Hello everybody. Hope you're having a nice day at work or wherever you're reading this from. I'd like some feedback on a hand that occurred at a 2/5 NL table at the Borgata. My table was a mix of 3 good players, myself, 2 weak players, and a very loose player (3 empty/absent). I had only been at the table for an hour or so, but felt comfortable with my assessment of my opposition. The table had been fairly tight, with a $30 pf raise usually taking the blinds and any limpers down without a fight. I had a few unlucky hands where I had shown down a strong second best hand, which dwindled my stack to about $200. I'll do my best to explain my observations of the opponents involved in the hand where i got burned...

sb: tight
bb: loose, very luck oriented player
utg: ME, shown several very good second best hands, hadn't raised a pot the entire session
2nd: weak, calling station if he hit the board, always folded to a pf raise during my time at the table
5th: weak, raises in position constantly, just doubled up from $200 to $400 the previous hand
button: solid player, called player 5's raises several times and took the pot on the flop or turn

so the action is as follows...

utg: me, i limp with 67H
2nd: limps
5th: raises to $30
button: calls
sb: folds
bb: calls

that makes $99 in the pot as the action comes back to me... i move all in for $200
2nd calls
5th calls
button folds
bb calls

WHAT?!?! that was unexpected to say the least. My evaluation of their hands was spot on... i just don't understand why they behaved as they did.
2nd: As5s
5th: AdQs
bb: 9d10s

the board comes down Ah9h9s 2s 10d and the BB wins with a full house.

Again, i really thought what i was doing had an extremely good chance of increasing my stack by 50% with next to no risk but the entire table seemed to go crazy! Caro's "loose wiring" theory states that players don't know what they will do with their hands the majority of the time because there are not that many hands that are truly strong or truly weak. He says they act on a whim when the action comes to them. Any comments would be appreciated... was my thought process off in some way? or did i just run into a table gone crazy and some really bad luck?

thanks,

phil

you're not playing a tournament. Doing shit like that in cash games is a donkey play.

Yeah. That's not far off.

What happened here was that you made the pot big on an excrutiatingly slow table and it drew action from marginal hands. It happens. The good news is that you can rebuy and stimulate action again, only now at the flop and with decent holdings.

Blech. You're looking to pin this hand on the play of the rest of the table when you're a short stack limp-shoving UTG with a drawing hand. Bad play from early position and in a weird way be thankful you didn't hit to re-enforce your poor thinking in this hand. SHort-handed, suited connectors are for a cheap price in late position.

FYP

sorry but i disagree with you guys big time. my cards aren't the point and i said that to begin with. are you trying to tell me that on a table like that i should expect to be called for $170 limp reraise all in by A5s, AQo, and 910o? i knew what i was up against and made a play i'm surprised didn't work. consider the situation not the outcome... hopefully somebody out there can play beyond their cards and can give me a better opinion here. i'd like to know if anybody has had a similar situation in which players go haywire for no apparent reason. to me calling with anything less than KK is absurd.

If you think its a good play why post it?

You post here to get other opinions and assessments on your play. The general consensus is that this is a bad play. I agree with them. First of all, you're telling us about the players, but we need to know about hand ranges here. What is the range for player 1s opening raise? Does it matter to him that you limped UTG? What are the other players likely calling with?

You should not play shortstacked at the table. If you are going to play shortstacked, you should not be playing cards like suited connectors UTG because you will not get the right implied odds.

Also, since you're short, people will view you as desperate and will likely call with a wider range. Yeah the range that called you here is pretty comical, but how do you know none of them had AA, or TT or AK or anything? I think you just saw some money in the pot and shoved in becuase you felt there was a decent chance it might work, but you need to have specific reads on people's hand ranges when you make a move like this to ensure that it works.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

EDIT: Alternatively, read what Acid said above.

