Jump to content


Do you agree with the way I played this hand?


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 LONEWOLF

LONEWOLF

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 10 December 2004 - 10:54 AM

Ok, so if you read my previous post, you will know that I am playing in the 6 man tourney's on Stars. This hand came up and I wanted to share it with you. Blinds are at 15/30 and there are 5 PPL remaining. The initial read I had on the player was semi-tight, but the hand right before this one, he showed down (and won) with a very marginable hand. So the next hand comes up with me in the cut off. I make is 105 to go with Q7 o. Button and SB fold and this guys calls from the BB. The flop comes down 8 :D 9 :) j:spade: . Being first to act the BB fires out 100 into a pot that was about 235. So almost a half-pot bet. This bet caught my attention. Reason being is I believed this guy to be a tight player with a side of him that wanted to be more of a gamgler, thus I felt he hit this pot, probably pretty good. However, with this flop I believed if I called him and saw the turn, that any number of cards would give me an ideal bluff chance. By calling, I can be representing any flush draw, overcards draw or strt draw. The next card was the Q :). I thought this was a beautiful card. It gave me top pair, but I still felt I might be behind. But this was the card (in my opinion) that enabled me to win this pot. Not only did it make a flush possible, but also gave any T a strt. This time the BB bets out 120. I found this to be a very weak bet, a nervous one at that. So I re-raise to 300. I did this to "feel" him out and also attempt to take it down if not there on the river. He waited 2 secs and called. The riv was a rag and BB checks to me. He had around 800 chips left to my 1500, so I wanted to make his decision very easy (with him folding what I believed to be the best hand to me), and put him all in. After a 2 sec wait this guy called for all his chips with...Flush? No, Strt? Nope, my reads were dead on. No BB turned over 89 off suit. He flopped 2 pair and was unable to get away from them regardless of the complicated board. Although I lost the hand, I believed I played it very well. Any thoughts?L*
" There are few things that are so unpardonably neglected in our country as poker. The upper class knows very little about poker. Now and then you find ambassadors who have sort of a general knowledge of poker, but the ignorance of the people is fearful. Why, I have known clergymen, good men, kind-hearted, liberal, sincere, and all that, who did not know the meaning of a "flush". It is enough to make one ashamed of the species." --Mark Twain

#2 bdluss

bdluss

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 165 posts

Posted 10 December 2004 - 11:52 AM

I like the play, the raises everything. My only concern would be this is your read on your opoponent who you read as semi tight which he obviously was not (and also is not a good player) as he was unable to lay down bottom 2 pair to that board. But hey, I know your move will work by far the majority of the time and that most players (even weak ones) would probably lay that hand down. Good move, just unlucky guy had no discpline to fold the hand.

#3 bubbad

bubbad

    Poker Forum Newbie

  • Members
  • 42 posts
  • Location:Las Vegas

Posted 10 December 2004 - 12:02 PM

I agree I would probably have made a very similar play the only thing I would probably have done differntly is severly overbet the pot pre-flop hoping to take down just the blinds.... especially with your previous read of "tight" but all in all I like the play

#4 Chip_and_a_Chair

Chip_and_a_Chair

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 148 posts
  • Location:Newton, MA; Red Sox Nation 02004
  • Interests:Baseball, Poker, Movies

Posted 10 December 2004 - 12:33 PM

I like your play, and I think you did everything you had to do to in an attempt to win that pot. The betting process even made it look as though you were on a straight or flush draw. However, I wouldn't go so far as to say your opponent was a weak player based on the information, because it is entirely possible that he made an educated decision to call.With your raise on the turn, I would have either categorized it as a "call me" raise and given you credit for the straight or a nut flush, or as a "you can either call me or fold" bet, indicating that you had two marginal cards to the flush, but didn't want another spade to fall in case he had a higher one.So in that respect, his mere call after your raise on the turn was a questionable play, because if he's beaten with a straight, only a 10 helps him (for a hopeful tie), and if he's beaten with a flush, only one of four 8 or 9s helps him.My only question is your all-in bet on the river. In trying to convey strength, you may have signaled that you were trying to make his decision tough and muscle him out of the pot. Of course, he may have felt committed to the pot at that point anyway. But if I were your opponent, I'd be more likely to think I had you beat after you pushed me all-in with a power move then if you had a strung out a smaller bet that looked like it had been designed to bleed more money out of me. Unfortunately for you, the number of large bets in the pot gave him the pot odds to call if he thought there was a roughly 50 percent chance that you were representing Aces, Kings or AK with your raises.Quite frankly, I wouldn't have played it that far if I were him, but he may have had you pegged for a bluff draw, and by the river there was no way you were getting him out of that pot.
- Lucky Clubs -

#5 SexyStudThang

SexyStudThang

    Poker Forum Regular

  • Members
  • 154 posts
  • Location:Tampa, FL

Posted 10 December 2004 - 07:39 PM

I'll start by saying I purposely didnt read any of the replys so that they dont influence anything that I say in response to your post. First, the buy-in of this thing probably matters, but since I dont know it I'll go ahead and comment without it...Stars tournaments allow more aggressive play with marginal hands, and Im going to assume that even though you didnt state it that when you raised with Q7o you were simply building a pot that you were gonna take down a couple of streets down the road, which is fine, everyone does it and it's never wrong if it works. The main problem here is you're making a very advanced play at a player that is probably looking at porn while he's playing. Against a player that you've determined is pretty good and willing to fold I can see making this play, but lets say you did think that this player is capable or releasing a hand that he considers good at a scary flop... That bet on the turn was a scared bet anyway you look at it, and I agree to the raise here, and that I would most likely do the same in the same situation (Any time someone makes a weak bet like that Im liable to raise which gets me into some situations like this one all too much), BUT I dont agree with the amount. With his bet on the turn the pot becomes 435, with your raise to 300 he now is forced to make a decision whether to call 180 at 735, and when he calls he's leaving himself 800 with a pot if 905. This is the perfect play if you're extracting money from him, because I dont believe many players will release after making that call, but in this case you need to make it look like an extraction play that gets him to fold. All in here is out of the question that looks too much like a bluff, and would likely frustrate him into calling. I think a raise to 470 (keep the math easy on me hehe) would have gotten the job done. Now He's forced to call $350 at a pot of 905 which leaves him with $630 in his stack, an easy call for him to make if you set him all in on the river so by calling here he's committing the rest of his stack without question. He might fold, but if he doesnt you know that your bet on the river can't force him out of the pot even though you're 100% certain he has a weak holding, and you save 630 in chips checking behind hoping your Q somehow held up.
Sunglasses will help you flopping Quads.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users