Aq Early In A $5 Stt

[rog 0]

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t20 (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)UTG (t1500)UTG+1 (t790)MP1 (t1360)MP2 (t400)Hero (t1470)CO (t1440)Button (t2710)SB (t2230)BB (t1600)Preflop: Hero is MP3 with Q , A . 1 fold, UTG+1 calls t20, 2 folds, Hero raises to t100, CO calls t100, Button calls t100, 2 folds, UTG+1 calls t80.Flop: (t430) J , 6 , Q (4 players)UTG+1 checks, Hero bets t240, CO folds, Button calls t240, UTG+1 folds.Turn: (t910) 4 (2 players)Hero bets t1130 (All-In), Button calls t1130.River: (t3170) T (2 players, 1 all-in)Final Pot: t3170

[Bellerophon 0]

I'm gonna reply to yours rog since you were so kind to me. I think you played it perfectly, I don't know the results but you played it good. The only thing I can think of is that he got lucky on the river having Q10, J10 or maybe flopped top two. If you want to wait a few rounds and then pounce, or just wait for something big for your first move, thats fine too. In the smaller buy in tourneys, people play looser so I could see a call her with Q10s. In the tourney where I lost to 2 outs (K10), I was in a hand early with AQ and invested half my chips, folding on the river cause a K was on the board. I got lucky and hit a straight on the turn, and then a flush on the river to win a big pot on the 2nd hand I played to get back in the game. In your case, you had no scare card so, you played it well. I'm thinking he caught on you. But I don't put him on AK.

[rocketpoker828 0]

I like preflop and flop. Why shove the turn? Seems like you're losing a lot of value by doing that.

[Bellerophon 0]

I like preflop and flop. Why shove the turn? Seems like you're losing a lot of value by doing that.

How is he losing value? He raised preflop, bet flop, all in turn..... GREAT PLAY! If the opponent is chasing anything, he should be folding with only one to go.

[Zach6668 513]

How is he losing value? He raised preflop, bet flop, all in turn..... GREAT PLAY! If the opponent is chasing anything, he should be folding with only one to go.

You lose value when someone who's chasing calls with poor odds and misses.The goal in poker isn't to win pots, it's to win money (or chips in this case).

[tskillz187 0]

How is he losing value? He raised preflop, bet flop, all in turn..... GREAT PLAY! If the opponent is chasing anything, he should be folding with only one to go.

I don't really agree that he's losing value. I would shove too because the pot and his stack are relative in size. But if your stack were 3k shoving here would be bad and scared poker. Sure you shut out draws, but you don't want them not playing, you want them overpaying to play.I don't mind how hero played the hand.

[Zach6668 513]

I don't really agree that he's losing value. I would shove too because the pot and his stack are relative in size. But if your stack were 3k shoving here would be bad and scared poker. Sure you shut out draws, but you don't want them not playing, you want them overpaying to play.I don't mind how hero played the hand.

Ya, I should also mention that I probably play the hand exactly the same. Well, I probably bet a bit more on the flop though, which makes it less on the turn.

[IQCrash 1]

Shoving the turn is ridiculous. Standard 1/2 pot continuation bet on the flop is just fine. When he smooth calls you, though - it's a sign to slow down. You've already gotten some information in the hand - he had enough to call you with, but you don't know whether you're beat yet or not. Shoving the turn is suicide, all you have is top pair. I would check the turn not just for information, but for pot control. Pot control is key in these situations when you're still unsure of where you're opponent is. Once he's smooth called on that flop, you need to get into pot control mode and check to him on the turn. Call a reasonable bet and more than likely, fold to a strong bet.The river, if he checked behind on the turn, I'd wait for a safe card - bottom pair pairing or a non-broadway. When the ten drops on the river, had you not shoved the turn and went for the check, then you're once again in pot control mode - the ten completes a lot of hands, and all you have is top pair - just like you did on the flop and on the turn.

