15 replies to this topic

[TheIceman05]

It's a pretty weak-passive game, but the preflop raiser was pretty predictable. He'd raise with a relatively wide range of hands in late position, and showed a tendency to fire at the flop with or w/o a handParty Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converterPreflop: Hero is SB with [Ad], [Qs]. 1 fold, Hero calls, BB calls, UTG+1 calls.I considered raising from the sb here, but I don't like 3 betting w/AQo out of position, in what's likely to be a 4 way pot. Flop: (8 SB) [8s], [6h], [9d] (4 players)Hero checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP3 bets, BB calls, UTG+1 calls, MP3 calls.I like this flop for my hand. I check planning to c/r if MP3 bets. He does, and I do, hoping to isolate and lead the turn. To my chagrin, I get two cold calls from the preflop limpers, and decide that I'm likely beaten by an Arag pair or medium pocket pair.Turn: (8 BB) [4c] (4 players)Hero checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP3 checks.River: (8 BB) [4d] (4 players)Hero checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, MP3 checks.I check the turn and riverFinal Pot: 8 BBWhat do you think? Ice

[Randy Reed]

Looks good though I really don't like the check raise on that coordinated of a flop, I understand the reasoning, but with that big of a pot and I can see the others calling down with their draws. It does appear that your hand held up though. The 2 callers probably had low wheel card draws and the raiser probably had A/cheese.

[DCWildcat]

I think the board is a little too coordinated for a C/R, though leading out may be appropriate. What are the limits? Need to know those to have any idea what kind of stuff the villains would fold to

[TheIceman05]

DCWildcat said:

I think the board is a little too coordinated for a C/R, though leading out may be appropriate. What are the limits? Need to know those to have any idea what kind of stuff the villains would fold to

The limits don't really matter all that much as I gave you a game description (see original post), but if you really must know...They are clearly stated in the original post, in the hand conversion, as 1/2.Any more responses would be much appreciated.

[DCWildcat]

TheIceman05 said:

The limits don't really matter all that much as I gave you a game description (see original post), but if you really must know...They are clearly stated in the original post, in the hand conversion, as 1/2.

My apologies.Was it really necessary to use that tone? You sound like a defense attorney.

[TheIceman05]

Haha, you're right. Absolutely not. I took back-to-back sick beats and lost a ton of cash today. ****ing casinos. They're rigged. ONLY in casinos could you get caught with your runner-runner pants down two hands in a rowIce

[highstackpoker]

I'm not to sure what you liked about that flop other than it being rainbow...you said yourself the game was weak passive...if they're weak, bad players, which you'll most likely find at 1/2, they'll limp with all sorts of garbage. Plus, the thing about this flop is this: this flop either a) gave your opponents a straight draw, B) gave your opponents overcards or c) gave your opponents a pair. All not likely to get them to fold. A C/R here in my opinion is a bad play simply because you don't figure to get yourself heads up with the pf raiser. Plus, given what you said about the pf raiser, he could have anything, and he'll most likely just call your extra bet here and you still have no idea where you stand. I think the best play here is to just call the raise pf like you did, and play hit or miss. This obviously missed you...muck and get your money in at a better spot. If the flop was a little less coordinated, i don't mind this play at all...such as 259 or something like that, but not with 3 in the middle straight zone. Bottom line, this flop was guarenteed to hit your opponents in some way or another where they like their hand (overs, draws, pairs)I bet what happened was someone caught in the middle had middle or top pair with like a Q kicker and took it down, like Q9 or even K8.Good luck at the tables.

[DCWildcat]

TheIceman05 said:

Haha, you're right. Absolutely not. I took back-to-back sick beats and lost a ton of cash today. censored casinos. They're rigged. ONLY in casinos could you get caught with your runner-runner pants down two hands in a rowIce

8)Sorry to hear about the bad luck though

[amarillotg]

i think the mistake was made pre-flop. your best chance to get it HU was 3 betting pre-flop with your AQo (which is pretty much standard anyways). your forcing the BB into a double bet instead of a single and the EP limper has a bit more of a choice now.i think if you 3bet PF you would of gotten the BB out. even if EP stays i think he folds the flop if he doesn't hit his hand hard.

