Suitedjustice's Ongoing Mid-life Crisis
I woke up in the middle of choking to death again; though to be accurate, it was towards the end of the process--woke up
There are all sorts of flavors of UTG shenanigans, including the following:Fun player limps UTG with $160, I make it $12 from MP with AKs, BB makes it $25 from his $50 stack, fun UTG flats the $25, I 4bet to $100, BB calls all-in for less, and fun player says "Y'all tryin' to get me out, and 5bet shoves to $160 with Q7o.That was the hand where my AKs held three ways unimproved.
A rare (but deserved) merciful runout from the gods! May this be the sign of the changing tides?!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Step 1: bet big. Actual # is irrelevant just make it a lot of BBs relative to the pot size. Don’t over pot too big, that’s doing too much.
Step 2: run good
Step 3: ???? (Scoop and tip I assume)
Step 4: profit
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You obviously don't play much poker. The villains having each other's outs makes it MORE likely that they hit them. The Poker Gods must have been on break to have missed this opportunity.
My mini-streak ran out during yesterday's snow-forshortened session. I ran into a player who owned me. It happens sometimes. Villain doesn't have to be great, he or she just has to pull a big bluff whenever you feel like they have it—and then they'll show you; they always show—and then they'll take you to value town in big hands whenever you're feeling sticky. Wash, rinse, repeat.
The best policy is to move tables. You may have a tell that they've picked up on, or they may know your type and be a specialist in playing against it. My ego, however, convinced me that V was just sunrunning, which is a temporary condition, and whether that was true or not, I paid the price for it.
I did, however, get to witness the worst live poker player I've ever seen, who fortunately was not the V who owned my soul.
When I sat down, she was puzzling over the concept of the blinds and the order of play, but was quite proud of having mastered the colors and values of the chips. She had $175 behind when she got into a hand where V checked the flop, she bet $10, and V checkraised her to $25.
"Why are you doing that?" she asked, indignantly. "I have a good hand." Then she showed V her hand while it was still live. Then she called the raise.
She was advised by the table not to show her live hands, so she accused the dealer "You told me I could show my hand heads-up." Apparently, she had done the same thing multiway before I'd sat down.
The dealer told her that while she could show her hand, he did not recommend it.
After that, I gave her remaining stack five minutes to live. It lasted for nine. I got $50 of it, and the other guys got the rest.
December 2024 ****'s Creek Navigation Update
MGM Springfield $1/$2 poker: 3 hours
(-$232.00)
MGM Springfield Slots: 2 hours
+$34.45
Running Poker Total December: 15 hours, +$470.00
Running Slot Total December: 9 hours, +$763.64
Total December: 24 hours, +$1233.64
I think there might have been pirates who enjoyed leisure, but I could be wrong.
On Saturday I lost a couple of hundo, thanks in part to making the worst play I've made in a long time. This is not the time to be doing this. I knew that I made a mistake right away, but life isn't a video game, and I couldn't revert back to my last save, so I had to watch myself get righteously wafflestomped.
Just to confirm, here's my question to the
, and its answer below.Stakes are $1/$2. Effective stacks are $125. There are 3 limps, I raise to $17 in the BB with AsTh. Villain, who limped from MP, reraises to $35. Everyone else folds. I reraise to $125, putting the Villain all-in. That was a mistake, wasn't it?
Let's analyze this step by step:
1. Preflop Dynamics
Stakes and Effective Stacks: $125 (62.5 BBs). You're playing a relatively shallow stack depth.
Your Hand: Ace-Ten offsuit (♠️♥️😉.
Initial Action: Villain limped in middle position (MP), then reraised after your raise. Limp-raises at lower stakes are often highly polarized (monster hands like AA, KK, QQ, or traps like small pairs or suited connectors).
2. Sizing and Interpretation
Your Raise to $17: Solid size, punishing the limpers. With 3 limps ($6) and the small blind, the pot was $9 before your raise. Raising to $17 targets folds or weaker calls, especially out of position.
Villain’s Reraise to $35:
This is a min-reraise after limping, which typically indicates one of two things:
A very strong hand (e.g., AA, KK, QQ, AK).
