Jump to content


an out-of-position no limit hand in detail


  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#41 jayistheman

jayistheman

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,815 posts
  • Location:philly
  • Interests:billiards, poker, sleep, software development, videogames, fly fishing, hiking, camping

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:15 PM

i still say not raising this pre flop is FPS and causing wayyyy too many marginal decisions postflop.the hand becomes much more clear cut, and that has to be +ev.

#42 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:15 PM

TJ_Eckleburg said:

I need to chew on your reasons for limping... but I think IF you're going to limp, you need to check-raise at some point with the intention of folding if he calls OR plays back at you.
i agree that i should have checkraises somewhere?but check/fold if he calls?? why...?aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#43 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:16 PM

Actuary said:

What if flop came 2,5,9 and he makes the same bet..you going to call him down fearing 55 ?
no.

Actuary said:

This hand makes me think you are out of your league.I still reserve some hope that this is a mirage.
ok.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#44 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:17 PM

jayistheman said:

i still say not raising this pre flop is FPS and causing wayyyy too many marginal decisions postflop.the hand becomes much more clear cut, and that has to be +ev.
not sure how you came to this conclusion.and actually, your first statement is wrong--this hand is just the exception. normally, limping makes my postflop decisions more clear-cut than raising does, when the stacks are deep.again, this hand is somewhat of an exception because not only where the decisions not as clear cut, but the stacks also weren't quite deep *enough*.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#45 TJ_Eckleburg

TJ_Eckleburg

    Drunken Short-handed Deepstacked NL Master

  • Members
  • 4,198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta
  • Interests:Poker, sports, music, blah blah blah

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:18 PM

Quote

it's cheaper to checkraise the flop, agreed, but it's also a lot more "predictable" in a sense. this means a lot of players will "call my bluff" so to speak, and--especially this specific player with his profile--will reraise hands that i am ahead of.
Who re-raises an EP limper who checkraised.... with only a semi-bluff or 2nd pair?I can't see a lot of hands that re-raise your check-raise that you're ahead of, unless this guy is a complete and total psycho.In which case you'll make more money off of him playing straight up... like by raising premium hands preflop.
Always bet like you've got a pair.

--Me

#46 jayistheman

jayistheman

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,815 posts
  • Location:philly
  • Interests:billiards, poker, sleep, software development, videogames, fly fishing, hiking, camping

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:22 PM

and actually, your first statement is wrong--this hand is just the exception. normally, limping makes my postflop decisions more clear-cut than raising does, when the stacks are deep. ill agree to this for pairs up to TT and even JJ. but QQ is just too strong for any postflop decision to be clear cut after limping.again, this hand is somewhat of an exception because not only where the decisions not as clear cut, but the stacks also weren't quite deep *enough*. explain this a little more, please.[/b]

#47 KDawgCometh

KDawgCometh

    old skool

  • Members
  • 15,174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the bebop
  • Interests:poker(duh), soccer, football, rugby, music, and film

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:22 PM

akishore said:

KDawgCometh said:

jayistheman said:

kdawg... do we need a joint??chill dude.  :-)
I'm completely calm, this is one of the most retarded hands I've ever seen, and for someone who tries to profess themselves as a good poker player, it just boggles me to no end
keith,this is not meant as a belittling or condescending question in the least, but i am curious how much experience you have in no limit hold 'em, specifically with medium or deep stacks.aseem
I used to only play NL. I won at 5/10 NL live in AC, what
Wine Notes for those that care about such pretentious things

#48 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:24 PM

TJ_Eckleburg said:

Who re-raises an EP limper who checkraised.... with only a semi-bluff or 2nd pair?I can't see a lot of hands that re-raise your check-raise that you're ahead of, unless this guy is a complete and total psycho.
this guy plays 56% of his hands and raises 31% of them, TJ.you are talking as if this guy is a textbook ABC player who takes my EP limp into consideration in the least bit.fwiw, i would bet money that there is a good chance he would reraise with worse hands on this flop if i checkraised. he was clearly a very aggressive player.

TJ_Eckleburg said:

In which case you'll make more money off of him playing straight up... like by raising premium hands preflop.
which means i'd need to sit to his left so that i could raise to isolate and be in position.but i wasn't.which means raising doesn't necessarily get me heads-up with him, and even then, i'm out of position.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#49 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:25 PM

KDawgCometh said:

I used to only play NL. I won at 5/10 NL live in AC, what
lol, what's with the "what" at the end of your post. you think i'm calling you out and measuring dicks with you or something? i was curious as to your experience and simply asked.thanks for sharing.what was your style?aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#50 KDawgCometh

KDawgCometh

    old skool

  • Members
  • 15,174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the bebop
  • Interests:poker(duh), soccer, football, rugby, music, and film

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:26 PM

akishore said:

KDawgCometh said:

I used to only play NL. I won at 5/10 NL live in AC, what
lol, what's with the "what" at the end of your post. you think i'm calling you out and measuring censored with you or something? i was curious as to your experience and simply asked.thanks for sharing.what was your style?aseem
my style here is completely irrelevant to this hand, as only the callingstation/obscenely weak style doesn't raise this PF, or find a raise anywhere
Wine Notes for those that care about such pretentious things

#51 jayistheman

jayistheman

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,815 posts
  • Location:philly
  • Interests:billiards, poker, sleep, software development, videogames, fly fishing, hiking, camping

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:28 PM

i think you've got too much of a concern with cutting opponents implied odds against you, personally.the reason people have implied odds against overpairs is because they are very strong hands. you must be sacrificing way too much value by playing them so meekly.