[TheIceman05]

amarillotg said:

i think the mistake was made pre-flop.  your best chance to get it HU was 3 betting pre-flop with your AQo (which is pretty much standard anyways).  your forcing the BB into a double bet instead of a single and the EP limper has a bit more of a choice now.i think if you 3bet PF you would of gotten the BB out.  even if EP stays i think he folds the flop if he doesn't hit his hand hard.

I completely disagree. Playing AQ for 3 bets is rarely a good idea. It's not a fun hand ot play when you have to cold-call a raise, but I'm more than willing to play it against a late-position raise from the small blind when I have a pretty solid feel from the table. Raising here will NOT force the UTG+1 player out, thought it may have forced the BB to fold. However, I'm willing to take the chance here that he doesn't have a hand that will call one bet, yet would fold to two. AQo doesn't play too well in a big pot, but it figures to be best here more often than not. Though if I could guarantee a BB fold and there was even a slight chance of the UTG+1 of folding (say, 20%) I'd definitely make this raise for the dead-money value.I'm just disinclined to admit that 3-betting AQo from the SB is "standard"Discuss

[highstackpoker]

The ONLY time you really want to 3 bet AQo is when there is under the following circumstances:a: no limpers, someone open raises in middle to late middle positionb: noone between you and the raiser cold callsc: you have positionLike say youre on the button and hold the A Q , and its folded to mp+2 who open raises, then the cut off folds...i'd say, if the raiser wasn't a very conservative player, that 3 betting WOULD be considered standard...but out of the small blind with a limper? Not only that, but you hvae NO clue what the BB has and by late position player raising even though someone already limped, thats suggesting more strength than if he opened the pot as well...3 betting here with AQo is a terrible play....(no flame or offense intended) If you're into studying the game at all I highly suggest taking a look at the different sections dedicated to the play of the hand, AQo. This can be found in books such as "Inside the Poker Mind" and "Holdem for Advanced Players" and even in the original "Super System"...this hand is actually VERY tricky to play expertly.Anyways, back to the hand, i still stand with the opinion that you just take a flop and play hit or miss...by doing this also, you're keeping the pot smaller than if you were to 3 bet it and get two callers. If you do that and build the pot...it could become correct for your opponent to draw to really weak hands that beat you such as a weak gutshot or just 1 over such as a king if you hit your Q. Keeping the pot small will more than likely make your opponent misplay their hands from the flop and beyond when you hit.

[amarillotg]

TheIceman05 said:

amarillotg said:

i think the mistake was made pre-flop.  your best chance to get it HU was 3 betting pre-flop with your AQo (which is pretty much standard anyways).  your forcing the BB into a double bet instead of a single and the EP limper has a bit more of a choice now.i think if you 3bet PF you would of gotten the BB out.  even if EP stays i think he folds the flop if he doesn't hit his hand hard.

I completely disagree. Playing AQ for 3 bets is rarely a good idea. It's not a fun hand ot play when you have to cold-call a raise, but I'm more than willing to play it against a late-position raise from the small blind when I have a pretty solid feel from the table. Raising here will NOT force the UTG+1 player out, thought it may have forced the BB to fold. However, I'm willing to take the chance here that he doesn't have a hand that will call one bet, yet would fold to two. AQo doesn't play too well in a big pot, but it figures to be best here more often than not. Though if I could guarantee a BB fold and there was even a slight chance of the UTG+1 of folding (say, 20%) I'd definitely make this raise for the dead-money value.I'm just disinclined to admit that 3-betting AQo from the SB is "standard"Discuss

i raise it for this reason. (the bolded portion)

[highstackpoker]

