what are your plays on all streets, mostly turn and river, i am fine with my flop check


PokerStars Game #24314089039: Tournament #136672762, $4.00+$0.40 Hold'em No Limit - Level III (25/50) - 2009/01/26 21:37:04 ET
Table '136672762 10' 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: mcfilhoo (3233 in chips)
Seat 2: brbincome (550 in chips)
Seat 3: Matakupat (1495 in chips)
Seat 4: I DeMoNiC I (1875 in chips)
Seat 5: se7enth_bok (1730 in chips)
Seat 6: MJNKEYHOLE (1515 in chips)
Seat 7: Jeffrado (1480 in chips)
Seat 8: phizlle (1022 in chips)
MJNKEYHOLE: posts small blind 25
Jeffrado: posts big blind 50
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to se7enth_bok [Kc Js]
phizlle: folds
mcfilhoo: calls 50
brbincome: folds
Matakupat: folds
I DeMoNiC I: folds
se7enth_bok: calls 50
MJNKEYHOLE: calls 25
Jeffrado: checks
*** FLOP *** [Kh Th 3c]
MJNKEYHOLE: checks
Jeffrado: checks
mcfilhoo: checks
se7enth_bok: checks
*** TURN *** [Kh Th 3c] [5c]
MJNKEYHOLE: checks
Jeffrado: bets 150
mcfilhoo: calls 150
se7enth_bok: calls 150
MJNKEYHOLE: folds
*** RIVER *** [Kh Th 3c 5c] [8c]
Jeffrado: checks
mcfilhoo: bets 200

why would u check the flop. also if u called 150 on the turn your gonna fold for 200 on the river? . i think by checking the flop you couldnt fig out where you were. now your lost imo. i guess id call the river and x my fingers. you played kj and hit ur k so i guess u hit ur hand?

Bet flop, if you're not betting flop, I'd probably just call down from here. There are a lot of drawing hands that you currently beat that could be betting the turn, but also a lot of hands that would call raises. We don't need to valuetown ourselves here. River.. I flip a coin and call if it's heads... but I don't really see what you're beating here. I call for the old adage, "$4.40's are donkaments."

Why are you fine with the flop check? You have position and a good hand.

I'm not a big fan of the button limp. If EP limped a big one we're gonna have no idea. You may have a good argument for the limp, but I don't understand what we're limping for if we're checking the flop behind.

IDK for sure, but I think it's pretty hard to flop two pair or Broadway on the button consistently.

so i guess where i misplayed it the most/worst was the flop then. any value in checking to raise on the turn but being scared when there's another caller in fron of you?

No, pre-flop looks the worst. I would think a raise or a fold would be the correct line for this hand. That way you take control of the hand then and have a better feel of where you're at after the flop. We have position so if we are going to play this hand I would lean towards raising pre-flop rather than limping in.

Plz convert hand

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $4.00+$0.40 Tournament, 25/50 Blinds (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

saw flop

UTG+1 (t3233)
MP1 (t550)
MP2 (t1495)
CO (t1875)
Hero (Button) (t1730)
SB (t1515)
BB (t1480)
UTG (t1022)

Hero's M: 23.07

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, J
1 fold, UTG+1 calls t50, 3 folds, Hero calls t50, SB calls t25, BB checks

Flop: (t200) K, 10, 3 (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG+1 checks, Hero checks

Turn: (t200) 5 (4 players)
SB checks, BB bets t150, UTG+1 calls t150, Hero calls t150, 1 fold

River: (t650) 8 (3 players)
BB checks, UTG+1 bets t200

Total pot: t650

Alright. Yeah, raise/fold here PF. Its a 4.40, people are limping with Ksooted and such. Bet the flop with your position. Call down from here. Laugh when Villain shows you T8

I think the flop check is worse than preflop. I'm almost never not raising here PF, but if I think I play decently postflop, KJ has enough value to play in position against generally poor players.

The flop check is awful....we want value off those who are going to call you with any piece of the board and probably most pocket pairs.

You have top pair, getting over 4-1, have underrepped your hand, and both the straight and flop flush draw missed.

