semi-bluff here but I felt there was very little chance I would lose the button raiser on cheap street. In fact he would probably raise with overcards since he wouldn’t believe I would bet an eight (he hasn’t played me THAT much since I often would!). The button bets and the limper folds leaving my heads up with the button aggressor.
The turn is a 2h which is about as big a blank as one can get. I check again and the button checks behind me with a look of mild trepidation. Now I’m starting to think he has middle size overcards (rather than a pair or an ace high) and was worried about a check raise from me with the pair on board.
The river is the 2d. Now I’m convinced he doesn’t have an overpair (unless it was really big and he was inducing a bluff) so my only worry is that he may call with an ace high. With just under five big bets in the pot I take a stab with a pure bluff on the river. The button doesn’t even think as he folds. [Note: His not thinking tends to confirm that he had middle overcards. He should have at least pretended to think for a second or two so I would not know whether he would call with ace high in this spot].
I’m convinced I increased my chances of bluffing by checking and calling on the flop (and checking the turn with the intention of raising as a semi-bluff). When the blank hit the river my bet make it look like I was paired up. Although I was fairly sure an ace high would call with two pair on board I didn’t think he would call with less.
A few years ago (before reading the forum) I wouldn’t have make this play. But now I’m looking for more chances to steal and in this case playing a little less aggressively in the middle two rounds may have helped with the scary board and scary call.
Any comments will be appreciated.
Regards,
Rick
Pre-flop your call of the button raise after being half-way in is clear. You will occasionally flop a straight or flush draw plus with only two opponents a pair might win. I believe some players might even raise with your hand since you have posted but I would not.
At the river you cannot survive a showdown so betting is your only chance of winning. Based on the pot size if you think betting will work more than about 20% of the time then you should bet. It sounds like you had a good read on your opponent so betting here is probably right.
Calling the raise pre-flop is good. I think some people raise here. I would if I knew my opponents and it sounded like you did. I think that if you knew you weren't going to lose the button on the flop you should have bet out. You're open ended, runner-runner flush and straight flush. The question is do you think he would have raised you? Probably not. A bet would not have been out of the question. Maybe this is a little too aggressive. I know if scott was behind me then he would raise my bet so I would check to him, but I would probably bet into anyone else.
But let's imagine for a second. You probably could have gotten away with the pot on the turn. If you had raised pre-flop the button would not have raised and just called. Would this be a fair assumption? Then you check raise on the flop knowing that the button will bet. Then bet out on the turn. With all your during play assumtions it sounds like it could have panned out this way. I guess this might be hindsight but it sounds good.
Stephen
On the flop, I reckon a checkraise is in order. He will have to respect your raise and start playing his hand for what it's worth.
Checking on the turn is probably not as good as betting, in my opinion. When you check on the turn and he checks behind you, you've given him a free card and failed to show strength. Now if an Ace hits the board, you'll feel like you have to check to him.
The flop is your strength. He's only going to call you down with an 8 or AA-99. And you might jag your straight and get called down, to send him on tilt. I reckon your straight draw is good, by the way.
You say "I'm sure I increased my bluff chances by check-calling the flop". Well, more than if you check-folded. I think you would easily increase your bluff chances more by betting or check-raising.
You simulated the play of a weak-tight player holding winning cards (like JJ or K8). You'd rather simulate the play of God.
Richard Cavell
"The blinds fold and the limper and I call. Now some may not call here"
No, just call. no problem. It's a call, dammit.
"but it is at worse a close decision. I’m getting 6.7 to 1 odds and having only two opponents (albeit in a sandwiched position)."
Stop justifying, I tell you.! It's a call, a definite call. ;^|
"Anyway, the pre flop call is not the point of the post "
Yes, okay, now we're talking.
"The flop comes an 8s8c7c. The limper checks and I check. Now some would take a stab with a semi-bluff here"
I would probably take a stab. Small caps scott would take a stab, but then he's handy with a knife. But wait...
"but I felt there was very little chance I would lose the button raiser on cheap street."
Oh, well, okay, why didn't ya say so? I guess I can see not stabbing then, I think, maybe.
"The turn is a 2h which is about as big a blank as one can get."
Or as small a blank, depending on how you look at it.
"I check again"
A bet might have made some sense here, but oh, okay. What next?
"and the button checks behind me"
Ah, good. Maybe you can steal on the river.
"with a look of mild trepidation."
Maybe more than maybe.
"Now I’m starting to think he has middle size overcards (rather than a pair or an ace high) and was worried about a check raise from me with the pair on board."
But he smartly avoided it! Hmmm, all this hand reading. I think I don't wanna play with you.
"The river is the 2d... With just under five big bets in the pot I take a stab..."
You like that stab metaphor don't you. The butcher of the poker table. Well, good stab. He pretty much can't call without ace-high, as you knew. And he's not going to bluff raise here. Good stab. Sharp knife.
"I’m convinced I increased my chances of bluffing by checking and calling on the flop"
Well, it was one way to bluff at it. Assuming he had overcards like KJ, QJ..., I guess you could have just played aggressively and won it on the turn or river. But there's more than one way to stab...err...skin a cat.
"(and checking the turn with the intention of raising as a semi-bluff)"
Whoa, hold on there! You didn't tell us this before. Okay, cool, you were going to make the big move on the turn. Okay, okay, cool.
"...in this case playing a little less aggressively in the middle two rounds may have helped..."
Uh, but with the thought of playing big time aggressively, but he checked along. No problem, steal it this way, steal it that way. They can't stop you. Nice hand well played sir. ;-) :-)
John,
Uh! I'm afraid that you may be in need of a little therapy. Know any good psycologists?
Vince.
"The turn is a 2h which is about as big a blank as one can get. I check again and the button checks behind me with a look of mild trepidation. Now I’m starting to think he has middle size overcards (rather than a pair or an ace high) and was worried about a check raise from me with the pair on board."
i have some questions about this. if i were the button i would be inclined to check here with A highs and especially pairs to try and induce a bluff and to bet here with KJ etc. (well, actually. i would check the turn and bluff raise the river against some opponents and i would check the turn and fold the river against others but the turn check makes it more likely for me to have a hand that might win a showdown.) why do you read him the way you do?
overall i like your play and it is certainly one of the many viable ways to steal a pot. i suspect this one was yours for the taking at any point.
wouldn't have been so cool if he had JT and called you on the river, winning with a J high? i dont think i have ever won a showdown with a J high. i have won a few with K high though. it always makes me feel so happy.
scott
Rick,
Hope this post is not too late to gain your attention. Your play on the first and last betting rounds seems clearly sound to me, but I'm not so sure about those middle two rounds. Although you hit a good piece of the flop and your opponent probably missed, you did not apply any pressure on him to fold until the river (and you were a bit lucky he did not have an ace or hit one of his overcards). I think a bet on the turn, perhaps preceded by a check-raise on the flop, may have a higher EV against most opponents.
MJS,
I meant to write a follow up but I've been buried and was not sure how to express myself. Besides, J. Feeney did a thorough psychoanalysis of me for free.
Although I was new to the game this player had played me quite a bit recently and had been playing back at me quite often on my flop and turn semi-bluffs. Now this isn’t so bad when my semi-bluff is more in the order of bottom pair overcard kicker since he would often have only a draw of his own or merely overcards and I would be leading more often than not. But against someone who is defending hard against semi-bluffs, you don’t want to semi-bluff with low card draws.
