Here's a hand I saw played out at the 1/2 NLHE tables at a casino in Vancouver. The hero is an opponent I have never met before. He has been playing at my table for close to three hours, and I have pegged him as weak/tight.

Relevant Stacks
SB (Villian A) ~$200
BB (hero) ~$200
Button (Villian $600

Reads:
SB is a solid player with good reads, but plays a little too passive to be profitable. Has not played many hands.
Button is LAG, seeing many flops -- just built up a huge stack when he hit a set of nines against two other all-ins (QQ and 66).
Hero is Tight/passive.

Hero dealt AQ-offsuit

Pre-flop:
5 callers (including button), SB calls, Hero (BB) checks

Flop: 2 6 Q (rainbow) (Pot = $14)
SB checks Hero bets $5, Hero calls, Button calls.

Turn: 3 (completing the rainbow) (Pot = $74)
SB bets $20, Button calls $20.

River: K (Pot = $134)
SB checks, Hero checks, Button bets all-in

Discussion: I like the hero's initial pre-flop check and I like his initial flop bet, but I feel he butchers the hand after this point. My question to you is:
1) How could the hero have played the hand differently
2) Based on how the Hero did play the hand, should he call the river bet?
3) What did the Button and SB have?


Cheers,

Merby

(edited to correct the size of the bets on the flop)

I'm always confused with the min raises. it either signals extreme strength, extreme weakness or a draw. There seemed to be no draws out there so I figure it to be extreme strength. I guess the hero should have maybe just folded to the min raise.

I put the SB on q 6 or q 2 for 2 pair and the button to have Q K.

Thanks for pointing this out... I actually mistyped the bet-size and raise-size on the flop:

The actual flop play was:
SB checks, BB bets $5, ..., SB raises $15 to $20-to-go...

I will edit the original post ...

I should add that part of my thought that this hand was misplayed by the BB was the initial SMALL flop bet, after which time he went into check-call mode.

Cheers,

Merby

With the button smoothcalling a bet and a raise in the flop AND the turn, i'm prone to leave this hand at the turn or river. I'm sure he hit his set of 6's and slowplaying it on a harmless board. Also, SB seems to have two pair with all the aggression going on.

Fold Turn/River. Any other opinions?

I would put one more raise in on the flop, prob to 60$. If there is another re raise EASY fold, and a decent chance I can take it down here. If I am flat called I have to put the opponent on kq/jq. He would have to assume, if he had a very large hand like a set, that he could push and easily get a call. A similar hand(to some extent) happened to me playing 1/2 NL at SOaring Eagle in Mt. Pleasent, MI:

Im in the BB with A9 and check preflop, villian's position is limped in MP. Good player who will is pretty aggresive and willing to gamble with draws. My image is very loose as I have shown 3 bluffs in last half hour and have not shown a legit hand in well over an hour. I have about 550$, he has about the same. Both relatively big stacks as this is a 100 max table.

Flop is A 10 5 with two clubs

Pot is about 15$, I bet 9$, he raises to 25$. Knowing that he knows I showed a couple bluffs in similar situation it was hard for me to say he has me beat. Knowing he is a good aggresive player, Aj, aq, or ak is unlikely because of his limp. Only hands that scare me are a10, a5, or 55. He would have raised preflop with 1010. I figure his most likely hand is something like is a flush draw with some type of straight draw. However, he coul dhave a big hand.

I decide to put in 75$, raising him 50.

He flat calls-I was dissapointed with him. I was almost hoping he would raise me here so I could get out. I had to put him on a flush draw when he flat called.

Turn was Qc, completeting the flush draw. i checked and he surprising checked behind me. If he bets anything here I am done witht he hand. River was a brick and he checked it down again...showing A8.

How did I play this hand, any info. is greatly appreciated!!1

A very good assement -- I agree completely. The hero has not properly defined his hand and hence has not properly defined his opponents' hands. I really think he should have reraised the check-raise to around $60: he gets more info on his opponents' hands and better defines his hand.

This is win-win: any further aggression guaretees he is beat, but the check-raiser may not be able to beat AQ (because the hero's initial bet could have just been a probe bet, so the SB could easily check-raise with JT, JQ, JK, or possibly even TT or 99). In this way, the hero is likely to take the pot down here if he has the best hand, and will not lose any more money if he doesn't have the best hand. Playing the hand this way, if the hand lasts past the flop, the hero doesn't lose any more money, but the hand will probably end right here unless there is a *monster under the bed*, so to speak (a set or two pair).

I agree that as the hand played out, the hero cannot call the river bet.




I like your play here. Your third raise on the flop allowed this to get checked down. You cannot call if he bets on the turn or river, but because of the flop play, he really cannot bet the turn or river unless he has you beat (or makes a desperate long-shot bluff, because it looks to him like you will probably call.)

I think it works here because you were able to conclude that the reasonable hands that beat you probably weren't out there (i.e. AK/AQ/ or AJ) Thus he is only going to play back at you with A5/AT/55, and will probably fold a draw. Therefore you get value when the weak aces call you.

I am actually surprised he called you here. I would have expected A8 to fold here. Nevertheless, enjoy the gift.

Cheers,

Merby


I will post the results of the original hand after a couple more responses...

I think given the SB's passivity of late, I would fold to the check raise. He's got the goods, if he doesn't, good for him, I'm not taking a chance with a normally passive player like that. If he was a maniac or an aggressive player, I would rereaise like you said. I wouldn't want commit even more chips to the pot to see if my top pair is good. The hero would commit more than 30% of his stack to find out if he is good or not and he prob isn't and he also has to worry about the button.

The SB definitely has us beat with a weak 2 pair. The button may be slow playing a set or has KQ.

