Jump to content


question about a hand


  • Please log in to reply
134 replies to this topic

#41 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 10:36 PM

cool, go knock'em dead chief. i plan on quitting the game. i dont need ego padding. i'm a winning player because i listened to good players and learned from my mistakes. i can tell from the way u talk chief, u have a lot to learn. if i could make a bet, i would bet everything i have that u will not make it in the long run. you'll get frustrated and then you'll quit. i havent seen a technical player make it yet. you'll get even more frustrated when yur cute plays back fire on u constantly when yur running bad and it lasts for weeks upon weeks. u can run bad to the point of where u turn quads and u still feel nervous. u techno guys never have the stomach for crap like that because it defies logic. how in the hell can i go a month straight with out making a flush once? believe me, you'll quit. keep that pocket protector warm.

#42 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

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

Posted 08 November 2005 - 10:44 PM

i have read this entire thread.i insanely strongly agree with davin and chief.man, this entire thread just screams to me of results-oriented analysis.jesus, if the villian doesn't hit his four outter, half the people saying "RAISE THE FLOP" say "standard".reasons have already been covered, but i believe that in general, raising this flop is playing scared money. why in the world would you not want to give him another opportunity to bluff? he usually has at BEST four outs on you, many times TWO or less.i don't think this is that close at all.and pmc, you are seeming more and more like a twelve year old every time you post. what's funny is that i know both davin and chief personally, and your generalizations of both couldn't be more off the mark. keep up the good work, buddy. keep on winning those high stakes games.nice hand, OP.aseemp.s. the argument that we should "TAKE DOWN THIS POT RIGHT AWAY--it's a cash game, not a tournament!" is insanely flawed. it works just the other way around.
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#43 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 10:54 PM

lol, stay away from the card rooms chief, yur rope a dope stuff is fantasy land nonsense. i just told u how to deal with the lag but i can tell yur not aggressive by nature. yur a mit nerd which is cool by me but its not good in poker games. the psychological warfare is so strong. people will make it personal and u have to battle back at that as well as with the cards. u make it sound so easy. just let him hang himself , huh. yeah, everyone is a real sucker. u call him down until he puts u all in on the river and be a dope and call off all yur chips. hurricane was so on the money about raising on the flop so u know where yur at. thats it, i'm done. u and davin r just too dorky for me. i know for a fact u guys will not make it with yur style. you'll go on a bad run that defies logic and you'll quit. u technical types just dont have the stomach for the incredibly cruel swings in this game. i did not make one flush for the month of october and that wasnt even in my top 5 bad run stories. stick with launch angles and the robotic stuff u nerds r good at. its much more rewarding. is varkoni yur hero? he got knocked out early in the 2003 tournament and no one clapped for him. u see, no one likes nerdy poker dorks

#44 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 11:03 PM

oh my god akishore, u r really off. another guy from cambridge, right down the street from mit. u guys dont even have a local card room there. stick with the internet boys. dont embarrass yurself in the live games. u guys have no understanding of the mental warfare. its all spread sheet rocket science for u guys. i'm out of here, i got to chat with the girl friend. u know.....females. the part of our species that likes nerd money but not nerds personally. bye guys

#45 akishore

akishore

    Poker Forum Veteran

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

Posted 08 November 2005 - 11:09 PM

lmao.you nailed us, we never play live, and we're all tight by-the-book nits. and don't be a jerk, i know what females are. they're the graphics on my computer screen. i've never seen one in person, though, since i am clearly a weak/tight level-one thinker who has no creativity and is therefore a social outcast.damn, you got my number good. please don't take offense to my post, high-stakes master. please continue posting your highly correct advice. after all, you're a WINNING player, so you're obviously correct.wait, i have to go. it's time for star trek. and then back to internet poker and my cyber-girlfriend lafawnduh.aseem
After a long hiatus, my poker blog is back!