Note that I did intend to check raise the turn had he bet. And when he didn’t bet I thought he was weaker than ace high. In a post above, skp’s point is well taken in that a better player might be more likely to bet the weaker hand on the turn and induce a bluff with the ace high. But this guy just wasn’t that type of player.
Regards,
Rick
Perhaps you chose the best course of action against this opponent. Although you're a small dog to his likely overcards on the flop, you have sufficient odds to check-call the flop and turn hoping to outdraw him. Whether more aggressive action on these rounds would increase your EV depends on the playing tendencies of the opponent.
Regards
I am next to UTG in a full game. UTG folds. I raise with Ac Kh. The 2 players to my immediate left cold call the raise. They are slightly on the loose side when calling raises. Everyone else folds including the blinds.
The flop comes Qs Ts 9c. How do you play the flop?
Puggy
You should bet the flop. With only two opponents you might win the pot outright and you have some outs if you are called. The two flush is not a major concern with only two opponents.
Jim,
Thanks for the response. The problem is that this flop is almost guaranteed to have hit one of the cold callers. In fact, I think your chances of winning it right there are very, very small. Plus, the chances that you'll get raised are extremely high. There's all kinds of draws out there, top pairs, 2 pairs, pairs + draws, etc.
After you call the raise, you can never be sure how many outs you actually have. A Jack will win it for you, but you're not thrilled if it's a spade. You sure can't be happy if a King comes. If an Ace comes, you could easily be up against 2 pair, and again, you're not happy with the Ace of spades.
On average, I'd call it maybe 5-7 outs on the flop, plus a tiny chance of having the best hand. Pretty marginal.
Anyway, I DID bet. The first cold-caller folded and the 2nd raised. I called.
4d on the turn.
I checked, raiser bet. I called again. River comes the 2d. I checked, raiser bet, I folded.
I've been second guessing myself about this hand for 2 days.
Puggy
I don't play 15-30 but I think I would bet it out and fold if raised. You could get an A, K or J, but they could all get you in trouble, except the J. That 2nd guy probably has KJ for the straight on the flop. He could even have J8 and if you showdown he would say something like, "It was s00ted that's why I called your raise." Do you believe it reasonable that he had AQ? If he's the type player you're describing then he's not slow playing his monster. His raise means he's got the nuts and you should bail. I don't know if you want to consider the turn call a mistake but I don't think I would have called.
Stephen
But Puggy you were the pre-flop raiser and they are going to be worried about you. You stated that they were on the loose side when calling raises. There are only two opponents not five or six. Suppose they called your pre-flop raise with middle pairs like 88 or 77? Suppose they called with something A9 suited or AT offsuit with no Spade? Well, they may fold when you bet out of fear that you have a bigger pair (e.g.-AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT, or AQ which gives you top pair). They would be folding better hands! When this happens you gain a lot. Someone with another AK but no Spade may decide to fold! The key here is that you are planning to call anyway if someone else bets so you might as well bet yourself. The chances of getting raised are not very high at all since you were the pre-flop raiser and the only hand you could have that this flopped missed is AK with no Spade or JJ with no Spade. Putting in another way, if you get raised you can probably fold knowing you are playing with very few outs. Your flop call of the raise was marginal.
I think you should have definitely folded on the turn.
But you and I really need to have a dialogue about this because I believe you have the wrong approach. The last thing you want to do in these shorthanded situations is be in a check-call mode. You end up putting yourself on the defensive and going too far with your hand. Mathematically your flop bet only costs you a fraction of a bet those times you get called. But the flop bet is a good money maker in those situations where with only two opponents you can get them both to fold.
Jim,
You were right when you said that the cold callers should be worried about me betting the flop. But these were loose cold callers, and if they called preflop with something like AT or A9 (even suited), they won't be folding it on the flop (especially if they've got a backdoor draw). You're right that if they both have 7s or 8s, they will muck it but how often will this happen?? There's such a high chance that this flop hit either of them. I agree with Rick that if we change the 9 to a 3, it's a definite bet. However, in this case, I think it's marginal. I like your attitude about keeping aggression here though. This is one I have to think about more.
Once I do bet and get raised, there's 10 small bets in the pot. That's almost enough just to call and hit the jack. (Of course, the J of spades might not be good, but) Plus, an Ace may be good. I think the flop call is OK, but I agree that the turn call is pretty bad.
Thanks for the posts, guys. I thought this hand was pretty interesting.
Puggy
(n/t)
Puggy,
Here is a quick comment. I agree with Jim Brier above that you usually want to bet into two opponents. However, in my post below I thought this particular flop required more caution. He might agree upon further examination.
Regarding the outcome, I think once you check and call the turn, you should check and call the river when another blank hits. There are some draws he could have missed that you can beat including AT and the flush draws that missed. Even if it were slightly minus EV, you would have slept better ;-).
Regards,
Rick
AK is the most difficult and misplayed hand around bar none that includes tournaments (IMHO).
With that flop and assuming the players are decent I just check/fold it. Playing them strong is an option IF the flop and players are right but I guess I get away from it 75% of the time and save a lot of BB in the process.
I am just not getting in a drawing match with a no pair hand. I view it like a 3 card flush or straight.
I either check-fold or check-RAISE(call if three-bet; check-fold the turn if a blank comes, bet out if a Jack or Spade comes, check-call if an Ace or King comes).
Incidentally, which did you like more in "The Cell": the "looking in the fridge" scene, or the "horse" scene? I'll go w/ the fridge but the hoss thing WAS something you don't see everyday(two people walked out right afterwards)...OOPS, wrong forum.. :)
I was wondering what the star was doing with a wanker like "Puff Daddy" - movie was entertaining but I liked the "art of war" a lot more. Only movie I have walked out on in recent memory was the super heros movie with Jeanene Goraphilo(sp) - gave bad a whole new meaning.
It depends entirely on my opponents. My two options are check and call one bet or else bet out.
Firstly, it is far too likely that this sort of flop has hit my opponents. I assume I can only win with a jack, or probably an ace.
1) I will check if I there is some chance I can get a free card, and if I am pretty sure that if I bet my opponents know how to raise. Now if my jack hits I checkraise.
2) I will bet if I think there's any chance it will make them weak-tight (ie if they're not going to raise me in spite of having the best hand, and might even fold).
Probably 80% of the time, I'll check and call.
Richard Cavell
Puggy,
I haven’t read the other answers yet. In general, I like betting the flop into two opponents with AK and two parts of Broadway on board (i.e., QJ, QT, JT). But there are several factors in favor of checking here.
1) The third card is a nine so the entire flop is coordinated and they will either bet for you or not thin out when you bet.
2) There is a two flush and you don’t have this suit so you can’t backdoor a strong flush hand. But an opponent could easily have a two flush.
3) You said your opponents are “slightly loose when calling raises”. In Los Angeles, I take this to mean they call raises with middle cards (Wednesday afternoon at the Bellagio, it means they call raises with AQ ;-)). The board is all middle cards. Your bet will often get raised
4) They can be fairly sure that most of the flop didn’t hit you, but you don’t have that luxury. So expect a lot of pressure from draws and pair/draw type hands.
I would check and see what happens. If there is a bet and a raise back to you, get out now while the pot is small. If there is a bet and a fold then call and consider leading the turn. If there is a bet and a call also take one off but now you need to hit something on the turn to continue.