A speculative hand trapping with the intention of inducing action.
At lower stakes, limp-reraises are frequently weighted toward value hands.
3. Your Decision to Shove
Shove Size: Your effective shove was for 62.5 BBs. Villain has already invested $35, so they need to call $90 to win a total pot of $159 (pot odds ~1.77:1 or ~36% equity needed to call).
Villain’s Likely Calling Range: After committing with a limp-reraise, their range likely includes:
Strong hands like {AA, KK, QQ, AK} (which dominate your AT).
Possibly a few traps or weaker hands if the Villain is not very disciplined.
4. Equity Analysis
Let's run your AT offsuit against a likely range for the Villain:
Scenario A: Tight Limp-Reraise Range
{AA, KK, QQ, AK}
Your equity: ~22%.
This is a disaster. You’re crushed by this range and unlikely to profit long-term.
Scenario B: Slightly Wider Limp-Reraise Range
{AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, AQs}
Your equity: ~30%.
Still bad. You're likely losing chips here but not as severely as in Scenario A.
Scenario C: Wide Limp-Reraise (Unlikely)
{AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, AQs, AQo, random bluffs}
Your equity: ~42%.
If Villain's range includes some weak hands (e.g., suited connectors, AQo bluffs), this shove becomes closer to breakeven or profitable.
5. Evaluation
Mistake or Not?
Against most players who limp-reraise in live low-stakes games, this shove is a mistake. Their range is often very strong, and you’re dominated far too frequently.
If you had reason to believe the Villain was capable of limp-reraising with weaker hands or bluffs, this move would be more defensible, though still aggressive given your stack depth.
6. Better Options
Fold: Folding preserves your $17 investment, which is a small loss relative to your stack.
Call: If you think the Villain could be bluffing, calling $35 and playing post-flop might be an option, but it's dicey given you're out of position with a dominated hand.
Shove: Only viable if the Villain's range is wide and includes weaker hands or bluffs, which is unlikely here.
7. Conclusion
This shove is likely a mistake, as it risks your entire stack with insufficient equity against a range heavily weighted toward premium hands. Folding to the reraise would have been the more prudent play without specific reads indicating Villain is capable of limp-reraising light.
I'm not sure that I agree with the AI's suggestion to fold to a minclick. There were a few regs at the table, and the metagame aspect would induce some of them to start 3-betting me light after that.
V had KK (of course, what else would he have?) If I had called, the board would have run out T high, giving me TPTK, so I would have doubled him up. But that is results-oriented thinking.
I'm off to the casino now. I'll post numbers after today's session.
Haven’t pulled this out in long time
AxTx hand - fold-pre.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not sure that I agree with the AI's suggestion to fold to a minclick. There were a few regs at the table, and the metagame aspect would induce some of them to start 3-betting me light after that.
So? Let them. Then tighten/polarize your range on those spots counter exploit and bomb those light 3-bets with 4-bets. Or call them off and get to check raise bombing all wet flops that miss the top of their range
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thank you, gentlemen. Your advice is noted.
And probably correct, but I can't bring myself to fold to a minclick pre.
just fold to the mouth breather's limp rr minclick and punish the regs limp rr minclick?
Crazy right? Do one thing now, to set up doing something different later.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any limp rr, esp a limp min rr should def set off all alarm bells, but without knowing more about the player I prolly call here too. Def not shoving though, that's terrible, sorry.
Any limp rr, esp a limp min rr should def set off all alarm bells, but without knowing more about the player I prolly call here too. Def not shoving though, that's terrible, sorry.
It was pure spew, the worst play I've made in years. I knew it a split second after I verbalized it. I picked a bad time for it, as I can ill-afford this sort of thing.
Any limp rr, esp a limp min rr should def set off all alarm bells, but without knowing more about the player I prolly call here too. Def not shoving though, that's terrible, sorry.
