21 replies to this topic

[JaysonWeber]

Allright everyone, I've got a question, Its a play i've been making constantly online. I bought into PokerStars for 50 dollars so I could play in the tournaments, and I began playing the .10/.25 NL games because its all my bankroll on there can account for.Allright, I am holding K J and bump it up to a dollar, I get 3 callers.Flop is 9 7 2:club:It is checked to me, there is about 3.50 in the potThis is where it gets a little Theoretical here...I look at the three people in the hand, all of there stacks are under 6 dollars!So I decided to bet 2.50, and regardless of what happened, I'd call a raise all-in figuring I commited myself, even if I'm behind to a pair, I've got a great flush draw and two overcards... I'd like to know if others have tried this or though about it.

[FOOSE1]

With three callers you are probably beat at least by one of the three . . . even if it is by just a high card (Ace). But you have (theoretically) 15 outs or so (more if an 8 or 10 hits on the turn for the gutshot). If you put them allin they will only call if they currently have you beat . . . but with that many outs and only the potential to lose six bucks . . . go for it. I enjoy sitting at a table with small stacks like that because they get desperate and think they need to put it allin on one hand (even if it stinks).

[BigEasy6]

I think your play was good. If they call, no biggy. You have many outs. They will also make bad decisions, because they figure they are pot committed.

[Smasharoo]

Bad, bad, bad, bad.Couple of things. There are 3 other people in the pot, why not let someone else bet a small amount which likely at least two of them call and draw with odds to the flush?Also your overcard outs are very likely either dominated or reverse dominated by a caller here. They're subject to an ace redraw as well.Also your not drawing to the nut flush. Someone could be holding the A or worse, the A and another heart.Finnaly, you don't have anything near the bankroll with $50 to be anywhere near this game, regardless of how soft it is.

[JFarrell20]

Sure, this can work. I mean it's a little over-aggressive, and you may stray away from basic strategy if you lean on this crutch too often, but yes, this can pay off for you.Hell, you may as well just put them all in right now. Chances are they'll fold just because they won't want to redeposit their parents' money, especially if they don't have top pair.Refer to Smash's post. He already posted about this but at a larger scale. I'm less hesitant to play like this at this level b/c it's such a small amount of $$/risk. At a $25 NL table though, you can lose much more obviously.Let's put it this way... if there is $3 in the pot you need to be able to win this way at least 2 out of 3 times you try it for it to be profitable. In other words, you try it once, they fold, you win $3. You try it again, they fold, you win another $3. That's $6. You try it again, you lose to a caller, and you lose $6. Back to even.There is also the chance, though, that you push all in, get called, and win, this helps your case a little. The only thing here that worries me a bit is the fact that they called your pre-flop raise. But let me re-iterate, don't fall into this habit of having to play against weak bums. Your general 10-handed poker skill will deteriorate.

[tekn0wledg]

I think if you want to draw to the flush here I would wait until someone else bets, and potentially get some other callers here. Or, you could bet out yourself to the tune of a smaller amount and get several callers, thus giving you better odds to draw to the flush, and potentially top pair. This gives you the long term +EV to justify the move. Granted you have them covered in chips, but you don't want to do this frequently enough to actually lose a substantial portion of your bankroll.With three other players if you comitt them to go all-in, you are most likely already beaten, or drawing dead. However, on the flip side, you might be able to pick up the pot here.But is the $1.xx you may win everytime you do this worth risking $2.50 or more when you are called and can't showdown the best hand? I'd be interested to see the stats on the long term playability of that. If you think the number of times you will win the hand + the number of times you can pickup the pot right there are justified in laying $2.50 and potentially $5-6 if they move all-in on you, then it's profitable. In that instance I say it's definitely a +EV move. Go for it in that case.If you had the ace of that suit I could make a better case for it, but with the king in this situation I question the profitability.

[Pearl]

JaysonWeber said:

Allright everyone, I've got a question, Its a play i've been making constantly online. Allright, I am holding K J and bump it up to a dollar, I get 3 callers.Flop is 9 7 2:club:It is checked to me, there is about 3.50 in the pot

Jay, what position do you have? after you raise, you 'bought' the button and all 3 checked to you? also any sense on styles of other 3 players? what is your table image /what have you been raising and/or what hands have you shown? what do you think they think you have? in a small NL game, people may call you down with TPTK to a pot sized bet (by the way you are ahead vs a 9x0), but in a medium/high stake game, often, people may lay down their top pair to a big bet/reraise - depending on who you are up against. if all checked to you, and there are 3 players, probably better to check and get a free card.