The whole point is that you are in search of maximizing your expected win rate right? Well...granted you may be the best at the moment, this doesn't indicate that a raise is the best play, and in many cases i can see raising here as, perhaps not -EV but certainly less +EV than if you simply called. Here's why: Since you don't figure to isolate (poster said they are weak opponent, and therefore are more inclined to call the double raise), you are better off keeping the pot small. In poker, over the long run, your profits is the sum of all of your opponents mistakes less the sum of your mistakes. Therefore, you gain money every time your opponent makes a mistake. While calling the double raise would be a mistake for your opponents, it is not nearly as significant as a mistake as you would think because of their increased implied odds as it now becomes correct for them to chase many more draws. Given that your opponents are weak players, they will chase any reasonable draws and not so reasonable draws anyways. SO, lets charge them extra for it and make it an unprofitable play for them...thats money in your pocket. Heres how this works. Say you just call in this spot, as well as the limper, bb folds. There are 7 small bets in the pot. Say the flop is Q 8 4...and you go for the check raise. When your opponent bets, there are 8 small bets in the pot, you raise, putting in 2 more, so 10 total, but now your opponent has to call 2 cold, giving him pot odds of 5-1. What hands can he call 5 to 1 with? Well, he cant call any queen, because you have the best queen (odds of hitting kicker on turn = 14.6 to 1) he can't call a gutshot such as JT, T9, 76, 56 (odds of making straight = 10.75 to 1) And he cant call any other pair (odds of making 2 pair or trips = 8.4 to 1) So, if he doesn't have you beat, he can't profitably call you with any hand he could have other than perhaps a flush draw. Now lets look at this situation if you had raised it pf, With the same action on the flop, that now gives that opponent 7.5 to 1 odds on the flop. Now he can call with any pair with a kicker other than an ace, and any gutshot due to the implied odds of making more bets on turn and river. In the first example, the odds are just too short for him to be made up by the implied odds. Now they are enough. In conclusion, while raising preflop does sound okay because you figure to have the best hand at the moment, what we're really concerned with here is how to increase our EV. We do this by inducing greater mistakes from our opponents.

[wrto4556]

The C/r isn't going to work with a board like this. Too many people are likely to have hit that flop.J73 would be a good flop, imo.Or T52...but not 689.

[cdddc75]

wrto4556 said:

The C/r isn't going to work with a board like this. Too many people are likely to have hit that flop.J73 would be a good flop, imo.Or T52...but not 689.

Exactly.Check/call the flop.Check/fold the turn UI.

[amarillotg]

highstackpoker said:

The whole point is that you are in search of maximizing your expected win rate right? Well...granted you may be the best at the moment, this doesn't indicate that a raise is the best play, and in many cases i can see raising here as, perhaps not -EV but certainly less +EV than if you simply called.  Here's why:  Since you don't figure to isolate (poster said they are weak opponent, and therefore are more inclined to call the double raise), you are better off keeping the pot small.  In poker, over the long run, your profits is the sum of all of your opponents mistakes less the sum of your mistakes.  Therefore, you gain money every time your opponent makes a mistake.  While calling the double raise would be a mistake for your opponents, it is not nearly as significant as a mistake as you would think because of their increased implied odds as it now becomes correct for them to chase many more draws.  Given that your opponents are weak players, they will chase any reasonable draws and not so reasonable draws anyways.  SO, lets charge them extra for it and make it an unprofitable play for them...thats money in your pocket.  Heres how this works.  Say you just call in this spot, as well as the limper, bb folds.  There are 7 small bets in the pot.  Say the flop is Q 8 4...and you go for the check raise.  When your opponent bets, there are 8 small bets in the pot, you raise, putting in 2 more, so 10 total, but now your opponent has to call 2 cold, giving him pot odds of 5-1.  What hands can he call 5 to 1 with? Well, he cant call any queen, because you have the best queen (odds of hitting kicker on turn = 14.6 to 1) he can't call a gutshot such as JT, T9, 76, 56 (odds of making straight = 10.75 to 1)  And he cant call any other pair (odds of making 2 pair or trips = 8.4 to 1) So, if he doesn't have you beat, he can't profitably call you with any hand he could have other than perhaps a flush draw.  Now lets look at this situation if you had raised it pf, With the same action on the flop, that now gives that opponent 7.5 to 1 odds on the flop.  Now he can call with any pair with a kicker other than an ace, and any gutshot due to the implied odds of making more bets on turn and river.  In the first example, the odds are just too short for him to be made up by the implied odds.  Now they are enough.  In conclusion, while raising preflop does sound okay because you figure to have the best hand at the moment, what we're really concerned with here is how to increase our EV.  We do this by inducing greater mistakes from our opponents.

you make some good points and i understand what your saying. how about this aspect of it though.a raise here is forcing both the BB and the first limper to call 2 cold. i think this sets up a good scenario in getting the hand heads-up with original raiser. i think getting this hand HU increases my expected win rate more than if i call and let 2 more players in. of course if the BB and limper decide to call then your exactly right, they now have a lot more incentive to draw.what do you think?