Regards,
Rick
But Rick with a flop of: QsTs9c what early position pre-flop raising hands does this flop miss from the point of view of your opponents? Answer: only AK with no Spade. AA and KK are over pairs, QQ is a set, JJ is an open ended straight draw, TT is a set, AQ is top pair/top kicker. This board can look as scary to your opponents as it does to you. You need to take advantage of this by betting. If you get raised you can consider folding or just calling and then folding the turn when a blank hits. You escape at minimum cost. But if you check, you forsake the opportunity of winning the pot outright with only two opponents and you put yourself in a guessing mode for the rest of the hand.
Jim,
I know I’m in trouble when your post starts off with “But Rick” ;-). Anyway, you have convinced me that betting out is probably better. But my thinking may have gone along the following lines:
Puggy described the cold callers as slightly loose in cold calling early raises. In my experience, they are the types not to give up unless they held underpairs. With this flop, they will tend to be optimistic and think that you have AK, can be blown off it eventually, and if not (i.e., they think you hold the overpair or the top pair with a good kicker), they have three to eight outs. They discount the possibility that you would flop a set and bet it out (even though we usually do and should).
The other problem I had was the presence of the nine. This rarely helps the UTG raiser (unless he holds JJ for the straight draw). Take that card away and I will bet almost every time against most opponents.
Regards,
Rick
To my way of thinking the key is that you are the pre-flop raiser and are the first to act. If you had decided to vary your play and just limp in with big slick, then I would favor checking rather than betting.
If a game consists of 6 loose players who play badly, and 4 players who are somewhat equally matched in skill level, does the edge simply go to the equally skilled player who exemplifies the most patience?
Over the long run, the 4 better players figure to get all of the 6 bad player's money minus the rake. But as most of us know, this can be a long tedious process. The majority of chips put into play will be exchanged by the 6 bad players since collectively their outs will combine to make good hands vulnerable. In addition, the 4 good players are wasting energy if you will, over the long run, those times they find themselves competing against each other.
It seems to me that even most good players are subject to tilt in these type of games when they are not winning. Could it be that this is where one of the 4 equally skilled players can now seize a huge edge? By simply outwaiting his 3 competive collegues and refusing to tilt or otherwise let his play deteriorate, how significant does this become? Or is this not a very imortant subject? This may be overrstating the obvious yet, I see this scenario time and time again in games of all limits.
Dr. Trey
If a game consists of 6 loose players who play badly, and 4 players who are somewhat equally matched in skill level, does the edge simply go to the equally skilled player who exemplifies the most patience?
Over the long run, the 4 better players figure to get all of the 6 bad player's money minus the rake. But as most of us know, this can be a long tedious process. The majority of chips put into play will be exchanged by the 6 bad players since collectively their outs will combine to make good hands vulnerable. In addition, the 4 good players are wasting energy if you will, over the long run, those times they find themselves competing against each other.
It seems to me that even most good players are subject to tilt in these type of games when they are not winning. Could it be that this is where one of the 4 equally skilled players can now seize a huge edge? By simply outwaiting his 3 competive collegues and refusing to tilt or otherwise let his play deteriorate, how significant does this become? Or is this not a very imortant subject? This may be overrstating the obvious yet I see this scenario time and time again in games of all limits, and many otherwise good players seem to be unaware of this judging from their play.
Dr. Trey
.
Yes, the person who does not go on tilt will be the biggest winner. However, do not equate patience with tight/loose. When you are playing against so many bad players I think it is more profitable to play more hands because you will be involved in so many more hands with them and thus allowing them to make more mistakes against you.
This is the most important thing in poker, period, IMHO. I would call it discipline. Once the basic strategies and skills are acquired, discipline is what separates the winners from the losers. In my experience I have encountered many players who are excellent; well versed in odds, bluffing, position et cetera. But, eventually, in the end, the give up their edge. They give up in the blurry fog of battle.
One more thing. If poker becomes tedious, don't play. I can't imagine a bored Tiger Woods or Wayne Gretzky? Can you?
Your post and others through the years that stress the two ideas of patience and discipline are the most worthwhile of all.
I think of patience as only playing good starting hands in proper position while discipline is being able to fold a hand that becomes an underdog as the hand develops (except for good pot odds situations).
These skills are easy to discuss and write about away from the table. Players who truly can stick with them during the game have a huge advantage.
Having patience and not going on tilt is the mark of a good player - if the other "good" players let their games deteriorate they ar bsing over estimated.
I'd be shoping for another game - I find it is almost impossible to beat 6 maniacs at the same table - you are correct about the collective outs and it becomes a crap shoot. I like 2-3 that I can maybe isolate but 6 is way to many.
I wasn't necessarily referring to maniacs per se. If there are 6 bad players in the game who are not overly aggressive or otherwise tricky, do you still not find this game good for you?
Yes - a game I would look for under those circumstances.
I appreciate the thoughts. Again, this is probably nothing more than the obvious, but I've been more attuned to this than in the past. Good players start tilting when they find themselves stuck in a game which is overly easy and they therefore feel they deserve to be ahead.
I was just wondering how much of an effect this may have on one's edge.
I think there are quite a few players who can play patient, disciplined poker when they first sit down. However, once they've been playing for about 5 hours, many of these 'patient' players will start to loosen up and gamble with the weaker players. Shortly after this, they'll find their chips draining away. Even if they were winning to this point, their chips will drain away just as fast as if they has only a few left.
Continued patience will mean the difference between losing 10 BB and losing 25 BB on a bad night. It also means the difference between winning 20 BB and winning 10 BB on a good night. I don't think you can be a winning poker player if you can't be patient for the entirety of all of your poker sessions.
Here's a hand that I played in a slightly wild $30-$60 game at The Bellagio.
I had AhQc under the gun and raised. Four players called behind me and the big blind called.
The flop came Ad Kh 4h. The BB checked, I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, two players behind him called, the BB folded, and I called.
The turn was the 7s. I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, one player called behind him, I raised, the player on my left call, and the player behind him folded.
The river was a 3d. I bet and was called. My opponent held the Ac2c and I won a pretty big pot.
All comments are welcome.
Any reasonable strategy should prevail in a game where players are calling UTG raises with A2 suited. Good game selection.
The crux of this hand is whether to check raise either the flop or the turn; given the position of the flop bettor I think the check raise on the turn is a slightly higher profit expectation, although there is nothing wrong with a flop raise either, IMO.
Questions to consider: are they capable of dropping (incorrectly perhaps) out on the flop with one bet in? Is the A2suited capable of letting his ace go? (not likely for a mug calling with that in the first place). What is to be done if fourth street brings a heart? Would the A2 raise a UTG flop bet? All of these questions and many more effect this situation however this strategy appears to my thinking to be optimum. But what do I know?
Why not ck-raise the flop to get rid of a hand like JT with one a Heart - Your were most certainly in the lead. Just a question - I probably play it like you did most of the time but usually regret not playing stronger earlier when some one sucks out runner runner on me.
Rounder, if you check raise the flop, wouldn't the gutshot have better odds now given the position of the bettor? (Assuming the original bettor does not reraise.)
I'm not gonna let that effect my strategy. The fact that some guy thinks it is "correct" to make a otherwise unwise call with marginal pot odds is OK by me - he is playing a 6 outter to my made hand that could improve. I like this postion every time - besids how many players to you think play 2+2 poker I suggest not as many as they would like you to believe.
What would you have done if your pre-flop raised had been re-raised?
Hi Mason,
I miss talking to you already!