FYP

i was looking for anybody out there with a similar scenario... opponents behaving in a way they hadn't for over an hour without explanation. despite the math not being there and the assumption that even the simplest of minds should be putting me on a monster based on my image and previous action. the other 2 decent players at the table were as shocked as i was at the action that developed and they couldn't offer an explanation. i only know the comments when the cards were revealed from the rest of the table were "i thought you had aces" and "i can't believe they called you with those hands". even though the play failed to win the pot immediately, i was still going to win the pot against those holdings my fair share of the time, 25%. i understand why some may disagree with my play, its a personal preference... but based on the situation i think it was well thought out and i don't think anybody can deny that its a +EV play. i just wish i had read the forum guidelines (it's been a while since i've posted) beforehand and didn't list my hand or theirs... i think the responses would have been much different if i had written i held AA

lol don't bluff calling station morons at live 2/5.

I don't think it's a +EV play.

You're risking $195 to win $99 and when you're called, most of the time it's by a bigger pair and you're gonna be a 4-1 dog. This is NOT +EV.

lol

While I don't mind terribly representing a bigger hand than you have while trying to pick up a lot of dead money, you can't be arguing that your play is correct in this situation because you clearly misread your opponents' ability to fold marginal hands.

Making this play is entirely read-based, so it's going to be hard for anyone on here to say it was a good play or not in a vacuum. However, seeing that you were called by A5 and T9, it was obviously not a good play.

Acid,

you do write excellent posts, i enjoy reading them. thanks for the most constructive one so far. you are correct that i should have bought in again. as i said in my first post, the original raiser raises in late position with a wide variety and usually conceded to the player to his left who called him frequently in position when he missed the flop. because of that i was not overly worried about the original raiser, or the caller on the button because he was a good player and likely would have reraised to isolate if he held a monster. the big blind was extremely loose and would call a standard pf raise with just about anything (j7o, 910o, A2, etc). the player to my left limp folded every time there was a pf raise so he also was not on my radar as a threat. based on the fact that the original raiser's low standards and the action that followed it, i know if the original raiser doesn't have a monster nobody does. also i represented a monster by making a play a shorter than average stack would commonly make with AA. i would expect the good player on the button to fold a decent hand like 8s-js or AQ in the face of my apparent strength. when the cards were revealed i found out my read for each opponent was spot on.

NO YOU HAVE A LOOSE WIRE!!!

You can list your hand, just don't list the results (including the villain's hand(s))

Just becuase the people who live in this forum are gonna fold A5s and T9 doesn't mean that the morons at your table will. The expression "pearls before swine" comes to mind. Don't do fancy stuff for people who just don't care and then get angry/upset when they call with garbage.

I fancy myself a decent player (insert laugher from forum regulars) and I'd probably call you fairly quickly with a hand like JJ or AK and I might even call with AQ (probably not) depending on how I felt at the table. Your raise is large and it discourages action. This isn't a tournament situation where it benefits you to take down the blinds to increase your stack. I feel that if you really had a hand like AA/KK you'd raise half of your stack and shove any flop. I'd weight your range much more heavily towards hands like 88-QQ and AK and therefore I think I'd be in good shape calling with high middle pairs like JJ and TT and stuff.

The fact is that this is a terrible play for the reasons that Naismith stated.

You suck at $1.25 SNGs.

And at your blog challenge.

Well yes of course it would have been because you would have had AA and it would have been +EV for that even though it would have ultimately lost. blah blah blah what everyone else has said so far...NOT an +EV play

lol of course it would be different with AA. We want callers.

bahahah this thread is a trainwreck.

The blog challenge died like 3 days after I started it. I can play super low limits online, but nothing lower than 2/5 in person.

As for sucking at $1.25 SNGs, thanks for being results oriented. I'm fine at getting my money in as a 2-1, 3-1, 4-1 favorite, I just suck at making the odds hold up.

I think the responses would've been more along the lines of, "Why push? Do you know that they're calling stations? If not, make it 100 for value and push any flop."

Unless you would've responded that you knew they'd call with AQ, A5 and T9, in which case we'd agree that overbet-pushing was a fantastic play for AA, but we wouldn't recommend doing it if you held, say, suited connectors.

I don't even think you tried to refute either point.

Hey, when you're right you're right. I just needed to clarify a few things.

Nice value bet?



The limp UTG with a suited connector playing short is a mistake. You didn't know this situation was going to develop. A good opportunity to squeeze did in fact materialize, but unfortunately they weren't afraid. This could be because of their perception of you, but I suspect it's just the size of your stack.