#46 Stylin_Fish

Stylin_Fish

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 4,035 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 11:20 PM

I had to break up with my internet girlfriend. I lied to her and told her I look a little like Brad Pitt and she wanted to meet me in person.
IPB Image

#47 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 08 November 2005 - 11:39 PM

level one player? isnt that some kind of dungeon and dragon jargin? nerds, theyre money is green too thank god. i''l bet yur nerd crew is heavy into reading up on the latest nacy drew novel while sitting at the omaha hi lo game waiting for a hand. lol, i'm telling u guys, i seen yur type before. vegas has the "crew", london has got the "mob", i guess u guys on the east coast can call yurselves "the team". such as a "team" of rocket scientists

#48 Captain_Walt

Captain_Walt

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 112 posts
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 09 November 2005 - 06:52 AM

akishore said:

i have read this entire thread.i insanely strongly agree with davin and chief.man, this entire thread just screams to me of results-oriented analysis.jesus, if the villian doesn't hit his four outter, half the people saying "RAISE THE FLOP" say "standard".reasons have already been covered, but i believe that in general, raising this flop is playing scared money. why in the world would you not want to give him another opportunity to bluff? he usually has at BEST four outs on you, many times TWO or less.i don't think this is that close at all.and pmc, you are seeming more and more like a twelve year old every time you post. what's funny is that i know both davin and chief personally, and your generalizations of both couldn't be more off the mark. keep up the good work, buddy. keep on winning those high stakes games.nice hand, OP.aseemp.s. the argument that we should "TAKE DOWN THIS POT RIGHT AWAY--it's a cash game, not a tournament!" is insanely flawed. it works just the other way around.
Exactly, exactly, exactly what I was going to say. Already mentioned this early on the thread what Davin and Cheif have been saying all along. Just wanted to re-emphasize it.

#49

  • Guests

Posted 09 November 2005 - 07:10 AM

pmc said:

cool, go knock'em dead chief. i plan on quitting the game. i dont need ego padding. i'm a winning player because i listened to good players and learned from my mistakes. i can tell from the way u talk chief, u have a lot to learn. if i could make a bet, i would bet everything i have that u will not make it in the long run. you'll get frustrated and then you'll quit. i havent seen a technical player make it yet. you'll get even more frustrated when yur cute plays back fire on u constantly when yur running bad and it lasts for weeks upon weeks. u can run bad to the point of where u turn quads and u still feel nervous. u techno guys never have the stomach for crap like that because it defies logic. how in the hell can i go a month straight with out making a flush once? believe me, you'll quit. keep that pocket protector warm.
In regards to a technical player making it. I believe Chris Fergueson is quite technical, and I would say he has done pretty well thus far.________________________________________Yimmet @ Bodog | Poker Stars | Ultimate Bet

#50 iggymcfly

iggymcfly

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,654 posts
  • Location:Missoula, MT
  • Interests:Poker, football, sitting on my ass

Posted 09 November 2005 - 07:52 AM

Pmc, you're totally ignoring a lot of important factors here that change the situation dramatically.This is a low stakes, short-handed, online poker game. Many of the players are way too over-aggressive, and will be more than happy to bluff off their chips on two or even three streets. This is not a 10-handed game full of tight players, where you can afford to limit your winnings so dramatically when you have two pair.In the situation where you're ahead, the opponent is drawing to between zero and four outs. If he has zero outs, (which I would say is close to half of the time in this game), you're getting at least another $20 by smooth-calling, and may even get him to follow up with an all-in on the river.If your opponent does have outs, then on average, you'll stay ahead over 90% of the time. That means that over 90% of the time, you'll probably make another $20 by letting him continue to bet. Sure occasionally, you'll lose $150, but that's poker. It happens.Altogether, then, I'd say 5% of the time, you get caught and lose your $150. 95% of the time, you stay ahead, and with a typical loose opponent, you probably average an extra $20 by doing that. (The all-ins cancel out the checks.) That means you're getting an extra $12.50 by smooth-calling in this situation.All this talk about psychological warfare, etc., etc., is clearly you being stuck in the frame of mind of playing a full-table middle limit game where you might extract value against an ace with a decent kicker or a weak two pair. A shorthanded NL 100 game doesn't consist of people who are scared by people staring at them in the eyes; it consists of people that say to themselves "whee, if I bet at every pot hard enough, I bet I can win them all."

#51 HurricaneKyle

HurricaneKyle

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 478 posts
  • Location:dodging bullets
  • Interests:Poker, Sports(Titans, Vols, Phillies),Hot girls, Relaxing and guitar.

Posted 09 November 2005 - 08:10 AM

Question for all those who advocate a smooth call. Does villian fold to a raise if he has an ace? I don't think so, how great is it if he does call and then proceeds to make a smaller two pair or if the board pairs the bottom card giving him Aces up with a King kicker? Then you are taking all or an even bigger chunk of his money by playing the hand fast on the flop.He might be LAG, but there is no guarentee that he leads out on the Turn. Calling on the flop should send warning bells to him because it looks stronger than raising.