Now:
"I had AhQc under the gun and raised. Four players called behind me and the big blind called."
It doesn't get much better than this, now does it! How many mistakes were made we can only speculate. Caller fou probably could call correctly with any group 4-5. But what kind of hand does each need to call. I don't think that you posted the hand to discuss this but there are a lot of pros out there that believe that getting a lot of 2 bet cold callers is a bad thing. They are wrong, wrong, wrong. There problem is that they don't know how to afdapt, adapt, adapt.
I don't like your check call on the flop. I bet and look to get raised and then I three bet it. If I get four bet I begin to worry that someone smoothed called preflop with A,K.
I also bet out on the turn. If I get raised I'm pretty sure I'm beat but make a crying call anyway. There is a slight chance that someone may raise the turn with that board without a minimum of A,K but I don't think that happens often. The pot is now too big to let go with my hand.
I bet the river also. There we agree.
Now what's wrong with my playing of the hand. Well it seems that we have results of the hand played the way you played it. Those results look good. So whose correct. Check the results for the right answer.
Vince.
Say hello to Charmaine (spelling).
You would have gotten more money check-raising the flop, than the turn.
- Andrew
I've never played $30-$60 at Bellagio, so I can't identify what you did right or wrong. Obviously, you're slowplaying top pair with the intention of disguising your hand and perhaps getting someone to fold a better hand.
The flop's not that good for you. The K will counterfeit your Q in the event of a running pair, and normally the Q gives you a few extra cards to make a hand (ie hit top two pair without trying).
I'd like to bet the flop and watch my opponents' faces as they act. I'm prepared to reraise the flop because of the flush draw (and the fact that running hearts gives you nut flush). Somehow, I'd really like to put them all on a hand before the turn card hits.
"Here's a hand that I played in a slightly wild $30-$60 game at The Bellagio."
You sure it wasn't a $3-$6 game at the Mirage?
"I had AhQc under the gun and raised. Four players called behind me and the big blind called."
So much for narrowing down the field. I guess if you didn't raise it would have been a family pot.
"The flop came Ad Kh 4h. The BB checked, I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, two players behind him called, the BB folded, and I called."
The player that bet probably has a weeker hand than you. So, you don't have to worry about two pair, since two pair will usually go for a check-raise. The other players could be on a draw. If you would raise at this point, you would be taking the player that bet out of the lead. Which you do not want to do in order to drive out the other players on a more expensive round.
"The turn was the 7s. I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, one player called behind him, I raised, the player on my left call, and the player behind him folded."
The same player bet again indicating that his hand did not improve. Correctly, you raised driving out an additional opponent. Now, you know for sure that your opponent had only a pair. If his hand was better he would have re-raised.
"The river was a 3d. I bet and was called. My opponent held the Ac2c and I won a pretty big pot."
You figured you had to bet the river in order to get an extra bet. If you checked, your opponent would have likely checked.
Here's a few comments on my hand:
"I had AhQc under the gun and raised. Four players called behind me and the big blind called."
In games where you expect a lot of callers and they play reasonably well after the flop this raise can be wrong. (See HPFAP-21.) However, if they come with lots of weak hands and also play poorly, you are giving up too much by just calling.
"The flop came Ad Kh 4h. The BB checked, I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, two players behind him called, the BB folded, and I called."
Even though I have hit may hand, given that the pot is pretty big my first priority should be to maximize my chances of winning it. I felt that even if I got a late position bettor and check raised (the flop) I would get other players calling for two bets. Thus the check and call startegy with the hope of check raising on fourth street. Furthermore, it should be fairly obvious that I probably have the best hand since I would have been three bet before the flop by AK, AA, or KK.
"The turn was the 7s. I checked, the player on my immediate left bet, one player called behind him, I raised, the player on my left call, and the player behind him folded."
My main purpose of this raise was to fold my opponents out, especially the caller who could easily have five outs.
"The river was a 3d. I bet and was called. My opponent held the Ac2c and I won a pretty big pot."
As I said above, it appeared that I have the best hand, if a jack or a ten was the river card the chances of my AQ being good go down.
This hand is very interesting. In this spot, I would normally hope to check-raise a late position bettor on the flop to thin the field. You say you planned to check-call because you expected your opponents would cold-call two bets on the flop. However, two of your five opponents failed to call just one small bet. This begs the question: How many expected folds would be necessary to make a check-raise the preferred play on the flop (assuming a late-position bettor)?
The fact that the flop bettor was on your immediate left reduces your chances of thinning the field on the turn as well as on the flop. Despite this unfortunate development, I would probably still proceed to check-raise the flop; my reasoning would now be that if I cannot drive out my opponents, I can at least make them pay the max. (And if I follow-up with a lead-bet on the turn, the strength I have shown may induce folds.) Do you see a serious problem with this reasoning?
You say the main purpose of your check-raise on the turn was to drive out players. However, it is not obvious why check-raising the bettor on your left would be more likely to thin the field than betting into him--especially if the two late callers are loose/wild players; your check-raise provided the remaining late caller with 13:1 pot odds for his possible 5-outer. Although I do concede that typical opponents would be somewhat more likely to fold after you check-raise the turn than after you lead bet (unless the original bettor raises), this may not always compensate for the risk of giving a free turn card.
It seems to me that check-raising the flop and betting out on the turn may achieve close to the same fold rate, while extracting extra money from weak hands on the flop (and not risking a free turn card).
Here's a few comments on your comments:
Your first comment just bears out my point of adapting to the situation. Although, an arguement can be made for raising UTG with A,Qo even if all the callers behind you are experts, the value of A,Q goes down in a situation that you describe.
Even though I have hit may hand, given that the pot is pretty big my first priority should be to maximize my chances of winning it. I felt that even if I got a late position bettor and check raised (the flop) I would get other players calling for two bets. Thus the check and call startegy with the hope of check raising on fourth street. Furthermore, it should be fairly obvious that I probably have the best hand since I would have been three bet before the flop by AK, AA, or KK.
Here is where I have a problem. If it is fairly obvious that you have the best hand then why would you assume that a hand you could beat would bet. If you do assume a weaker Ace will bet isn't it better to try and use that by betting and getting him to assist in thinning the field by raising you. Your position in this hand is poor. By checking you increase the probability that you get beat by taking the chance of giving a free card. And if you do have the best hand and they call well then what is wrong with getting more money in the pot when you have the best hand. You are really hoping that your opponents are counterfitting each others outs or will toss uniqe 3 outers. Many players will be afraid that you have A,K and toss the hand here. Of course you were playing and knew the players. By checking you seem to have accomplished the same thing as if you would have bet. So there.
No problem with the turn, considering the way you played the flop.
"The river was a 3d. I bet and was called. My opponent held the Ac2c and I won a pretty big pot."
As I said above, it appeared that I have the best hand, if a jack or a ten was the river card the chances of my AQ being good go down.
Obviously you are wrong here. You must be just as afraid of small cards against opponents that will call two bets with Axs. Of course, betting is correct unless the opponent is so weak that he will raise this board with two pair like Aces and 3's.
Vince.
"Obviously you are wrong here. You must be just as afraid of small cards against opponents that will call two bets with Axs. Of course, betting is correct unless the opponent is so weak that he will raise this board with two pair like Aces and 3's."
