3/6 ring

five limpers, i complete in SB with 7 7 , maniac bb raises, all except one call.

(13 sb, 6 players) Q 7 2

i check (y'know why), bb checks (!!!), checks to button, who bets (!!!), i am forced to flat-call (!!!), all but one call.

at this point, i know this is almost identical to the SSHE 2-2 hand, so i know to lead any turn card.

(9 bb, 5 players) 3

i bet, bb raises (!!!), everyone folds to me (!!!), i three-bet, bb caps, i call.

(17 bb, 2 players) A

i check, bb bets, i raise, bb three-bets, i cap, bb calls.


i lose to bb's 5 4 .

not a bad beat post, i swear! i just thought the flop and turn action were hilarious because they were almost right out of the hand quizzes where you have 2-2 in the small blind and you intend to checkraise a maniac on your left on a flop of K72 (or something super ragged like this flop), but it gets checked to the button who bets. so now you must lead the turn, but NOW the maniac bb raises and makes everyone pay two cold, which sucks.

i wanted to beat the shit out of bb for all the value he lost me versus the whole field in addition to his damn suckout.

aseem

Not saying it was wrong, and I'm probably being results-oriented here, but is check-raising and capping the river really correct here?

You gotta love a player who's willing to cap a wrong-suited double-gutter HU on the turn. Except when he hits, of course.

checkraising usually is. if i bet, villian can often slow down and just call if he is worried about my hand. also, he would just fold if he was capping with a draw (which he was) but missed (which he didn't). by checking, i let him bet all the hands which he would have just called with (so i gain two bets instead of one), and also let him bluff if he missed a draw.

capping is pretty damn correct against almost any opponent. once you checkraise and he three-bets, you have to have the best hand only 50% of the time to make capping correct. i have a damn freaking strong hand, especially given the turn action. to not cap, *especially* against a maniac, is waaay weak/tight (given a lack of an insanely exceptional read, of course).

aseem

standard play, hilarious opponent.
i will be signing up for pacific soon.

p.s. aseem - check your PSO stuff, i signed up for a few sites, though i haven't completed any (except a frequent flopper one) so you should have some bonuses. make sure they're getting credited.

thanks buddy. i don't get any credit until you actually finish your promotions. good luck.

aseem

i'm surprised no one has brought up my horrendous seat selection.

after this hand, i realized that all of this was easily avoidable if i had just followed good seat selection and not put myself on the direct right of a maniac!!

it is a fact that, on average, your biggest losses are to the two seats on your immediate left, and your biggest profits are from the two seats on your immediate right.

why let a maniac get some of my money (or why let him lose less to me) because he's to my left?

needless to say, i got up after this hand and got on the waitlist and soon got a better seat.

aseem