#52 NoSup4U

NoSup4U

    Making Poppinfresh look like a nit

  • Members
  • 10,674 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ
  • Favorite Poker Game:Shorthanded NLHE

Posted 09 November 2005 - 08:44 AM

Wow, apparently I've missed a good thread here. My comments:- Seems like a few people have said: This is a cash game not a tournament, so raise the flop and take it down there. I think thats backwards. Its a cash game, so maximize expected value. - Lots of people have said: You only have two pair, thats not that strong of a hand. Well, thats fine if your two pair is 85 and someone with A8 can spike an A to have a higher two pair. But the OP has AK. It isn't like this two pair can be counterfeited in some way. - Also, some people have said: Well, what if he has an A? He won't fold and you'll get him to call your flop raise. Well, if he has an A, then what is bad about smooth calling? All he can do is improve to a worse 2 pair than you have, and he'll call your raise later anyway with that A even unimproved.There is just nothing to be worried about. At worst, he's drawing to 4 outs. AT WORST! So lets do some quick math.Assuming you have $160 left.Assuming you'll just give him one free card and pop him on the turn.Assuming you expect him to bet at least $20.Remember, at best he has an 8% chance to hit here, so 1/12 times. So one time you will lose $160, and 11 times you will make $20, or $220. And thats worst case there. This example doesn't take into account times when he makes a worse two pair and is willing to pay you off even more...I just cannot see the argument here for taking the pot down on the flop, other than the loss aversion phenomenon. Mark

#53 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 08:51 AM

i can tell hurricane has some playing experience. slow playing is called a fancy play. mike caro said fancy plays cost u money in the long run. i learned that from him ten years ago. i quickly found out he was right and never waivered from that rule. how many times do u see someone flop the nuts or a strong hand and so does his opponent? they both slow play each other and then on the turn, a bet and a smooth call and then a scary card comes on the river and hand cuffs the two of them into checking. it could have all been settled on the flop if someone bet strong or raised strong and then all the money gets in the pot on the flop. hurricane's last blog is absolutely real world right. people dont put u on a strong hand when u raise on the flop. the sucker might just go off for all his chips with a weak ace. besides, hasnt anyone ever heard of making someone pay for the draw? i keep coming back here because u guys have it all ass backwards and i will never back down on a subject where i know i'm right. i hope the silent readers who r trying to learn r listening to me because the smooth call advice is terrible. the smooth call in that spot is bad buisness. i dont care about his 4 outs and how much of a dog he is. i heard yur hero danny boy say its all 50/50 on the flop. of course its just a joke but theres a twisted truth to that statement. u would only understand that if u been playing a lot of years and putting in a lot of hours. winning a small pot is always better than getting punched in yur guts for a big pot. winning keeps u focused, intimidates yur opponents and most importantly......and heres a main factor u guys never talk about......keeps u off tilt

#54 HurricaneKyle

HurricaneKyle

    Poker Forum Nut

  • Members
  • 478 posts
  • Location:dodging bullets
  • Interests:Poker, Sports(Titans, Vols, Phillies),Hot girls, Relaxing and guitar.

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:00 AM

I think people are trying to plan on how they can make a big pot instead of getting the most information out of villain. Big pots are often unplanned, they just develop naturally, oftentimes when you least expect it. I don't advocate a big raise at all, you definitely want some action here with the best possible two pair. Hell, you can even make the minimum raise. If he folds then it isn't likely that we were going to win much if any more money on the turn. Think about it from villain's point of view. You know you are perceived as a really loose-action player, you are out of position with two undercards and a gutshot,your bet was called on the flop. How could villain honestly believe there is a chance of hero folding on the turn when he called on the flop?Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't see how its very likely that he leads out with any kind of bet here. Most likely villain checks the turn, hero makes a relatively small bet. Villain likely folds here. This scenario is far more likely than some of you think. The rate of how much more you might win should he call your raise will also exceed how much you might lose if you smoothcall.

#55 Captain_Walt

Captain_Walt

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 112 posts
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:11 AM

"how many times do u see someone flop the nuts or a strong hand and so does his opponent? they both slow play each other and then on the turn, a bet and a smooth call and then a scary card comes on the river and hand cuffs the two of them into checking. it could have all been settled on the flop if someone bet strong or raised strong and then all the money gets in the pot on the flop. "Wow I will never slowplay again, someone else might have the nuts and I might have the nuts and we might split a smaller rather than a larger part. This is pretty much the underlying theme of the OP's post.

pmc said:

good luck to u all and play yur hands the way u see fit. i'm out of here never to return. thanks for the converstaions
Doubled your post count since that post.....whatever you say Tritz.