Vince, I hope you are not suggesting that Mason should check the river against a bad player on the off-chance that he made two pairs when the 3 hit and will raise. This is the type of opponent that you must bet the river against because he will miss making two pairs 8 out of 9 times (nearly 14 out of 15 times if he has Ax). Given the size of the pot, he will likely call the 14 times that he misses and only might raise the 1 time he hits. It's a clear value bet against such an opponent. A check may be called for against a good player who may fold a weaker Ace at the end but bet it if Mason checks. Actually scratch that, I would value bet here against anybody.
SKP,
Honesty is the best policy. I would bet the river in the situation as described by Mason. I said that Mason was obviously wrong when he determined that if a J hit the river he was probably beat. My point was that against a weak opponent no river card is a safe bet. I did imply that it may be a mistake to bet agaisnt a weak player that would raise with a small two pair given the board and the play of the hand. I was including in my evaluation the fact that he may have already made two pair on fourth street or infact may have flopped or turned a set. Mason used rational thought and logic to put his opponent on a possible hands, determining that high cards were his most likely cards to fear. Mason was correct in usong logic to put his opponent on a hand but he came to an incorrect conclusion. When you have a bad or weak player as an opponent you must widen the probable hands that he may have. With players that will call 2 bets cold (first to act after raiser) with an A,2 suited hand you can never be sure what is a safe river card because you can never know for sure where you are in the hand unless you have the nuts. So, sure, the betting may be the best bet but it is not a slam dunk. One pair even Aces is a mediocre hand given the scenario that Mason describes. The curious part of the hand is that he got one player to fold with a check raise after that player had called a bet on the turn. He must have had a small pair and put Mason on a high set. If so his first call seems incorrect. So tell me how could you ever feel safe about your logical conclusions in a game like that.
Vince.
"The curious part of the hand is that he got one player to fold with a check raise after that player had called a bet on the turn. He must have had a small pair and put Mason on a high set. If so his first call seems incorrect."
Vince,
I think that was the whole point of Mason's play. by checkraising the turn, he gets the button to fold Kx or some other 5 outer hand because the dude holding the 5 outer now puts on his thinking cap and figures he is drawing dead to Mason's AA, KK or AK. You can't fault the button for calling with his Kx or whatever on the flop and turn because until Mason pulls the checkraise trigger, he has no reason to believe that he doesn't have a 5 outer.
BTW, I made a mistake in my earlier post. I said that the 3 is not going to make Mason's opponent Aces up approximately 14 out of 15 times i.e. whatever his kicker is, he will get there only 3 out of 44 tries. But the fact is that this assumes that he already does not have Aces up. This means that he will get there 3 out of 35 times i.e. I forget what the board was on the turn but if it was AK96, you must take all of the k's,9's, and 6's out of the deck to figure out the odds that the trey gave him aces up. Thus, the 3 will give this fellow Aces up 3 out of 35 times. Still not enough to worry about so I would fire another bet and expect to be called given the size of the pot.
I haven't read the other responses because the damn server is too slow. In any case, here's my take.
I don't get it.
I am assuming that the reasoning behind the check on the flop is similar to the reasoning behind your check with AA in the PD article. You want to try and limit the field with a raise on the flop or turn rather than betting out on the flop and turn. But the big problem you have here is your poor position.
A check from you in this position may well result in no one betting the flop. You then have to hope that a bet on the turn comes from either the BB or the button so you can checkraise and limit the field. Meanwhile, you are just giving up free cards galore and failing to capitalize on a good flop when you are likely ahead.
I think that the best play on the flop is to bet. You did say it was a wild game so who is to say that someone is not going to limit the field by raising your bet with a hand like KJ. Also, when 4 players coldcall your raise preflop, the chances are pretty good that there will be an Ace out there. If that Ace is out to your immediate left (as it was here), he almost surely will raise and help you limit the field.
Obviously, you know the 30-60 Bellagio game better than I do. I have to assume that the players there even in a wild game are going to lay down 5 outers to a bet and raise on the flop given that you could have flopped a set or top two in which case they can't have 5 outers.
BTW, if limiting the field is still a concern, well you can still try for a checkraise on the turn i.e. even if you bet the flop and just called a raise.
There's lots more one can say about your play of this hand. Frankly, I am not sure that I like your play at all here.
I also took issue with Mason's check-call strategy on the flop, but I would favor a check-raise. The texture of the game and of the flop (i.e., with an ace, a king, and a flush draw) makes it very likely IMO that someone will bet. If nobody bet the flop, then Mason probably would not have received any help to thin the field had he bet out. However, he would now have more leverage to thin the field with a bet on the turn: their pot odds would be smaller, and opponents would be concerned that Mason was planning to check-raise the flop. See my post above for more arguments in favor of check-raising; I would welcome your feedback.
I do not like your idea of betting out on the flop and then attempting a check-raise on the turn to thin the field; IMO, this planned 4th street check-raise would be very risky. Loose players in a big pot are likely to call a bet on the flop with very weak hands and then may accept a free card on the expensive street--especially after you've shown strength by raising preflop and betting into a large field on the flop. Even aggressive players will often understand that this pot is protected.
You wrote that had Mason bet the flop, someone on his left with an ace "almost surely will raise." I think that when Mason Malmuth raises UTG and then bets into 5 opponents after a two-suited A-K-x flop, many players would be reluctant to raise with just top pair.
I am not so sure of that. Don't forget that this game was described as a wild game. If guys are calling raises with Ac2c, I would expect that they will raise the flop when an Ace hits.
I have looked at your other posts in this thread and generally agree with the things you have said.
Just a point of clarification: In my earlier post, I was not suggesting that I would invariably bet the flop and then look to get in a field-thinning checkraise on the turn. My point simply was that this is an option which may be open to Mason depending on...well...a whole bunch of things.
IMO, to check the flop, Mason has to be awfully sure that:
(a) If he bets, no one will raise but that he will get several calls i.e. it wouldn't be bad for Mason if no one raises but he gets just 1 or 2 calls
(b) Someone will bet if he checks so that he can checkraise (it being better if that someone was in late position).
While I think that there is a lot of merit to Mason's play of AA as described in the recent PD article, I think that there are lots of problems with his play on this hand.
Not having read any of the other responses, I assume this is an example of mixing up your play. Also, the plays you made are better because it is a wild game, which means there is a better chance that someone will bet behind you.
William
This is not an example of mixing up your play. In fact, mixing up your play in this type of pot can be a very serious mistake. When you say "mix up your play" I am assuming that you are suggesting playing deceptively and thus giving up a little expectation early in the hand so that you can perhaps make it back later in the hand with a little extra.
But in this situation the pot is already quite large. Therefore the main driver of your strategy, given that you have a hand that can be beat in many ways, is to maximize your chances of winning the pot. Mixing up your play (or playing deceptively) will frequently lower your chances of winning the pot in exchange for sometimes winning a bigger one. This is precisely the opposite from the way you should play in this spot.
If your opponent reraises, would you call, fold or reraise?
That's a tough spot. Many players would only reraise with an unbeatable hand. However, the pot is quite large, and if there is some chance that you can improve to the best hand or actually have the best hand you should call. This is mainly a function of your opponent.
One thing that I have noticed over the years is that when you play your hand "funny" as I did in this spot, it will make some of your opponents play their hands strangely as well. If you think that this might be the case, pay off.
When you say "mix up your play" I am assuming that you are suggesting playing deceptively and thus giving up a little expectation early in the hand so that you can perhaps make it back later in the hand with a little extra.