[Mandelbrot]

You check and see if any of your 15 outs come up. Betting here is risky - I won't say never do it, I've certainly done it before. But I think the better move is to bet after you've seen the turn at least.

[JaysonWeber]

In response to Pearls question about my position, table image, etc.I did buy the button, I was 2 off in the first place, or I may not have raised with KJ, the three players who called were all very tight players who would check around if they didn't hit there cards. This is the main reason I bet here, when they checked it too me, I bet out 3.50 knowing the only way they'll call is with A-9 or something close, they would have raised with 2 hearts on the baord w/ trips or 2 pair. I had the image of a rather aggresive, but solid player, it seemed people were calling me down when I did have the hands, so with this bet I took aggression, lead the hand, and I honestly wouldn't have called a bet of 2 dollars or more on 4th street had my hand not improved. But after putting the 3.50 in there, having one caller, there would have been roughly 10 dollars in the pot and calling another 2.50 or 3 max (there stacks were low remember) wouldn't have been so bad.Regarding smash's comment about my bankroll, its quite a bit higher than the original 50 dollars I threw on for fun, and I can always transfer more over from UB or somewhere else through neteller. So that didn't play into my decision.The way I saw the hand, I could buy the pot right there, and with that raise, I could commit myself to a re-raise. In that spot I figured I'd pick the hand up 8 out of the 10 times I tried it. So the overall EV Was a little over +5X8... so +40, and the two times I get a caller, I still feel I'll be winning 40% of the time, depending on there hand it could even be higher, the worst hand I could see here would he A-2 Hearts, which these players MIGHT have played for that raise.

[looshle]

I would bet out on the flop mainly for one reason. If you check here, it might show weakness and someone could lead out big on the turn, especially if the turn card doesnt seem like it would help anyone. If you bet out here, you have a better chacne of having everyone check it around to you after the turn, and then you can take a free card if you havent hit anything. At least with betting on the flop, you're controlling how much itll cost you to see the cards.

[wrto4556]

looshle said:

I would bet out on the flop mainly for one reason. If you check here, it might show weakness and someone could lead out big on the turn, especially if the turn card doesnt seem like it would help anyone. If you bet out here, you have a better chacne of having everyone check it around to you after the turn, and then you can take a free card if you havent hit anything. At least with betting on the flop, you're controlling how much itll cost you to see the cards.

I like this. Free cards are awesome.Jayson, I think it would be better to bet a smaller amount in this situation most of the time. But not always. If it is short handed, you could probably buy the pot, but since this one is multi-way you might as well get paid for your draw and bet small so you get more callers without risking too much of your own stack. On the turn, if you miss one of your outs, check and see the river for free. IMO.

[Pearl]

the three players who called were all very tight players who would check around if they didn't hit there cards. if your read is that they are tight (tight weak type that would fold their top pair putting you on higher PP?) and would check if they missed flop, then i like the betting here. (also i assume here that they call your 3x bb because your table image is aggressive and consider your raise a standard 'buy the button raise'.) when they checked it too me, I bet out 3.50 knowing the only way they'll call is with A-9 or something close, they would have raised with 2 hearts on the baord w/ trips or 2 pair. if they have 9x, you are in good shape. on that 7 9 2 board, hard to put someone on 2 pairs, but they could have a set. Ah 2h is the hand that you dont want to face - you are getting crushed there.The way I saw the hand, I could buy the pot right there, and with that raise, I could commit myself to a re-raise. if thats your intention, i might even suggest overbetting the pot, say $4.50 - about $1 short of their all-in. depending on the opponents, they might even consider it as a protection bet vs. the draws on board and may fold their top pair. signal to them is also clear - you have a good hand and you are commiting to call them down - also they are calling you an 'all-in (close enough)' - as you know, calling an all-in requires higher standard than having the top pair of 9 on board.(side note: i vaguely remember one hand where lederer and doyle played in a tourney - HL had 7's and DB had Qs Ks, flop was small cards - 7 x x with 2 spades. HL checked his top set, and DB pushed all in. HL called and DB hit his flush busting HL out of the tourney. DB did exactly what you proposed - right or wrong, it looks like he used it in his playbook.)