In games less than 2/5, blowing up and super bluffing preflop is almost never +ev. People are just too stupid to play correctly, especially in Casinos. I understand why you did it, but you really have to have a strong read. I really hope you rebought and then used that insane image you just picked up to your advantage.




Wrong. Calling you with anything less than AQ or about 66 is absurd, but it's going to happen - especially against stations in casinos. In order to pull off these plays you either have to have a super strong read, or be up against non stations. People don't care what you've shown down, they care about their own hands. You should be extremely happy with the hands that they called you with and that you weren't drawing dead before the river. It could, and should have ended up much worse. Hell, you even had the favorite going into the flop - you should have been ecstatic.



*Snicker*

Thanks David & Nobbir

I guess most people think i'm an idiot and can't play after this post... but thank you guys for bringing up points to support my case. I remembered that the original raiser had AA twice during my time at the table, the first time he made it $25 and lost to J7o, the second time he made it $65 and proudly took down the blinds. based on that i knew he didn't have a big pair, the competent player calling from the button knew it was going to be a multiway pot for $30 pf so his flat call also indicated he didn't have a big pair or even a hand as good as AQ. The BB was loose and could have held anything, but he also was not so stupid as to go into a multiway pot without reraising pf. against that range my 67H fared quite well, and as the hand turned out i was getting the right price for the gamble. When i said doing what i did i believed was +EV it was because of my read on the table. i believed i was going to take it down without a fight at least 75% of the time, and if called it was by a lone decent ace and due to the dead money i would be getting a good price for the race. another factor i failed to include initially were stack sizes. at a capped 2/5 game i'm not advocating sitting with $200, but the stacks who called me were $600, $400, and $750 respectively. my stack represented between 1/4 in the worst case to 1/2 in the best. if they were all sitting on 2G i could understand throwing away a couple hundred on A5 and 910o from crappy players... but not a third of their stacks. i appreciate the input from everyone even those who think i'm a donkey! hopefully i'll have another hand for your amusement sometime soon.

phil

When it came back to you there were 4 players, by your descriptions 2 weak, 1 loose and 1 solid. Your push acheived exactly what it should have - it got the solid players to fold.

You got called by a weak calling station with a suited Ace (standard), another weaky with AQ (standard) and a gambler getting > 3-1 with a drawing hand (standard).

Nobody played out of character there. Don't expect bad players to make good folds. You read the players and didn't adjust your game.

This attitude isn't going to work here, really. We're not all judgmental pricks that are going to judge you based on one hand. However, one of the things that people really take exception to is the disguised brag post. By that, I mean, you didn't really come here looking for advice on your hand. You came here looking for us to say, "Wow, great read! I can't believe they called with such crappy hands!" That isn't going to work in terms of learning how to improve or making this forum a valuable educational tool for NL players. Unless you go to the Bored at Work thread, where you can do whatever you want.

As to your point about your read, you need to understand that there are different types of reads. Your read that they held mediocre holdings was accurate and having that ability is an important part of poker and one you should be glad you've developed. Just as important is accurately reading the players playing those hands. Your read in that regard was horribly off. It's pointless to go, "Oh, that guy obviously has a weak ace" if you don't know how he'll respond to the move you make. Knowing he has a weak ace is great, pushing when he'll call with it is not great.

Enjoy your stay here, bro. It's a good environment.

i wasn't trying to brag Jay. I've learned a lot from a few of the responses. the concept of not throwing "pearls before swine" in a 2/5 game made a lot of sense... really no point to try to fool those people who will pay you everytime anyway. I routinely make the mistake of labeling a player as bad, and then expecting them to understand what i'm representing. based on the responses i've gotten, it seems to be a major leak in my game and i'm going to work to correct it, especially playing such low stakes. You bring up a very good point that knowing what my opponents have is not enough if i can't beat those cards. I can't continue to throw chips around because i would fold if faced with a similar bet and expect it to work against opponents who only know their two cards. Again if any of my posts seemed arrogant or out of line i appologize, i'm looking forward to discussing many more hands in the future here.

thanks,

phil