I think your check-call/chech-raise combo falls exactly under the catergory of FPS, or your own definition of "mix up your play".
- Andrew
Mason wrote:
"The flop came Ad Kh 4h. The BB checked, I checked,"
The above is from Mason's Hand to talk about. You will need to review post to answer the following questions that follow. I would have bet the flop.
Whose correct? Is it possible that both plays are correct? How can that be?
Vince.
Hint: Playing winning poker is based on concepts not laws. Kind of like Darwin's theory of evolution.
wrong Vince. Yup. Mason is right. His post was created to sell more copies of his HPFAF21C book. Take a look at the loose games section. I'll give a shot at explaining it.
When you're playing in a game where alot of players are cold calling preflop raises it becomes difficult to knock them out on the flop, but frequently you can knock them out on the turn for a double bet if they're drawing thin.
Mason checked on the flop because he was expecting someone to bet behind him, and of course he was right. Now, since no one raised, his opponent probably thought he had it locked up. Well, his opponent was wrong.
In a loose game he could have been beaten by a lot of hands. This play accomplishes stopping the rat from getting his mircle card on the river. In a loose game someone could have called with QT, QJ, or JT (suited or unsuited).
But, before you badger me Vince, I suggest reading his book.
The loosest games I wrote about so often are a thing of the past for me. The excitement is gone, there is nothing more to learn on scaling the fish, I found some serious (tight) competition elsewhere and am learning new moves, wasted on the idiot players.
We have a weekly $3-6 private game in Ljubljana, you can tell it's a fun game as my friends around the table all park their BMWs, Audis and Mecedeses outside next to my Harley, the stakes are obviously insignificant to them. These guys learned to respect my play and mastered the game quite well alongside with me (we all started from scratch in 1998, ripping off the hold'em rules off the Net and ditching the game of 5card stud in the process).
So they tell me they are beating that Italian game in Park HIT Casino Nova Gorica I graduated at and left, and they are beating it bad. They tell me the fish are fishier than ever before. They tell me there is a lot of rules explaining going on. They tell me about the guy that raises every hand. They tell me about the guy that posts a blind UTG. They tell me about the guy who calls three cold with 96s because there is a big pot in the making.
But they also tell me they don't want to raise with aces anymore, "...'cause they ALWAYS get cracked." (If that's true, dump them preflop then, I say...) They tell me about the bad beats and the frustration of getting sucked out again and again. They tell me about the fuckin' moronic bluffer that pushed them out on the river, but the other fish called and took it down with a pair of deuces. They tell me come and see, Izmet, this is insane...
So I went to take a look again.
It was fun.
Funny, except for one or two guys, all the faces were familiar. It needs to be said these are very friendly people, greeting me with a smile, long time no see, let's play some hold'em, Izmet, welcome back. I was very pleased to see them again, I have lots of respect for these whales outside the cardroom (they pull in some awful lira ammounts away from the poker tables, no comparison of their life achievements to the pitiful smartass USA poker pros living in a van by the river).
But they suck at hold'em big time. So we played $15-30.
The game was not that fishy as I remembered it, they learned to duck the raises while I was away, but they still enjoy seeing the flop for a good price. There was one guy who seemed to enjoy bluffing, another who never raised period (except with the nuts or trips). The fishiness manifests itself in many different ways.
I 3bet once with my KK preflop and to my surprise three early limpers all folded. Another surprise: I got 4bet immediately by the raiser (he had K8o) and this giggling guy check-called me all-the way on a K high board. Now can anybody explain to me how a guy like that can be so stupid preflop and then play close to perfect by rope-a-dopeing postflop? I'm not surprised so many solid players have trouble beating the fishiest of the fish. Anything can happen, the fish can stumble upon a correct move by accident and radical adjustments are in order.
So maybe the following hand can illustrate my approach to beating these guys:
I'm in the big blind, UTG limps and the next guy (a young player who is actually familiar with my Playing Against the Fish website) raises. Cold callers in the cutoff and on the button, small blind calls and I look down to see:
Question no.1: With 95s it's probably a call for most of the 2+2 people here, but what about 94s? Do you call here? Maybe I am underestimating the esteemed forum here, as it is a VERY clear call for me. I hope it is for you too.
We take the flop six handed. It comes:
Us early guys all check, preflop raiser checks too (!), the button bets, sb calls, I call, UTG calls and the raiser now check-raises. Button calls, sb calls and I now reraise my fourflush! UTG calls, raiser caps it and the rest of us call (the cutoff was the only one to drop out on the flop).
Question no.2: Am I better off flat calling?
Turn is:
Raiser bets his KK (I actually figured him for AA), button calls, sb folds, I call and UTG folds.
Question no.3: Could I bet out here?
We see the river three handed:
I bet out, raiser has a heart attack, curses, throws his $30 in with disgust for a call and the button overcalls. I show my flush and start piling the chips.
Question no.4: Was he correct in calling on the river with his KK?
Question no.5: Could and should I go for a check raise on the river?
Question no.6: What is my play if a nine hits on the river?
Question no.7: What is my play if a four hits on the river?
Question no.7: What is my play if a deuce hits on the river?
Question no.8: Do you wish you were here?
---
Izmet Fekali
Burek Experts Ltd.
Catering the World Since 1389!
Albania, Slovenia, Europe
http://www.fekali.com
Izmet,
First let me congradulate you on your uniquely wonderfully scribed post. Bravo.
Now.
Question no.1:
I call. The suited gives me the excuse I need.
Question no.2: Am I better off flat calling?
You now are in great position to get as much money in the pot as possible. Raise: GooD!
Question no.3: Could I bet out here?
Izmet you are an adult. If you wanna bet. Bet. But you are behind and you need exactly 2.x callers to make your bet correct and if you get raised you need almost .. u get the idea. Check and call unless there is a good chance that both of your opponents will toss better hand to a check raise then check raise.
Question no.4: Was he correct in calling on the river with his KK?
Yes. You too smart. A guy like you might add flush cards to a straigt draw if pot big and think opponents (fish in your words) might fold if you bet.
Question no.5: Could and should I go for a check raise on the river?
No. If you are behind it costs you 3 bets instead of two. If you are ahead others might not bet with a flush on board. If there is a maniac there I still bet and maybe he raises with a lesser hand. Of course if that is the case you still only call his raise.
Question no.6: What is my play if a nine hits on the river?
Betting is prefferable. However a check and call is not incorrect. In some instances it may be better. If you put one opponnet on a T there is a good chance his kicker is a 9 and you are behind. If he is aggressive he may raise with top two costing you a bet.
Question no.7: What is my play if a four hits on the river?
Against a solid player this is an interesting question. A solid player with K,K will like the 4 on the river and normally bet. Unless of course he realizes he is playing against a bunch of loose callers that just might have the 4 of spades in thier hand. (In reality he may not think specifically that the 4 of spades is out. He just might feel that a four is out and decided to check just in case). Even with a big pot getting an extra bet by check raising still has some merit but I still bet out.
Question no.7: What is my play if a deuce hits on the river?
Check and call. You still have a mediocre hand. a hand I have lost with a few times myself.
Question no.8: Do you wish you were here?
Is is sunny and warm? Yes? Then Yes.
Now Izmet I must make a statement. Even though I like your post very much I have to admit that I am against referring to poker opponents as "fish". But calling them fish doesn't make you a bad person just well you know what I mean.
Vince.
A fish by any other name will still call Mason's raise with Ac2c.