[JaysonWeber]

WRTO, If these guys would have had more money infront of them I probobly would have done this, betting 1 or 1.50, just to skim the field a bit, but as I originally posted, they all had under 6 dollars in there hand, so because of that I effectively MADE myself pot commited if one or two called me... That was my reasoning for pushing so hard off the flop.

[Smasharoo]

I would bet out on the flop mainly for one reason. If you check here, it might show weakness and someone could lead out big on the turn, especially if the turn card doesnt seem like it would help anyone. If you bet out here, you have a better chacne of having everyone check it around to you after the turn, and then you can take a free card if you havent hit anything. The free card here is on the flop.Betting to try and buy a free card later when you can take one there is just silly.

[tekn0wledg]

Smasharoo said:

The free card here is on the flop.Betting to try and buy a free card later when you can take one there is just silly.

How do you figure? Particularly in limit games where the bet on the turn is 2x the bet on the flop.Since the game is NL however, the bet in this situation does way more than just gets you a potential free card on the turn. For one, you get some information about what other hands are out there against you depending on the number of callers. Secondly, you can win the pot right there.Besides, the power of the free card can get you into a showdown situation where you might catch top pair on the river and have someone beaten without hitting your draw.Silly? I disagree.

[jogsxyz]

JaysonWeber said:

In response to Pearls question about my position, table image, etc.

You're overly concerned with table image. Those of us toiling in the low limits have no image. An hour after the game none of your opponents will remember you. How often do you even see two opponents for an half hour on the same table? Rarely! Making plays for table image is a waste of effort. Few are paying attention.Aside. When are you guys going to move member started threads out of Daniel's quiz section?

[wrto4556]

jogsxyz said:

JaysonWeber said:

In response to Pearls question about my position, table image, etc.

You're overly concerned with table image. Those of us toiling in the low limits have no image. An hour after the game none of your opponents will remember you. How often do you even see two opponents for an half hour on the same table? Rarely! Making plays for table image is a waste of effort. Few are paying attention.

that's so very true

[Smasharoo]

How do you figure? Particularly in limit games where the bet on the turn is 2x the bet on the flop.In limit you'd bet it for value if you thought you get three callers.In NL you take the free card.Do you see why?Since the game is NL however, the bet in this situation does way more than just gets you a potential free card on the turn. For one, you get some information about what other hands are out there against you depending on the number of callers. Secondly, you can win the pot right there.Besides, the power of the free card can get you into a showdown situation where you might catch top pair on the river and have someone beaten without hitting your draw.Silly? I disagree.It's chip spewing, plain and simple.Betting here loses you money, period.Silly, not silly, ludicrously overcomplicating a simple decision, whatever the reasoning you want to use, it's a loser.

[JaysonWeber]

jogsxyz said:

JaysonWeber said:

In response to Pearls question about my position, table image, etc.

You're overly concerned with table image. Those of us toiling in the low limits have no image. An hour after the game none of your opponents will remember you. How often do you even see two opponents for an half hour on the same table? Rarely! Making plays for table image is a waste of effort. Few are paying attention.Aside. When are you guys going to move member started threads out of Daniel's quiz section?

Actually, knowing the people you play is important, regardless of the limit, I see about 4 to 5 people on ALL the time, now if I didn't know them I wouldn't make as much money off of them, regardless of micro-limits or not, these people have betting trends and styles they abide by, thats just a fact. Now I know what you mean about micro-limits, and the players that multi-table are also players I try to play with, because they play high cards and only high cards, so when sitting at there table, I make sure to sit directly to the left of them if I can.

[Pearl]

'overly concerned about table image?' ..hmm..how do you propose to play a NL without knowing the players' style? - i have no idea how people play at low low NLs so i won't comment. dont mean to belittle your style of play either - i personally just dont know how you play a NL table well without having a sense of how people at your table play. for example, you have AK vs. a player whose style you have no idea (5,10 NL $1000 behind). you raised from mid position with that to 4xbb. this player called from SB. flop comes K 9 8 rainbow. (each of you have about 1500) he checks, you bet $100, he calls. turn is a deuce. he checks again and you bet $300, and he calls. river is a 3. and now he leads the bet with $750. what do you do? is your answer the same if you know that the opponent is loose aggressive? or if you know that the opponent is a tight (and weak) limit player who only plays premium hands and PPs? what if you noticed that 3 hands ago, the same opponent folded his AK to a big bet on flop when flop was Kxx rainbow? may be we are in different circles of NL - meaning i play mostly live so i wouldn't know how netizens think.