#56 Davin

Davin

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 548 posts
  • Location:Boston

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:23 AM

HurricaneKyle said:

I think people are trying to plan on how they can make a big pot instead of getting the most information out of villain. Big pots are often unplanned, they just develop naturally, oftentimes when you least expect it. I don't advocate a big raise at all, you definitely want some action here with the best possible two pair. Hell, you can even make the minimum raise. If he folds then it isn't likely that we were going to win much if any more money on the turn. Think about it from villain's point of view. You know you are perceived as a really loose-action player, you are out of position with two undercards and a gutshot,your bet was called on the flop. How could villain honestly believe there is a chance of hero folding on the turn when he called on the flop?Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't see how its very likely that he leads out with any kind of bet here. Most likely villain checks the turn, hero makes a relatively small bet. Villain likely folds here. This scenario is far more likely than some of you think. The rate of how much more you might win should he call your raise will also exceed how much you might lose if you smoothcall.
this is a valid point.however, i still feel lags will stab again bc of what they might put us on. i think he would take our call on the flop is more fearful than anything else. why would we relinquish the lead(after taking it pf) after we make our hand?if i were lag, i would stab again bc i would put our hero on a pp pf (due to the reraise) and hope that the pp is queens or lower. the pot is just too tempting to not stab again. for lag players, they tend to get rushes off of bluffing players off hands, not winning with quality hands.if, however, i were the lag and had a naked ace and were raised on the flop, i most likely will give credit to our raiser for a big hand. and since im oop, i cannot call this flop raise. therefor, our hero loses another bet from an ace on the turn. lags are aggressive, not stupidi also think that our hero can get away w/ top two on this turn. our villain raised pf and continued to bet on the flop. when the q hit, it not only brought a broadway straight, but also another possibility for a set (qq being a likely hand). after our opponents reraise on the turn, we know he's strong (since we were strong as well waiting for the turn to raise). what possible hands could he hold:a-x: unlikely considering the strength of his reraiseak: i feel he would play the same wayaq: possible, but also unlikely since he most likely would just call our raise (or go all-in if he feels that he's ahead)aa: possible. he did raise pf and lead the flopkk: same as aaqq: most probable. he did raise pf, and since we have no queens in our hand, this is the most possible ppj10: not obvious. played badly oop pf and flop, but it is the current nuts and possible as well.so we're beating 1 hand, splitting w/ another, and losing to 4 others. i feel that if op took the time to think things through, he may have been able to get away from this hand. lag sometimes wake up to real hands as well

#57 iggymcfly

iggymcfly

    Poker Forum Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,654 posts
  • Location:Missoula, MT
  • Interests:Poker, football, sitting on my ass

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:27 AM

HurricaneKyle said:

I think people are trying to plan on how they can make a big pot instead of getting the most information out of villain. Big pots are often unplanned, they just develop naturally, oftentimes when you least expect it. I don't advocate a big raise at all, you definitely want some action here with the best possible two pair. Hell, you can even make the minimum raise. If he folds then it isn't likely that we were going to win much if any more money on the turn. Think about it from villain's point of view. You know you are perceived as a really loose-action player, you are out of position with two undercards and a gutshot,your bet was called on the flop. How could villain honestly believe there is a chance of hero folding on the turn when he called on the flop?Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't see how its very likely that he leads out with any kind of bet here. Most likely villain checks the turn, hero makes a relatively small bet. Villain likely folds here. This scenario is far more likely than some of you think. The rate of how much more you might win should he call your raise will also exceed how much you might lose if you smoothcall.
The point is that a lot of times, players like "villain" don't think clearly. That's why they're screwing around in a NL 100 game. They think that if they just keep pushing, they can make somebody back off no matter what. Also, a lot of times, they have no draw whatsoever. I've had about three times lately where somebody's bet on every street in a similar situation and had absolutely nothing; no pair and no draw.Smoothcalling isn't always the right play, but if you play any kind of a weak-tight game, it's the best way to get him to keep betting. Now if he knows that you'll come over the top of him with no pair sometimes, (i.e. if you've recently showed a bluff), then you can raise him here and try to get him to go for a reraise. However, under normal circumstances in a NL 100 game, the best play here is to smooth-call and wait for a bet on the turn. If the player is truly as loose-aggressive as many that I've seen on PP, he'll bet that turn card about 90% of the time.And back on pmc, "Mike Caro told you don't make fancy plays"? Are you kidding me? That's your logic? That might be the dumbest thing I've heard yet. If I were to guess, I'd say you're completely misapplying what he said. He was probably talking about how at a live game that you're going to sit at for a few hours, you don't want to "scare the fish" and get them out of a happy, gambling mood. However, if you're playing a 3-handed game online where you might bust your opponent the next hand, that concern is completely irrelevant.