Q1: 11-1 odds, nearly any two suited will do
Q2: 4 opponents with a hand that is about a 3-1 dog, raise goot.
Q3: Turn gives you ~9-10 outs, S&M say if it's worth a call it's worth a bet. Probably best to squeeze the middle than risk a raise which'll push out the button. Check call goot (maybe check-raise?).
Q4: River call by KK correct given the size of the pot.
Q5: No check-raise on river if opponents are even mildly sophitocated. KK'd probably put the button on the flush though.
With 18 1/2 BB in the pot what do we do if:
Q6: 9 hits -> Check-call
Q7: 4 hits -> usually check-raise, sometimes Check-call
Q8: 2 hits -> usually check-fold, sometimes check-raise
Q9: I do wish I were there, but online poker goot enough.
- Andrew
Why do you fear "risk(ing) a raise that'll push the button out", a button that could well be holding 10-9?
Because pushing the button out reduces your overlay.
- Andrew
But doesn't it also increase your chances of winning the hand?
There's 16 BBs in the pot after the flop betting round and two "enemy" BBs get put in on the turn. Betting out and having Raiser raise out the button gets the same amount in the pot, and it's well worth the extra $30 to get it headsup. If the button coldcalls $60 you'll probably save $30 by checkcalling if the flush comes on the river.
BTW how could the other two guys have folded the turn, getting 19-1?
1. Automatic call.
2. No, but I'd've bet straight out to begin with, so I'm not sure.
3. Yes, Raiser may raise and knock 10-9 out.
4. Not with the button still to act behind him having taken all that heat and the pot that big; you ain't bluffing.
5. No, only the button holding the nut flush bets.
6. Check-raise.
7. Check-raise.
7. Bet.
8. Depends on how close to the Adriatic coast this place is.
Izmet, as you probably know from my posts, I am not one to talk much about preflop play; I generally reserve my comments for postflop play.
However, I am intrigued by your comment (which others seem to share) that you have a very clear call preflop. I am not so sure about that.
I generally will call one raise with any 2 suited cards from the bb if I think that the pot I win will have about 27 small bets. Now, it sounds to me like that you were in a game where you stood to get paid off handsomely if you went on to make a hand. So, the call is probably correct. But I don't think that it can be said that every HE player in any game should call a raise with 94 suited from the bb just because there are 5 other players in the hand.
Paranthetically, I would note that 94 suited is better than J3 suited here but not as good as K3 suited.
Anyway, as to your questions:
Question no.1 (the preflop call): see above
Question no.2: Am I better off flat calling [the flop]?
I like your raise
Question no.3: Could I bet out here?
Yes. But check-call is a viable alternative.
Question no.4: Was he correct in calling on the river with his KK?
Yes
Question no.5: Could and should I go for a check raise on the river?
Probably not
Question no.6: What is my play if a nine hits on the river?
Checkraise if the preflop raiser bets and button only calls. Fold if button raises. Checkcall if button is the one who is doing the betting.
Question no.7: What is my play if a four hits on the river?
Usually checkraise.
Question no.7: What is my play if a deuce hits on the river?
Checkcall the preflop raiser. Fold if he bets and button calls.
Question no.8: Do you wish you were here?
No, the Vancouver games are better!
I recently played a 15-30 hand on which I would love to hear some critique. I am in middle position and am faced with a raise by a good player UTG. I chose to two bet it with my pocket 10's to try and get heads up and clarify his raise. This didn't work, A wild man(WM) on my left capped it and a VERY loose calling station in the small blind (SB) called as did UTG. The 4 of us saw the flop of A, 7, 6 rainbow with 17 small bets in the pot.
SB checked, UTG bet and I call. 1st mistake? I figured that 18 small bets were enough for what I figured was a two outer. (I put UTG on AK. I think he would have checked AA.) I was then surprised to see WM raise and SB cold call. UTG then capped it. I now have to call 2 bets but there are 25 in the pot. As I figure that 24 is what I needed to justify a call, there would be callers behind me and the fact that WM was almost all in and would not be applying more heat, all contributed to my decision to stay with it.
Still four people in and a pot of 37 small bets are there for a turn of an offsuit 8. I now have 4 more outs and gladly call the UTG bet, as do WM (all in) and SB.
The river was a perfect nine and both SB and UTG called my river bet. This was a huge pot but my play was considered proper by no one at the table. For what it is worth, SB mucked face down when she saw the AK held by UTG and WM mucked a pair of nines. Results don't count, proper play does. How bad was I?
Pre-flop your play is reasonable. Personally I don't think a pair of Tens is a good enough hand to 3 bet a solid UTG raiser but your reasons make sense and it cannot be too far wrong. Of course you take a flop even when it is capped.
On the flop, your initial call is fine. You don't have enough current pot odds to play a two outer which is a 22.5:1 shot but with implied odds I think you can go ahead and try to take a card off cheaply. However, when it is raised and re-raised back to you it is now costing you two bets cold with the possibility of one more raise. Your narrative is a little inaccurate since a cap is one bet and three raises. Only two raises have been made so far. If there are 25 small bets in the pot you are only getting pot odds of 25:2 which is 12.5:1. This is a far cry from the 22.5:1 odds needed. I think you should fold here especially with the possibility of having to call a final raise. But again when implied odds are considered plus remote runner-runner possibilities (as was the actual case) it cannot be a big mistake.
On the turn you have picked up four outs with any Nine but a Ten may no longer be an out since a Nine in someone's hand gives them a straight. Nevertheless, your turn and river play were fine.
You are right about the inaccuracy. I called the two bets and had to call a third after WM capped it. Aprpeciate your comments. There are few that I respect more and, as I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, you help of all us learning players is appreciated and I would love to see your down to earth analysis in print. Ever think about writing a book?
I think 2+2 has pretty much cornered the market on excellent poker books. About a year ago, as a learning aid for my brother, I developed a hold-em quiz. The quiz consists of 57 problems covering pre-flop play, play on the flop, on the turn, and at the river. There are 100 possible points. Just for fun I gave the quiz to about a dozen friends. The highest score was 78. The lowest score was 41. These are all experienced hold-em players. I also sent the quiz to John Feeney by way of appreciation for him sending me a copy of his excellent book "Inside the Poker Mind". The quiz consists of two word documents. The first document is the quiz itself. The second document is the solutions manual which provides my answers to each of the quiz problems along with the supporting rationale. Now of course these are my answers and not those of an authority so each player can judge for himself. I would be happy to E-Mail it to you if you wish to contact me privately.
what did John Feeney score?
I don't know that he ever actually took the quiz. If he did, he did not tell me what he scored or what he thought of the answers.
Congratulations.
I can't ( or won't ) commit to a critique of your play of this hand until I've had some time to digest all the details, but I do have a few ?'s.
1. How sure were you that UTG ( or even someone else ) didn't have "AA" in a capped pot? If you can say 95% or more, I would find it hard to call your (flop ) play more than marginally incorrect.
2. Did you notice, on the flop, that spiking a set would give "98" a straight? Again, if the 95% [ belief that nobody held this hand ] criteria was met, you can't really be accused of more than a minor error.
3. What hands hands had you seen "UTG" raise with prior to this? Normally, a raise from a "solid player" in this position is going to be a higher pair ( AA - JJ ) than yours - as opp. to overcards - about 1/3 of the time; if you thought your hand was at least a 2-1 favorite to be the best BTF I like your 3-bet alot. If you were less sure than this I think the LAST thing you would want to do is isolate him.