If you aren't calling in this spot, you should definitely fold KJ preflop.

Yeah someone may have picked up clubs on the turn, but at 4-1 you can make a crying call.

I'm okay with the PF limp behind, but I think we need to bet this flop (~100-150). FD's are coming along no matter what, but we don't want any backdoor draws, weak pairs or Ace highs getting a free shot to outdraw us.

I don't hate the limp here PF, but you are limping hoping to hit top pair obv, why are we checking the flop.. I would bet 150-200 on the flop

QFT.

I don't agree with those who are strongly critiquing the smallball play here though. I'm cool with the limp, the flop check, etc.

I think you are confusing smallball with weak/passive.

You should always be exploiting edges and maximizing your profit on every hand. You should be taking control on button pre, and def be betting this flop 4 ways.

IFold08, you have alomst 2,000 posts on FCP, so I *know* you know that strat hands need to be converted.



Thank-you for the conversion, TrueAce.

Ifold08, I like your play on the following streets:

QFT. However you also have to be aware that the flop was checked, so a backdoor flush is just as likely here as missing the flop flush draw.

I'm looking back through the Negreanu smallball chapter (which is my most recent poker read, and the approach I'm experimenting with implementing lately; that doesn't mean I'm wedded to it for life or anything), and I'm not sure if I see anything definitive either way. On p. 349-350, Negreanu discusses "when to bet" a flop, and "when to check". An example he gives of "when to bet" is "good hands that need protection", specifically "if the flop comes J-8-4 and you have KJ, you should bet the flop a high percentage of the time". However, on the next page under "when to check", he cites an example (which I think is the one we discussed in another thread) where you have 99 and the board is 9hThJh. In this thread, we've got something in between as there are potential straight and flush draws, plus KJ making K as top pair is not as powerful, nor in as much need of protection, as making it with the J.

More generally, though, I'm working off the following:

"A lot of poker theorists are going to disagree with [the smallball approach], claiming that the best approach is to maximize your equity in each hand you play, but there are other considerations to think about...you should consider making what, for all intents and purposes, is the weaker play. This concept is hard for a lot of people to wrap their head around." (p. 424)

"Over the years, there has been so much emphasis on being aggressive that being passive is often seen as weak or poor play. Aggressive players may even mock a player who proceeds cautiously [but] it's only a matter of time before they will run into a trap that they can't escape...a smallball player doesn't ever want to be all-in at any point in the tournament--unless he has the absolute nuts, of course! Playing cautiously after the flop will help you avoid getting involved in large pots in marginal situations. Yes, you'll lose some extra pots when your opponents outdraw you, but you will more than make up for that with the money you save by avoiding playing big pots that you'll lose, and with the money you'll earn by letting your opponent bet the hand for you." (p. 373)

"As a result of this philosophy, you are going to end up allowing your opponent to see some free cards. It's not the cardinal sin that people often make it out to be. [I]n no-limit, it's essential for your survival and will help you avoid traps where your more aggressive opponents would surely go broke. [B]y playing smallball, you will take more lumps and lose more pots than when you were playing big bet poker [but] playing this way will allow you to stick around longer in the tournaments" (p. 421)

"It's usually an insult when someone pegs you as a calling station, but the rewards of that image should far outweigh the bruising to your ego." (p. 448)

QFT


TBH, I hate converting them and I find them more difficult to read. And the times that I have tried to convert HHs they haven't come out right.

Smallball is for when you play deepstacked poker. I understand possibly checking certain very coordinated flops, this isn't one of those flops. KJ could very much be ahead here, as AK will probably raise PF and would have already bet out the flop, KQ might have even raised PF. So KJ should be good here and a flop bet might've have taken this pot down already.

Yeah, I think people are trying to play this smallball approach when we're playing tournys where being 50bb's is deep.

We only have a little over 30bb's, we need to get value out of our hands, and in micro stake tournys (especially 4.40s) we need to bet and we need to bet a lot. Most opponents in these tournys suck at poker and are calling with much worse here.

I_fold, we have position, if your going to be playing KJo, there has to be a raise PF. Limping is usually weak in these tournys, get hands suck as Axsooted to fold/call for a higher price, those are hands that will usually be limping.