Hero cannot call the 100 dollar bet with the way he played the hand.

The SB actually played the hand quite well -- except, he didn't bet a proper amount on the turn (nobody who called $20 on the flop will now fold to $20 on the turn when the pot is sweeter).

Here's the results: BB made the call and the button turned over 45-offsuit for the nuts.


SB: SB mucked his hand so I don't know what he had. He claimed to have folded KQ. This hand seems suspicious given the play on the river.

The river would have given him two pair, so if he truly had two pair, that's a *monster* laydown (considering the river was his "gin" card). I will give this player credit, he certainly is good enough to make this tough laydown, but the way he played this hand lends me to believe he probably had a smaller Q like QJ or TQ.

If he actually had KQ -- cudos to him for making the correct laydown (perhaps he picked up a tell and was knew even top two was no good... or maybve he was just feeling pessimistic because all his *big* hands weren't holding up lately... we'll never know). I think that without him picking up a read, his river play is atrocious: check-folding when rivering top two.


Button: Don't forget that the button was LAG. He had made a speculative call pre-flop with 45-offsuit. He had position, and there were already several limpers, so the pre-flop call is certainly justifiable. I don't like the call of the initial $5 bet: he only has a gutshot straight draw (4 outs) and is being asked to call $5 into a $22 pot (after his call). He is getting nowhere near the pot odds to justify this call.

Although both SB and BB have deep enough stacks to justify the implied odds, nobody has been very aggressive about the pot so far, so it seems unlikely that the button will get payed off if he hits his straight.

I actually prefer his call of the SB check-raise to $15. Granted he is still getting nowhere near the pot odds, but now both opponents in the hand have bet/raised the flop, so both seem to like this flop. It therefore seems far more likely that he will get payed off if he hits a 3 for the straight. Add on to that the fact that he is last to act, thus his call closes the betting round.

I suspect his LAG style, together with the *rush* of just winning the huge pot and busting two opponents put him in the right mindset to make the initial speculative call on the flop (after all, here was another chance to bust two more opponents...)


BB: The *hero* was too weak a player to fold here on the river. He made the call for all his chips, only to run into the nuts. He had several oppertunities to protect his hand, and get away when it was clear he was beat, but failed to act at any of these times. The way he played the hand, it was certainly *possible* he still had the best hand on the river --his passive play prevented him from judging the strength of the opponents' hands.

If he had reraised to $60 on the flop, the button would have folded his gutshot straight draw. The SB may have still called, and if he did in fact have KQ, would have won the hand, but in this case, the BB probably would have figured any caller had to have AQ, KQ or two pair or a set. Since by the river, he can only tie AQ, and every other likely hand beats him, it is an easy fold to any river bet. He therefore wouldn't have gone broke here. Besides, if the SB actually had QJ or QT (and called the $60 bet on the flop) then the BB wins a nice pot.

Cheers,

Merby

I have Donk question.. with so many players ahead of you limping is there any reason why u didn't put in a healthy
$20 raise pre-flop? sitting on the BB perch with a very decent hand
Just picking up the weak pot was an option..

I doubt it seriously you would have be faced with you dilliuma

A good question -- the "hero" in this case plays very weak/tight, so he would not be "capable" of raising AQ-offsuit here.

If I were to put myself in the BB's position-- I don't consider myself to be a very passive player-- I still would check my option around half the time in this situation.

The other half of the time in this situation, I will put in an oversized pre-flop raise from the BB trying to pick up the pot, or at least narrow it down to one or maybe two opponents (much better for my AQ).

I still like the idea of taking the free flop and re-evaluating my hand after seeing the flop. For one thing, since you are the BB in an unraised pot, your opponents must give you credit for any type of hand, so when you bet on a flop of Q62, your opponents have to take in the possibility that you have hands like Q2, 62, 22, Q6 etc. as well as the usual holdings (AQ, KQ, JQ, KK, etc.) This will tend to keep your opposition a little off-balance.

On the other hand, when you raise out of the BB (especially after there are so many limpers in the pot), most opponents will give you credit for a premium hand: AA, KK, AK, and possibly QQ. Thus, although they are mre likely to fold decent hands, any time they stick around after the flop, they are likely to have a hand that beats these premium hands, or a strong draw to a hand that will win.

Nevertheless, I generally don't like raising drawing hands (like AQ) out of the BB in a multiway (unraised) pot. Why not check your option and re-evaluate after the flop?

Cheers,

Merby

Preflop not bad
Post Flop Fold to the Raise To a Solid Player

Based on How you Played it Yes you call the river bet

some has 66 I have to believe

While I don't disagree with that assessment, I also know the mindset of many players is that once they've called the initial bet, they will call the raise. Especially if the first person to act calls. To combat this, you really have to raise extra big. Which I don't like, out of position, with a hand that you really need to hit to win against a couple of callers.

I as well advocate calling more often than raising, even with AK in the blinds. (and this is a marked difference than my play early in my career)

(Unless my image is tight enough that I think I have a legitimate shot at taking the pot right there with a raise)

Mark

Well, being in the blinds you have the benefit of being able to represent an overpair, TPTK, any junk 2 pair, any set, a total bluff--anything.

Honestly, though, I probably pop it again on the flop unless you think someone's got a set. Take it to 50 or 60 and see what happens.

The turn is a relative blank--I don't see anyone overplaying Q3, 53, etc. It's all relative though--it's about as safe a card as you can get. I don't mind leading or raising. It's kinda an optimal situation for you really with your hand disguised as well as it is.

We've probably comitted ourself to showdown by betting/calling the turn, though. Just a thought.

I'm either folding to the check/raise on the flop or re-raising the check/raise--and slowing down if I get called.