2 replies to this topic

[rickduff]

I am not sure that making my first post here in the Bad Beats forum sets a good precident. ;-) I was playing a cheap NL tourny yesterday on Pokerstars with about 2100 other people. I like to treat them as an exercise in patience as I try to stay out of the way while the inital rush to self destruct happens.I was doing reasonably well at that when I drew K8s in the BB. No-one raised, so I just checked to see the flop for free. The flop came up 10 7 3 spades, the same as my cards. I figured I would have to play this, ;-) and decided to slow play it and checked. One person bet and the Button raised all-in. Now the player at the button had done a couple all-in's in the last 5 hands as he had been very low in chips and had finally managed to get back to just under my stack. I thought about it for a while and decided that he probably didn't have the nut flush and called his all-in. The other players folded and we were heads up.I was right, it turned out he had a 78 in hearts, giving him a pair on the board and a runner runner straight draw. I sighed, figuring I was safe. The turn came up a 7 and it dawned up me that if the river came up an 8, I was in trouble. Of course that is what happened and I soon finished the tournament in 1500th+ place.I suspose it is no worse any any other kind of runner runner draw, but why would someone go all-in after a suited flop with only a pair and a long shot straight (which matters not if they are against a flush)? Rick..

[Wilderness]

rickduff said:

I suspose it is no worse any any other kind of runner runner draw, but why would someone go all-in after a suited flop with only a pair and a long shot straight (which matters not if they are against a flush)?  Rick..

1. Because they don't really know what they are doing and/or don't really care because its a low buy-in.2. They figured they might scare off everyone else who might be afraid of facing a flush. Especially if they were short-stacked, which from your post I wasn't sure if they had been short-stacked earlier and made up some ground or were still short-stacked.Its still just a bad play for any reason, but that's the kind of thing you will get in huge, low buy-in tournaments.

[rickduff]

Wilderness said:

2.  They figured they might scare off everyone else who might be afraid of facing a flush.  Especially if they were short-stacked, which from your post I wasn't sure if they had been short-stacked earlier and made up some ground or were still short-stacked.

I had around $1300 in chips. He had been down to 4 or 5 hundred and had built it back up to $1100 or so.I have only been playing holdem for about 3 months now and only playing the money version for the last month. I like pokerstars because it is hard - although I agree with you about cheap tournaments.I tend to look at an all-in call as purely a strategic move. If I make the call, I know up front whether my goal is to scare people away and steal the pop, or look for callers and make more money. In fact most times I want to make money on it (thinking I have the nuts), I tend to try to suck the player in until they are pot commited, rather than an all-in move by itself. I really don't think the newbies (although I may still be considered one) realise that once you make the all-in call, you give your fate over to the poker gods and no longer have control. This bad beat forum is all about the times when you thought you had the nuts and went all-in, only to discover there is some remote chance that the poker gods were displeased with you and expressed that displeasure. ;-)Rick..