[Bellerophon 0]

You lose value when someone who's chasing calls with poor odds and misses.The goal in poker isn't to win pots, it's to win money (or chips in this case).

Right, but if you slow play all the time they catch on you. So you gotta pick up the pot when you only have 1 more to go. Put him to a decision for all his money to see the next card. And actually, you don't get paid to win pots, you get paid to make good decisions. I have been sucked out so many times, especially online. The 2 outer hand I posted is just one of the many. Maybe if I had raised him all in on the flop, he woulda folded and I would have won 2400 plus the 3500 in the pot instead of losing by a miracle. Which if poker was Jesus, walking on water would be common. I believe in playing percentages, but you could be stuck at the bottom of those percentages for 26 consecutive situations and go broke right? Like Doyle says, pick up all the small pots so when you have a monster draw or the nuts you can move all in and takem down. I've lost a lot of money because of bad luck. It can happen at anytime. Just like 2 WPT episodes ago when the guy lost his A5 to 10J and then the very next all in he lost again with 66 to 2 overs. And that was for an additional $500k. We all saw Daniel lose more than half of his money on High Stakes Poker because he flopped the nuts and then someone turned the better nuts with miracle cards. Fortunately for him, he didn't lose his entire roll, but that's why cash games are better. You don't have as many all ins cuz there is no rush due to the blinds. Ok, I think I'm straying now...... lol.

[SuperJon 175]

Right, but if you slow play all the time they catch on you. So you gotta pick up the pot when you only have 1 more to go. Put him to a decision for all his money to see the next card. And actually, you don't get paid to win pots, you get paid to make good decisions. I have been sucked out so many times, especially online. The 2 outer hand I posted is just one of the many. Maybe if I had raised him all in on the flop, he woulda folded and I would have won 2400 plus the 3500 in the pot instead of losing by a miracle. Which if poker was Jesus, walking on water would be common. I believe in playing percentages, but you could be stuck at the bottom of those percentages for 26 consecutive situations and go broke right? Like Doyle says, pick up all the small pots so when you have a monster draw or the nuts you can move all in and takem down. I've lost a lot of money because of bad luck. It can happen at anytime. Just like 2 WPT episodes ago when the guy lost his A5 to 10J and then the very next all in he lost again with 66 to 2 overs. And that was for an additional $500k. We all saw Daniel lose more than half of his money on High Stakes Poker because he flopped the nuts and then someone turned the better nuts with miracle cards. Fortunately for him, he didn't lose his entire roll, but that's why cash games are better. You don't have as many all ins cuz there is no rush due to the blinds. Ok, I think I'm straying now...... lol.

Hey, if you like risking your entire tournament life on TP in the early stages, be my guest. It just sounds to me like your playing scared poker.Edit: By the way, I hate the way the OP played this hand. My guess, OP got stacked by JQ or 66. If villain was on a draw and didn't complete, then good for you OP. I just don't see how this play can be profitable in the long run.

[Zach6668 513]

Right, but if you slow play all the time they catch on you. So you gotta pick up the pot when you only have 1 more to go. Put him to a decision for all his money to see the next card. And actually, you don't get paid to win pots, you get paid to make good decisions. I have been sucked out so many times, especially online. The 2 outer hand I posted is just one of the many. Maybe if I had raised him all in on the flop, he woulda folded and I would have won 2400 plus the 3500 in the pot instead of losing by a miracle. Which if poker was Jesus, walking on water would be common. I believe in playing percentages, but you could be stuck at the bottom of those percentages for 26 consecutive situations and go broke right? Like Doyle says, pick up all the small pots so when you have a monster draw or the nuts you can move all in and takem down. I've lost a lot of money because of bad luck. It can happen at anytime. Just like 2 WPT episodes ago when the guy lost his A5 to 10J and then the very next all in he lost again with 66 to 2 overs. And that was for an additional $500k. We all saw Daniel lose more than half of his money on High Stakes Poker because he flopped the nuts and then someone turned the better nuts with miracle cards. Fortunately for him, he didn't lose his entire roll, but that's why cash games are better. You don't have as many all ins cuz there is no rush due to the blinds. Ok, I think I'm straying now...... lol.