#52 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:29 PM

jayistheman said:

and actually, your first statement is wrong--this hand is just the exception. normally, limping makes my postflop decisions more clear-cut than raising does, when the stacks are deep. ill agree to this for pairs up to TT and even JJ.  but QQ is just too strong for any postflop decision to be clear cut after limping.
why the arbitrary cutoff between JJ and QQ?and really, how do you know this to such a huge degree of confidence, that QQ is just too strong for any postflop decision to be clear cut after limping???

jayistheman said:

again, this hand is somewhat of an exception because not only where the decisions not as clear cut, but the stacks also weren't quite deep *enough*. explain this a little more, please.
normally, when the stacks are deep, limping queens in early position makes my postflop decisions more clear-cut (or at least, more *profitable*) than raising them does (since i'm obligated to bet a lot of flops and most flops leave me with not knowing where i really am, and this makes turn and river decisions somewhat messy, and as i said, the turn and river overlays can be big).i am saying this hand is the exception to my statement above, because the stacks weren't quite deep enough (in a 200 bb stack game, i believe my statement is true to a very good extent, but this hand was only 80 bb and 100 bb stacks). this hand was also the exception because my decisions actually weren't clear-cut postflop.but again, i don't know how much more "clear-cut" this hand would have been psotflop if i had raised preflop. and regardless, even if it had been "clear-cut" (flop comes Kxx, i bet, he raises, i fold), it might not have been profitable or as profitable.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#53 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:33 PM

jayistheman said:

i think you've got too much of a concern with cutting opponents implied odds against you, personally.the reason people have implied odds against overpairs is because they are very strong hands.  you must be sacrificing way too much value by playing them so meekly.
ironically, this is the same reason that i *don't* raise them preflop out of psoition when the stacks are deeper.let's say our stacks are 200 bb each.i raise under the gun with AA-QQ to 4 bb. you can call profitably with a lot of hands, because with a lot of flops, you can expect a very good chunk of my stack since i'll be betting a lot of flops and usually turns if you call a flop, and being out of position, etc.let's say i limp under the gun with AA-QQ. theoretically, your implied odds should be better, right? not really. i play these same hands quite differently postflop.the pot is a lot smaller on the flop, which means the bets will be smaller throughout the hand. i will also be more aware that there are a wider range of hands out there, so i will be less inclined to play my hand for just a pair on coordinated flops. i will also gain tremendous deception if i hit a set. i will also gain tremendous deception on ragged flops where i feel my pair is very likely best, etc.just because i limp doesn't mean you have better implied odds. the reason is specifically because i play the hands differently postflop by limping them.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#54 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:35 PM

KDawgCometh said:

my style here is completely irrelevant to this hand, as only the callingstation/obscenely weak style doesn't raise this PF, or find a raise anywhere
lol, i think you're trying a little too hard to get under my skin. not really working.i've mentioned several times that i misplayed this hand postflop. telling me that i was a calling station for not finding a raise anywhere is being kind of redundant.and i asked about your style because i believe people who regularly play LAG or who have decent experience playing LAG have a much better appreciation/understanding for the value of position and for turn/river overlays.i also don't know how deep the stacks were in the AC 5/10 game, so i'm not really commenting on that.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#55 jayistheman

jayistheman

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,815 posts
  • Location:philly
  • Interests:billiards, poker, sleep, software development, videogames, fly fishing, hiking, camping

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:38 PM

why the arbitrary cutoff between JJ and QQ?and really, how do you know this to such a huge degree of confidence, that QQ is just too strong for any postflop decision to be clear cut after limping??? QQ is an overpair on the flop more than JJJJ is an overpair on the flop more than TTso on. i picked the line between QQ and JJ due to my experiences playing them so many times. some games, i move the line down to TT or 99 depending on position and other factors. Im pretty sure that its fairly common for players to choose these cutoff points for the sake of strategy conversations and simplified hypothetical situations.... ive actually read something by phil gordon, where he put his "limp" cutoff at TT or so.... granted, this was tournament scenario.i was wrong to use such explicit words like "any" in my comment, as that allowed you to stick it up my ass... but what i meant was that it is a stronger hand than JJ, TT... "clear cut" was also a poor word choice by me. what i meant was that playing QQ postflop (after you raise) involves more obvious decision making than if you were to limp and blindly c/c with overs on the board. the "standard" continuation bet allows you to gain alot of important information on the flop... information that you are lacking, given a limp.but again, i don't know how much more "clear-cut" this hand would have been psotflop if i had raised preflop. and regardless, even if it had been "clear-cut" (flop comes Kxx, i bet, he raises, i fold), it might not have been profitable or as profitable. you would have been able to play the hand with a shred of confidence, and this entire thread would never have happened.... (not that its a bad thing)