After the flop is checked around, why the hell aren't we putting out a bet?! Our hand is beating the limping range of the villains in this hand, GET VALUE! 2nd pair, FD's, SD's, worse K's are going to be calling you down, even if you do bet pot, SO BET IT!

On the turn, what is your thoughts for just flat calling? We can put in a raise and be able to take the pot down a high percentage of the time right there.

The river, as played, you have to call. Your getting a great price and again, you most likely ahead of villains range

With all that being said, throw your mouse against the wall when you realize that you let T6cc get there.

Wow, I find them MUCH easier to read when converted. In any event, the rules of this board are on the side of conversion. But I figure I just won't respond to a non-converted post. ::shrug::

But taking down the pot isn't the be-all, end-all. As one of the passages I quoted states, playing more passively encourages villains to make bluffs which you can pick off and earn more chips.

DN also has a section (I don't have time to look for it right now) where he talks about limping being more important when stacks are shortish, so you don't get pot committed.

No, but we need to accumulate chips as well. If we bet the flop we might get called and more than likely we're ahead. And we can also bet the turn and maybe get some more chips to increase our stack. We have a good hand, why not get value from it?

I really don't understand why people are wanting to check and play this hand passively. This is a 4.40 and people are calling with worse, more often the their calling with better. Get value. Get our chips in there. Don't slowplay in micro

Exactly. I've seen players call with Ace hi all the way down, they've called with middle or even bottom pair in these things.
Get value!!

if you could find this i'd be appreciative. I've heard DN say they exact opposite on All Strategy.

personally i'm not too against the pf limp

but you've got to bet the flop for all the reasons that have already been said.

Found it--and coincidentally, he uses KJ as an example, how about that:

"However, you still have ways to play a short stack that will allow you to use your post-flop skills. You'll just have to be a little more creative and add limping to your repertoire. Let's say you are the first one into the pot and you look down at KsJs. Your stack size is $100,000 with $3,000/$6,000 blinds and a $1,000 ante. A standard smallball raise would be $15,000, which is 15 percent of your stack and more than you'd like to invest for a hand that you'd have to fold to a raise. K-J is not a hand you want to play for all your chips preflop, but it could become a strong hand after the flop. By limping in, you increase your chances of getting to the flop. That is your goal as a shortstack--get to as many flops as possible." (pp. 320-321)

This actually is one of the parts of the chapter I have the most trouble swallowing; it's certainly counter to what other poker theorists I've read will say about shortstack situations (they would say that rather than get to as many flops as possible with a shortstack, you should be conserving your chips for big moves). Interesting that you say he said the opposite on All Strategy (what's that?).

He does say further down the page on p. 321 that you should "cut out limping from your portfolio" when your stack falls below "ten big bets". But apparently he's a big fan of limping when it is higher than that but not hugely higher (when deepstacked, he seems to favour a 2.5xBB raise to enter a pot).

All Strategy is podcast DN does with Justin Bonomo and Scott Huff on Pokerroad.com.

I'll dig through that a little. It just seems that you are way too short to be limping pf.

I still think that you should be betting that flop.

I'm not set in stone against the idea.

Unless you are playing a true high-level deepstack tourney, or you flop a monster with little chance at getting outdrawn, you typically shouldn't slowplay a decent made hand. Slowplaying top pair on a multiway flop in a fast tournament is a great way to get sucked out on, and when it happens, it's usually your own fault if you gave those gutshots and backdoor draws a cheap opportunity to get there. Bet the flops you hit. Maybe you fold everybody, but you assure yourself of a pot rather than improve the chances that you lose it.

a few things:

i agree with gallo about the hand conversions

i dont dislike my limp with the KJ on the button

my check on the flop was awful

i only flatted on the turn because i specifically put the caller ahead of me on a flush draw

and i think where i messed up the most this hand was that i was just running bad, and really down about my game, so i played the hand not to lose it instead of trying to win the hand. i had it drilled in my brain that i would lose every pot that i played.

thanks to everyone who's posted here