I didn't say to slow play anywhere.Betting an amount that gives him incorrect odds, but is smaller is not a bad idea here either, although IQCrash's checking idea is interesting to me. I don't play tournies that much.I want to say this without being rude, but I'm gonna come off like an *** anyways, but you sorta need to reevaluate your overall view on poker.Everything here is being results oriented."Oh if I shoved that flop, I would have won" and so on. That doesn't mean it's the right play.Poker is a long term game. Losing one pot that you played well is actually a good thing for us in the long run. Like you said, you can't win them all, or you can get outdrawn 26 times in a row, but if we consistently make good decisions, we win in the long run.Cliche's like "put him to a decision for all of his money" are usually wrong. Cliche's in general are usually wrong in poker, and they are an awful way to approach the game. Poker is way too situational to say something like that.Furthermore, to address your cash game theory about less all-ins being better. You don't lose your roll when you lose an all-in in a cash game. Well, if you are smart, and practice bankroll management, then you don't.- Zach

[rog 0]

Thanks for the feeedback. I bet less than usual on the flop because there's really no draw to protect against. I wasn't sure what to do on the turn. I figured a check would look like me giving up after my c-bet was called, and would induce a bluff a fair percentage of the time, so I felt it was kind of a weak play. I know the shove was a bit of an overbet, but a meaningful bet would have left me pretty short. I'm still not sure what the right line is here.

[SuperJon 175]

Thanks for the feeedback. I bet less than usual on the flop because there's really no draw to protect against. I wasn't sure what to do on the turn. I figured a check would look like me giving up after my c-bet was called, and would induce a bluff a fair percentage of the time, so I felt it was kind of a weak play. I know the shove was a bit of an overbet, but a meaningful bet would have left me pretty short. I'm still not sure what the right line is here.

Tell us what happened, and we'll tell you what the right line was.

[Zach6668 513]

Tell us what happened, and we'll tell you what the right line was.

You can't be serious.

[tskillz187 0]

You can't be serious.

AHAHHAHA. Zach is gonna die moderating here.

[Zach6668 513]

AHAHHAHA. Zach is gonna die moderating here.

lol, that's got nothing to do with me moderating, except I prolly wouldn't read the thread otherwise, lol.

[Bellerophon 0]

I didn't say to slow play anywhere.Betting an amount that gives him incorrect odds, but is smaller is not a bad idea here either, although IQCrash's checking idea is interesting to me. I don't play tournies that much.I want to say this without being rude, but I'm gonna come off like an *** anyways, but you sorta need to reevaluate your overall view on poker.Everything here is being results oriented."Oh if I shoved that flop, I would have won" and so on. That doesn't mean it's the right play.Poker is a long term game. Losing one pot that you played well is actually a good thing for us in the long run. Like you said, you can't win them all, or you can get outdrawn 26 times in a row, but if we consistently make good decisions, we win in the long run.Cliche's like "put him to a decision for all of his money" are usually wrong. Cliche's in general are usually wrong in poker, and they are an awful way to approach the game. Poker is way too situational to say something like that.Furthermore, to address your cash game theory about less all-ins being better. You don't lose your roll when you lose an all-in in a cash game. Well, if you are smart, and practice bankroll management, then you don't.- Zach