#56 TJ_Eckleburg

TJ_Eckleburg

    Drunken Short-handed Deepstacked NL Master

  • Members
  • 4,198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta
  • Interests:Poker, sports, music, blah blah blah

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:39 PM

Quote

this guy plays 56% of his hands and raises 31% of them, TJ.  you are talking as if this guy is a textbook ABC player who takes my EP limp into consideration in the least bit.  fwiw, i would bet money that there is a good chance he would reraise with worse hands on this flop if i checkraised. he was clearly a very aggressive player.
Maybe so.But still... who re-raises a check-raise with less than a K on this flop? Hell, who re-raises a check-raise with ONLY a K on this flop?I think that IF YOU WANT TO LIMP QQ HERE, you need to checkraise and overbet the flop.
Always bet like you've got a pair.

--Me

#57 jayistheman

jayistheman

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,815 posts
  • Location:philly
  • Interests:billiards, poker, sleep, software development, videogames, fly fishing, hiking, camping

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:41 PM

either you misread, or i mistyped my thoughts.... or im misreading your response :club: but just because i limp doesn't mean you have better implied odds. the reason is specifically because i play the hands differently postflop by limping them.i was insinuating that you are limping out of fear of giving your opponent implied odds..and i think you are sacrificing alot of value by doing so.

#58 KDawgCometh

KDawgCometh

    old skool

  • Members
  • 15,174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the bebop
  • Interests:poker(duh), soccer, football, rugby, music, and film

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:42 PM

akishore said:

KDawgCometh said:

my style here is completely irrelevant to this hand, as only the callingstation/obscenely weak style doesn't raise this PF, or find a raise anywhere
lol, i think you're trying a little too hard to get under my skin. not really working.i've mentioned several times that i misplayed this hand postflop. telling me that i was a calling station for not finding a raise anywhere is being kind of redundant.and i asked about your style because i believe people who regularly play LAG or who have decent experience playing LAG have a much better appreciation/understanding for the value of position and for turn/river overlays.i also don't know how deep the stacks were in the AC 5/10 game, so i'm not really commenting on that.aseem
well, I do play a LAGTAG NL style, and this is a raise, and if you play tag, this is a raise. well it doesn't matter how redundant it is, you pretty much played this hand as wrong as possible. I'm not trying to get under your skin, I'm just tellingit like it is.when I played 5/10 NL, it was with a high cap buy in, so I would normally be playing with 200 BBs.I have to say, this hand has to be a joke right, just be done with the joke so all of the posts in this thread can end
Wine Notes for those that care about such pretentious things

#59 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:45 PM

jayistheman said:

what i meant was that playing QQ postflop (after you raise) involves more obvious decision making than if you were to limp
more obvious does not equal higher EV.

jayistheman said:

and blindly c/c with overs on the board.
lol. i'm not doing this every hand, obviously.

jayistheman said:

the "standard" continuation bet allows you to gain alot of important information on the flop... information that you are lacking, given a limp.
i disagree, both for the loose/aggressive live games i play, and also for this specific hand against this type of player profile.if the pot is limped and small, a flop bet usually gives *much* more information. in a raised pot, a lot of aggressive players will find more reasons to call or raise.they might call with weak draws that they would have folded in a smaller pot. they might call with the intention of making a delayed bluff on the turn, now that i have somewhat shown the strength and vulnerability of my hand.they might raise with top pair, thinking i have overcards, but they also might raise with air on a bluff. the latter probably wouldn't happen if the pot was limped and small.maybe your games are different, but in my games, any continuation bet is suspect and is usually given zero respect unless it's an overbet or the bettor clearly has shown a lot of strength and cannot be moved off his hand nor drawn out on easily.

jayistheman said:

you would have been able to play the hand with a shred of confidence, and this entire thread would never have happened.... (not that its a bad thing)
lol, again, more confidence does not equal more profitable.sorry if it seems i'm always attacking you. i'm not. this is a debate. it's why this forum exists. you don't need to get offended and think i'm "sticking something up your ass" if i highlight it and focus on it.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#60 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 6,228 posts
  • Location:Cambridge (Boston), MA
  • Interests:Poker, jazz, programming, taekwondo, rock climbing, movies, etc.

Posted 03 October 2005 - 04:48 PM

TJ_Eckleburg said:

I think that IF YOU WANT TO LIMP QQ HERE, you need to checkraise and overbet the flop.
ok. thanks for the advice.if i had AA instead, would you still prefer to checkraise the flop or wait until the turn?i think i'm starting to see this more clearly. with QQ, a check/raise-fold line *on the flop* is solid. i don't necessarily want him to see a turn even if he's bluffing, because the pot is big and i don't want him to draw out easily/cheaply on me.on the other hand, if i had AA, i would be much stronger and can wait until the turn to checkraise for value and to protect more efficiently.and yes, i do limp AA under the gun too, but only with the intention of reraising. if the pot is limped around, it's not drastic. this usually isn't the case on the tables i select.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users