I would definitely not generalize what the range of a limp-raise is without knowing the player beforehand, as the OMC who have survived this long in the player pool (or who have maintained being marginal losers), have widened what was once strictly a KK-AA limp-raise range to blocker heavy broadway hands like KQ, KJ, AQ etc. At least from my experience of globe trotting the international tables/playing with the different OMCs of the world 😉
V was a kid in his 20's but not good, the kind who limps and farts around with $100-$150 stack and drinks a couple of Coronas, but no more than that.
It's possible that he could make a fun spite minclick over my largish blind raise, but not likely enough for me to spaz 4bet.
I would definitely not generalize what the range of a limp-raise is without knowing the player beforehand, as the OMC who have survived this long in the player pool (or who have maintained being marginal losers), have widened what was once strictly a KK-AA limp-raise range to blocker heavy broadway hands like KQ, KJ, AQ etc. At least from my experience of globe trotting the in
That's why I was saying without knowing player type I would call. If you know their range is AA, KK or even JJ+,AJ+ then you have to fold here ofc because your equity is terrible against that range. IME there are three main types
1) As described they would only do this with AA, KK or even just AA. There may be types who would include QQ, AK or something but this doesn't make too much of a difference, you're looking terrible against all of these. Stack depth is also important here, if they have barely more than the pot left they will usually not fold their unimproved AK, whereas if you are deeper it's a different story.
2) The type you described that has some hands where you're actually looking decent against, or can take it away
3) The type who is capable of doing this with just about any hand he wants to play.
Fortunately you can usually have a pretty good guess who you're up against. But ofc you can be wrong, or you can be up against type 3 but s/he just happens to have AA. The usual.
I also don't agree that peeps would disappear from the player pool if they still limp/RR only with AA/KK. Others also play terrible and there are enough players where this play still kind of works. Also nits are usually not big losers, they are usually small losers, but peeps play too many hands for them to be big losers. Usually, as always it depends.
That's why I was saying without knowing player type I would call. If you know their range is AA, KK or even JJ+,AJ+ then you have to fold here ofc because your equity is terrible against that range. IME there are three main types1) As described they would only do this with AA, KK or even just AA. There may be types who would include QQ, AK or something but this doesn't make too
Yup, agree, sound analysis and as a rule of thumb/without knowing the player type, I would just call/take it from there...
I also don't agree that peeps would disappear from the player pool if they still limp/RR only with AA/KK.
Am not saying they would of been wiped clean from the player pool Darwin style, but am stating that even players that evolve slowly, do evolve and adjust somewhat their ranges/even their limp-raise ranges. That being said, I rarely play small stakes, so my observation comes more so from live mid/highstakes.
Also nits are usually not big losers, they are usually small losers, but peeps play too many hands for them to be big losers. Usually, as always it depends.
Agree 100%. But the game has evolved significantly in the past 2 decades and the OMCs from yesteryears/the Golden poker era, have necessarily adapted somewhat in order to remain small losers/survive the long haul... My 2 cents 😉
"Why are you doing that?" she asked, indignantly. "I have a good hand." Then she showed V her hand while it was still live. Then she called the raise.She was advised by the table not to show her live hands, so she accused the dealer "You told me I could show my hand heads-up." Apparently, she had done the same thing multiway before I'd sat down.The dealer told her that while sh
gold strat talk right here
I have to write a bit of non-poker content to justify being in this forum and not in PG&C, so I'll post a life hack.
The Gillette disposable plastic 3-blade razor in my bathroom has now been with me and in use for one solid year. It's the only razor I've used during this time.
Now, I have a beard that I sort of grow out and then shave off regularly, as if my face was a Play-Doh Fun Factory, so I don't shave my entire face, but I do shave my neck and upper cheeks every other day, lest I look like either a werewolf or like famous 19th century newspaperman Horace Greeley.
Spoiler
King of the Neckbeards
My disposable razor is nearly as sharp as the day I bought it back in Dec of 2023, thanks to an old pair of jeans. Twice a month or so I use the jeans as a strop to sharpen my razor. It's that simple. Some strops are made of denim, and so are jeans.
Fifteen swipes in one direction, then fifteen more in the opposite. Rinse the jean fuzz off the razor, and it's good to go for another two weeks. And it barely marks up my jeans; not that I care, but they're still perfectly wearable.