Bottomline is I agree with you. I just think that underating luck is overrated. That cliche is not wrong at all. I've heard it from almost all of the pros. Putting pressure on your opponent is a great thing to do, just like in any sport. The best players in the world use that strategy. Doyle Brunson is such a feared player because all of his opponents know that all of their money could be in the middle of the table at any time. And usually end up in his stack. Poker is a long term game, but let's say that those percentages are based on 1,000,000 hands. So a hand that is 70% to win will win 700,000 times to 300,000. That's a lot and of course I want my money with the large side of that percentage. BUT,..... you LOSE 300,000 TIMES! That's A LOT. If those times are spread through out the 700,000 evenly, for every 2.3 you win, you lose 1. So, in practical application the 70% isn't as good as it looks. I guess I'm just trying to give a very realistic look at it. It's like football... ANY GIVEN SUNDAY!"Oh if I shoved that flop, I would have won" and so on. That doesn't mean it's the right play. - I agree, it's not the way I meant it.And yes I know about bankroll management. I didn't mean ALL of your money, just the money you bought in with.And I also want to say that you are obviously advocating small ball play, which I play well in my opinion. But in my thread you advocate the all in post flop raise. These hands are very similar, so I'm not understanding the contradiction. I also could've checked my turn and then moved all in on the river ace but I didn't know an ace would come so.... Anyways, I'm a tester and I say and ask a lot of this crap just to see what people say. Not to push buttons, but I just like asking lots of questions and giving multiple opinions.

[SuperJon 175]

You can't be serious.

I am. Isn't it time we find out what the results of the hand were? Or did he already say and I just missed it.

[tskillz187 0]

I am. Isn't it time we find out what the results of the hand were? Or did he already say and I just missed it.

The results do not affect anything in whether or not we can tell him if he played it right. He played it fine. Could have bet a little more on the flop, but he had a good reason not to.If the villain had a set and he made this bet though... he'd be a donk.

[ChrisRichey 1]

Bellerophon, you can't have the mindset that your opponent may get lucky so it's better to get the chips that are in the pot now than to go broke. Let's say your opponent has a flush draw. He is roughly 4:1 to hit on the next card, so by betting 1/2 the pot he is paying 3:1. The goal in poker is to extract as many chips as possible from your opponents, which is done by overcharging their draws. You want them to chase, and overpay in doing so. Yes they will hit on you from time to time, but that's poker. As for the hand, I don't like the push on the turn at all. I would continue to lead for 1/2 of the pot.

[Bellerophon 0]

Bellerophon, you can't have the mindset that your opponent may get lucky so it's better to get the chips that are in the pot now than to go broke. Let's say your opponent has a flush draw. He is roughly 4:1 to hit on the next card, so by betting 1/2 the pot he is paying 3:1. The goal in poker is to extract as many chips as possible from your opponents, which is done by overcharging their draws. You want them to chase, and overpay in doing so. Yes they will hit on you from time to time, but that's poker. As for the hand, I don't like the push on the turn at all. I would continue to lead for 1/2 of the pot.

I don't know why you thought I disagree with you.

[IAGTTAYM 0]

I would bet a little bit more on the flop, maybe 285, but 245 is ok. I agree with IQcrash, you got to check the turn. What hands calls your shove on the turn, that you actually beat? KQ, that is about it. By checking the turn you also induce bets from hands that you actually have beat.

[copernicus 0]

I dont like the push here. Hero is WA/WB to a wide range of hands, with only AK and a highly unlikely T9 hands that call for aggressive action.Edit: I didnt say what I would do, and its a very difficult situation. The stack/pot are very awkward for a meaningful bet. Checking has the drawback of inviting villain to play back at you putting you on either middle pair that is afraid of the QJ, or AK that can be taken off the pot, or taking a free card himself. That leads me to betting about 1/3 of the pot. It barely prices out the 6 and and 8 card draws but preserves enough of a stack that you can fold if he comes over the top. In hindsight, given the stack sizes, the flop bet was probably a bit too big, contributing to the difficulties on the turn.

[dingas 0]

I think you should check the turn to induce a bluff from a worse hand.

[SuperJon 175]

I think you should check the turn to induce a bluff from a worse hand.

This would imply that OP has the best hand on the turn.I still believe OP was dominated on the flop, and I still hate the push on the turn.