#58 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:33 AM

u know whats really funny? u guys go through this hand like u know the sucker is on the draw or bluffing. in the heat of battle, yur not sure what the hell the sucker has. i say raise and raise strong. thats real world advice. keep it simple. hurricane proves himself to be a genius more and more. the likely scenario is the sucker checks the turn, hero bets, sucker folds. i said that in an earlier post too. my way, theres a good chance he will call the big raise to see the turn because the sucker invested money on the flop with a lead out bet. only sophisticated players can bet a flop on a draw, get raised big and then fold. hurricane is right, big pots more often than not just happen, they dont get created. i ALWAYS bet the nuts or raise with the nuts and u would be surprised how often u get raised or reraised back. now yur big pot happens. i know for a fact that all u smooth call advocates have not been playing long. i dont care if i sound insulting. i'm sticking up for the silent readers who r trying to improve theyre game. i will never leave this post.

#59 Davin

Davin

    Poker Forum Groupie

  • Members
  • 548 posts
  • Location:Boston

Posted 09 November 2005 - 09:48 AM

pmc said:

u know whats really funny? u guys go through this hand like u know the sucker is on the draw or bluffing. in the heat of battle, yur not sure what the hell the sucker has. i say raise and raise strong. thats real world advice. keep it simple. hurricane proves himself to be a genius more and more. the likely scenario is the sucker checks the turn, hero bets, sucker folds. i said that in an earlier post too. my way, theres a good chance he will call the big raise to see the turn because the sucker invested money on the flop with a lead out bet. only sophisticated players can bet a flop on a draw, get raised big and then fold. hurricane is right, big pots more often than not just happen, they dont get created. i ALWAYS bet the nuts or raise with the nuts and u would be surprised how often u get raised or reraised back. now yur big pot happens. i know for a fact that all u smooth call advocates have not been playing long. i dont care if i sound insulting. i'm sticking up for the silent readers who r trying to improve theyre game. i will never leave this post.
im sorry, but your post is full of contradictions.you say your "sucker" wont fold to a big flop raise bc he has invested money already in this hand, yet just 2 lines prior, you say that this same "sucker" will c/f the turn on the same pot. your first description lends the "sucker" as extremely loose. your second description lends him to be weak tight. which one is it?hurricanekyle provides a lot to this forum by not generalizing his opponents as simple mindless idiots and by backing up his viewpoint with solid reasoning, good examples, and strong counterargumentsyour style is to beat a dead horseif anything, the "silent readers" are listening to him, not you. you speak of sophistication in your post, yet it's apparent that you completely lack the comprehension of the word

#60 pmc

pmc

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 92 posts

Posted 09 November 2005 - 10:21 AM

good, i hope the silent readers r listening to hurricane. u guys read too many books. loose agressive and weak tight etc etc. i already told u guys that yur not playing against robots. a person can be loose for one hour and then slow down to tight for the next hour. so what is he? in yur mind, he'll always be a lag. i pay attention to whats going on because i play live games. u guys play the internet and when yur not involved in a hand, yur watching t.v. or looking up something on the net. theres only 2 kinds of players. its either yur a sucker or yur playing well, and ive seen supposed suckers ram and jam and play bad and then all of a sudden tighten up and play well. u say i contradict myself about the suckers moves on the flop as opposed to the turn. there u go again with yur generalizations of players. u think that a supposed lag is going to fall into a given pattern where in the real world, they can do just what i said. they go from hot on the flop to cold on the turn and then yur smooth call trap gets foiled. if the guy is such a lag, then why dont u raise him on the flop since he is so loose? wont u make more money like that in the long run? u guys just want to argue. when i first read the heroes post when it first came out, right when he said about the sucker betting into the hero on the flop, the first thing i said to myself was, "ok, now u raise him". thats years of experience talking. any other play from there is gay. if the hero said he folded to the guys bet on the flop because he read the sucker for a set, believe it or not......believe it or not.... i would like the heroes fold better than the smooth call. i know i'm going to get a bunch of crap from that statement but i certainly dont expect u guys to understand it. maybe hurricane will understand it. smooth call is a terrible play. day 1 rookie mistake all the way




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users