back online.

1/2NL

dont have HH that can be converted cuz i'm at action gaming network. their history is a actual pic.

9 handed

hero 470.
villain 135


villain just lost a fairly decent pot to me. He seems like a solid player, which is why his limp from button seemed a bit weak.


hero is sb with

MP 2 call, c/o call , button call. hero complete bb check

flop

hero check, bb check, MP check, c/o check, button bet 10. hero raise to 30. fold to button who calls.

turn

hero?

Meh. Doesn't anything you bet that both makes sense and that he calls pretty much commit him to a push anyway?

If he was deeper a C/R would be kind of fun, but yeah all bets bring you to all in, I guess I bet $55.

yeah I bet again, he has a flush draw.

Check/raising a guy who's fairly short when you have no plan for the rest of the hand if you get called is fairly bad.

You're obv just gonna get it in there since you picked up a FD, but this play is generally bad IMO.

Also, his button limp isn't especially weak since there are 2 limps in front of him. It's not like he open limped there. Would he limp KQ or AQ here?

If he's a decent player, we can eliminate A-3 from the equation. Chasing gut-shots are bad. And he isnt stacked deep enough to do something like that.

Why would you check top pair into 4 other players? We need to start weeding out the field and lead right out. Checking into 4 other players puts us in a tricky spot if they check behind and something like the 6 or Ace of hearts pops off on the turn.

Another thing, limping /w the marginal Q-J OOP. Maybe you've found a way to make playing marginal hands OOP profitable, but I haven't been blessed with your genius. I would have liked to have position on our villain. If we did and he checked it to us on the turn, it would give us more evidence to put him on a flush draw and set him all-in. But being that we're OOP, we less of a read on him. This guy could be on a draw, smooth calling you with a better queen.

As for the turn, I guess i'd set him all-in as well, being that all the money is going in either way (if he has a draw or if he's flopped a set with 2-2 or 4-4). At straight pushing might get him to fold.

I'll let someone else field this.

But he didn't limp OOP, he was in the blinds...

alright, i stand corrected.

I'm just mostly against completing the SB with marginal hands because i'm OOP for the flop turn and river.

Position is over-rated in a cash game; I truly believe that. Tourneys differ.
I think having a prescription for the hands we play makes us predictable and limits our profitability.
I certainly don't regard QJ as marginal when properly played.
The flop has more valuable information than most starting hands can ever contain.
I'll take any hand to a flop getting the right odds.

Meh. I disagree. When you're all short stacked and stuff position doesnt matter because only 1 or 2 bets can get in, deeper the stacks the more you can lean with your position and put a ton of pressure on opponents.

Position is one of the most important factors when playing a hand of poker. In a tournament, in a cash game, anywhere. It cannot be overrated. Being OOP is a huge disadvatage in almost every situation.


QJ is still marginal. You're bound to get into trouble more often (especially OOP) with a hand this easily dominated.


How do you know what the right odds are?

FWIW, limping QJ here from the SB is the best option available to the OP.

do u mean my check /raise on the flop?

cuz i had a plan for the rest of the hand. -** I bet out about the pot. he pushed, i called, he had Q,5.**


also, I sensed he was weak because the table had been playing fairly aggro from position if there was limpers. But thats not to say he cant have KQ, which i really thought strongly about.

although, Q,9 Q,10 Q,J were all very possible, as was a FD.

Villain must have fooled you with his aura of solidness that limp is pretty bad. I don't like his flop play either, he should either shove or fold IMO. Obv the turn plays itself for both of you.

what's FWIW mean?

Agreed, but don't you think you should have some guidelines versus opponents taht are new to the table/have little to no read on?

I'm all for mixing it up, but only when you first get a read on your opponent so you know how to mix it up.

For What It's Worth

Shove. Most likely he has a middle pair and was making sure your check-raise wasn't a FD.

If he's playing Q-weak suited and 2 paired, or was ballsy enough to smooth call a set, GH.

If we think he's got a middle pair, why do we want to shove?

Because we're ahead.

Duh.

If you had a naked FD with two broadways would you shove?

well to answer OP's orginial question i bet 40-50 here and call a shove. I actually dont mind a smaller bet in the realm of 40 just to make sure he stays around with hands that we are WA of hear like Q10 or 2nd pair. The only problem with a smaller bet is obv if he has a FD. But the pot is about 70 bucks i believe and betting 30 or 40 still isn't giving him the right odds to call this for 1 more card.

This is a joke right?

Mitch I'd rather lead the flop, I hate getting 3 bet in that spot. I dont want to get in an overbloated pot with QJ.

And obv we're getting it in on the turn. I bet 45-60

Obv.

You're encouraged to stick around strat and comment on threads.

Maybe, but then I'd be semi-bluffing since i couldn't beat any pairs. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

You're saying that you are often putting him on a hand that is drawing to 1 or 2 outs (depending on suits) and that you wanna shove. Why? So he can fold? If you think he has a middle pair, you want to entice a call, not run him out of the pot.

And this is exactly why you shove instead of value betting.

More on this point... if you only ever show up with a drawing hand on a shove here, then your semi-bluffs are more likely to be called. If I had a set here I'd shove. If I had 2 pair here I'd shove, because any decent bet commits him with a call, so make it look like you're trying to buy a pot. The value from calls you get will more than equal the times they have the strength to fold. Also you immediately shut down any draws when you push like this, which gains more value then slightly overpricing, then paying them the rest of their stack when they hit that draw.

I'm from a school of thinking where once you check-raise somebody, you have to immediately take full-control of the hand. Here that means pushing. Look suspiciously aggressive!

+1 - If I check raise, I'm repping the nuts, for the rest of the hand.

Anyone else think this is a bad beat post in disguise? I think everyone who plays a bit of poker realizes that once the flop is check raised, and the turn even helps your hand, your not gonna check.

How aggressive is this guy? Would he call or raise on the button with AQ or KQ?

I probably would lead the flop rather than check-raising and then check-call a reasonable bet on the turn

If you want to discuss and analyze hands, you have to look at it objectively. Act like you're actually playing the hand based on the info given and nothing else.

You can't look at the hand and think, "well if he's posting it here he must have lost the pot so I'm going to do _______ (even though I would really do _______ if I was the one in the hand."

To add my two cents...

I lead here for 50-60 and auto-call a shove.

You can look at it that way, but you can also read the results and know for sure if he won or lost...

I think his point was the hand plays itself. I don't know if RT lost it though, so I'm not sure if its a BB post.

If the guy had Q5, it's a bad beat post

It's only the turn, RT doesn't lose hands.

Suppose the hero is playing a flush draw with no showdown value at all.

I'd we want to leave a little back at this point to bluff the river if I'm going to fire the second barrel on the turn. So I prefer also to leave something for the river in this case as well. Obviously this deception is unnecessary if you play the heart draw differently.