P.S. The congrat's were not winning the pot. They were for an EXCELLENT post - one of the best I've had the pleasure to read. I suspect it will receive many responses.
Looking forward to your hearing about next "close call".
- Chris
1 & 3 He would raise on the hands you suggested plus a few. Down to 10's, AJ and even A10s or KQs. The preflop raise hoped to clarify this as I didn't think he would 3 bet it without a premium pair. I didn't know that he didn't have AA but was sure that the Small Blind did. She would see A Face to the river with nothing but overcards. If UTG also had an A the odds of him having the case ace were reduced and many other hands justified his play. 2. Yes I noticed that but I didn't even think the maniac would have had a hand that was that poor. Thanks for the comments
Your first call on the flop is marginal at best. 18-to-1 plus implied odds is normally enough to call with a pair, but you are likely to be raised by the players behind you and thus your true odds are not as good as they seem.
Once it is raised and reraised, you are now getting 25-to-2 or only 12.5-to-1. This is not enough to try to make a set and you shouold have folded.
Given that you called, the rest of your play is okay.
"Once it is raised and reraised, you are now getting 25-to-2 or only 12.5-to-1. This is not enough to try to make a set and you shouold have folded."
I disagree. He has a back door out and good implied odds. With all those maniacs in there loose play in some instances is correct. Although I don't totally disagree. The fact that the odds do not really justify a call and since there appears to be a lot of bad players that you will chop up with your better hands folding is probably better.
Vince.
although I agree with you that when there are bad players, it calls for looser play, I think in this situation you are incorrect.
I think the key point is this : only one of them needs to have an ace for you to be a 12.5 to 1 - and even with runner runner straight outs, 12.5 to 1 is not enough...cause at least one of those 3 has an ace.
Assuming 2 tens are good (possibly a very wrong assumption), his additional runner-runner draw combined with implied odds isn't all that bad. Because if he hits perfect-perfect (9,8), it is extremely unlikely anyone's on top of him with JT. Would you agree?
AC wrote : "Assuming 2 tens are good (possibly a very wrong assumption)..."
Stop right there. I think that's a horrible assumption, and therefore the hand should be folded. Of course, if you assume your hand is good, then the pot odds are good...if he had KQ (which is no pair), and you assume no one has a pair, you should be raising until the cows come home.
Pardon me if I misunderstood your post, I'm trying to be as cordial as possible, but it doesn't make sense to me to assume that TT is good.
Doc-
I think you and I agree more on this hand than I might have led you to believe in my response to your post. I hate the initial call on the flop.. (see my post below).
I say, "possibly very wrong assumption" you say, "horrible assumption". Same gist. I have no quarrel with negating a Ten as an out. But for whatever reason, the poster assesses a Ten is still good. If this is the case, (I'm not saying it is) then runner-runner potential does add to his hand. How much? I agree 12.5 to 1 does not cover it. But it might be closer than it appears. This was my only point.
Ace
I would also add that since the flop betting is already capped you shouldn't be happy that the WM is almost all in, as this significantly reduces your implied odds.
It seems that I disagree with the call on the flop more so than the other posters. Mainly because out of all the thoughts you had on the flop (pot odds, what UTG had and so on), the one thought which is noticeably missing is the one of it getting raised behind you. Had you at least considered it and felt it unlikely, fine. But failing to even be cognizant of this possibility, let alone surprised that it got raised behind you, shows that you could not have played this hand very well.
AC
20-40
Loose agressive player raises on the button. Of course he would raise with a very wide range of hands.
I call in the SB with J9s
BB calls
Flop is A56 two hearts
I check BB checks in a "I don't like the flop" way.
Button bets I raise.
Would you check fold?bet? (although I would have not gained information about the BB, a bet offers better odds)
Ace-small-small looks like the ideal flop as the button will automatically fold if he misses. Would you extend that kind of play to other textures?
Yes just about any pair on board would entice me to ck raise a player like that also a well coordinated flop like 456s - A good move played on the right guy will pay dividends.
I don't like this play given a) the presence of the big blind behind you; and b) the coordinated nature of the flop, given the 2 hearts and the 5-6. You have very few outs if you are called by either opponent. I would prefer to be heads-up. Also, if BB checks in an "I don't like the flop" way, I would be wary.
Well of course a semi-bluff is better than a pure bluff. Of course A22 is a better flop.
Of course this play is better heads-up
However I still think it was a profitable play.
First it was a read on the BB. Not some acting by him.
Suppose now the BB will fold 90% of the time (it is a low estimation for me due to my read and due to the fact he showed weakness by checking). Then the button will have to fold only 1 time out 4 to show profit. It is easy to see that he will completely miss the flop far more than that.
(Due to my image and because he is an average player he will always fold if he completely misses the flop. Always. He will fold also many more hands.)
This post seems similar to mine above. But there are differences. The presence of a 3rd player makes this play much more dangerous in my opinion. (I'm not even sure it's correct head up. That is, check and fold might be best against many players). Unless your read on the BB is excellent (his not liking the flop), I think you'd be better off picking a different spot for this play. In addition, you can't be sure any of your outs are good. In my example above, I had a reasonable kicker if I paired either card. This is not the case here.
Frenchy - I, also, do not like this play. I am assuming that you don't have hearts. The button can have, as you say, a wide variety of hands but a great majority of them will include an A and it will be almost impossible to catch up, even if he lets you get there free which is doubtful. The BB is a further complication as is the two flush.
I KNOW I played these 2 hands poorly. My question is how much will these kinds of mistakes cost me in most $20-$40 games?
1st Hand:
All folded to the button who raised. I looked down to see Kd Qs and made it $60. (I did this because the game just started and I wanted the button to know he's not going to steal over me all day long). BB folded, button called. This call surprised me. I actually thought that he would cap it with position with his more marginal hands, perhaps to get a free card.
The flop came Ad,7d,3c. I checked, he bet, I raised, (the truth is, I didn't realize I held the Kd. Does this matter? I would've liked to have seen the turn card) he re-raised, I folded giving him credit for an ace.
Hand #2:
Good player UTG raised, all folded, I called in the BB with QJo. (I hated this call, but I thought it'd be easy to fold an unfavorable flop).
The flop came Ac,Kc,Qs. I checked, he bet, I called. The turn was a 3d. I checked, he bet, I folded. Again, I was unsure if I held the Qc.
This was my first foray into a 20-40 game (is that too obvious?) I was very nervous. Misplaying these hands upset me quite a bit. What I want to know is, how dumb was my reasoning and how much will this cost me in these games? Thanks.
I'll only comment on the 1st hand.
Although the diamonds could pose an intermediate problem, with the proper image your play is plausible against some players. He may fold a better hand and if not, your likely to have outs. But be very careful against a player who knows you are capable of this. He may try a re-steal if you will, with a hand like 99. Now if a diamond doesn't turn, you will be hard pressed to win even when hitting an out. Image plays an important part in decision making here. With the right image against the right opponent, a check and call can be every bit as concerning to a good opponent (even more so) than a check and raise. This might achieve the same purpose as a check raise, while costing less money against an aggressive player.
As to not realizing you held the King of diamonds... Yes! Being unaware of what you hold and/or your hand's potential, will absolutely cost you $$$ against tough competition. You are probably better off looking back at your cards and run the risk of giving your hand away, than to continue to play the hand par