Mid-limit hands w/Bob Morgan

Bob Morgan is more conspicuous than Spiderman, with cooler eyewear. He's the kind of player who does so many confusing things that he reduces me to nuts and bolts, hopefully more nuts.


I decided in the car that if I had position on Morgan and I started with a showdown hand, any ace or pair, there would indeed be a showdown. I get A-x suited and open-raise. All fold to Bob in the SB. He just calls. He was fidgety about it. But I didn't care about any of that, as I had a prescribed pattern in mind.


The big blind folded. It's headsup.


The flop comes all small with a pair. Bob checks, I bet, Bob check-raises. Already, I was done thinking. I went into auto-call-every-street, and called his flop raise.


The turn is an ace. Bob bets. I call.


The river is another ace. I've got the nut full house, beatable only by quads. We went four bets on the river and Bob showed KK.


Next tango started off just the same. I open-raised, Bob played out of the blind, and we were headup. The flop came 10-8-8. Bob checked the flop. I bet. Bob check-raised. This time I had squat, so I folded. Bob showed 8-5 for flopped trips.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!


Tommy

Tommy, I think you are one of, if not the most respected posters here. And that respect is well deserved.


I say this because of your comment about the first hand.


In one of the first posts I made on this site, in the small stakes forum, I wrote about a pocket pair hand I played. I mentioned that based on the players in the hand and my position that I was going to wait till the turn to pounce if I was lucky enough to flop a set. I did, and I did. Trouble was, someone else had the same plan with a bigger set.


Anyway, I got torn to pieces by a couple of posters for deciding how to play the hand before the flop. I felt like an idiot. I feel better now after reading your thoughts.


So, where can I get some of this credibility stuff that you've got so much of?

Sounds like Bob Morgan was prepared to own you except for the suckout. He had top notch holding in both battles. Sounds like a pretty good strategy against your take it to the showdown philosophy.


In the first hand you suckout on a hand you would have paid off with. And the second hand, you happened to have squat in a hand you would have paid off.


Seems like he should be saying BWAHAHAHA.

I ran a search in Small Stakes and didn't find the post to which you refer. I did try and do my homework though.


That said, I am going to take a stab at the differences between your post and Tommy's.


Tommy's plan involved a very specific situation. Namely, headsup play vs. a tricky overaggressive opponent. Simply calling to the river with any hand that has intrinsic showdown value is a very viable plan against such an opponent.


Your hand, however, sounds like a much different situation. You are talking about a multiway situation where you need to worry not only about the players, but the texture of the flop is going to have huge impact on the correct way to play the hand. What if your set came on a monotone flop, or one with a 3-straight, or you had 44 on a A94r flop? These are all wildly different scenarios and the action multiway can lead to completely different courses of action. There are simply too many variables in a multiway hand to simply have an unalterable gameplan preflop.


That said, thinking ahead is a critical part to poker success. Just be willing to change on the fly, and be aware of the differences between headsup and multiway play.


As for respect....never respect someone so much that you aren't willing to question their actions or reasoning. This forum is successful in large part because even the posters we respect get put to the test. How do you get it? Damned if I know. I'm not too worried about the whole respect thing. As long as I don't look like a jackass, I'm happy! /images/smile.gif

I obviously didn't give a full description of the hand. I went into it more in the original post. I’m not surprised you didn’t find it. It was quite a while ago, and I may well have posted it under a different name. I don’t really remember.


Anyway, I was first to act in the hand, and decided that if I flopped a set on a safe board I was going to check and look for a check raise on the turn. Had the flop been 3 of a suit or some other scary situation I would have changed the plan. So basically, I agree with everything you said about the hands.


That said, I didn't mean to imply that respected posters shouldn't be or aren't questioned. It's just the way they are questioned. I've got no problem with people disagreeing with me here. As a matter of fact, it's a good thing. That helps me learn more and improve my game. If everyone just said, “I agree” with everything I wrote I’d never learn anything. That would be no good, cause I have a lot to learn.


My point is basically that the way in which people disagree is important. The more respected posters like Tommy, and yes, you get much more civil and helpful disagreement than the new or unknown posters like myself.


I guess that's only natural though.

i think tommy is aware that he sucked out and then lucked out. (although any suckout is a luck-out i guess). evryone can plainly see that. the bwahaha stuff seemed to be their to punctuate the comical flavor of the post.


"the best laid plans are sometimes crap" wouldve been a nice alternate subject heading.


lighten up JV.

I am at a loss to explain or understand Bob's river play in the first hand. This looks like a clear check and call or bet and fold to a raise (or call one against a very tricky player).


Yes, Bob had Tommy trapped, but on the turn, the tables are turned and it should be clear that now the KK is very likely being trapped by an ace - there's no reason for an ace, especially a bad one, to raise the turn.


Dan Z.

On the first hand, with my A-x against Bob's KK, yeah, of course I was lucky to hit one ace, and especially lucky to get lots of action after hitting the second ace.


On the second hand, I don't think it's fair to say I was simply lucky to come up with a fold holding two overcards in a nearly-auto call situation.


But just to be clear, the Bwahahah was meant only in fun. Bob and I are good friends.


Tommy

"So, where can I get some of this credibility stuff that you've got so much of?"


Hey, it's a mystery to me as well. The only thing I think I do differently than most is that I see all organisms as magnificently successful, having come from a billions-of-years progeny who all lived to reproduce successful reproducers. That's no small matter. In that light, it's damn near impossible to judge harshly. Perhaps this comes across as wisdom. Heck, I dunno.


Tommy

Why would I lighten up? I don't think I am being harsh because I choose not to sugarcoat my posts.


It seemed to me that Tommy believed his plan worked. I personally think Bob owned him, not the reverse. I feel if Tommy would have hand ace high in the second situation he would have paid off.


I consider the fact that you didn't have ace high or a hand to payoff with random.

"The only thing I think I do differently than most is that I see all organisms as magnificently successful, having come from a billions-of-years progeny who all lived to reproduce successful reproducers. That's no small matter. In that light, it's damn near impossible to judge harshly. Perhaps this comes across as wisdom. Heck, I dunno."


This might seem, to most posters, as pot-induced mumbo-jumbo, but I can tell you it's, in my judgment, 100% the truth. Tommy is a true fan/analyst/interpretor extraordinaire of Ricahrd Dawkins, Oxford's resident zoologist/philosopher/author who makes an excellent case for what Tommy professes above. This has led to an attitude in Tommy that treats all people with respect and a zest for life that IS wisdom, I do know, never mind his sheepish "I dunno." We all say, with varying degrees of seriousness, that poker is life. Tommy knows more about this subject than anyone on the planet, including everyone. I still think he should not worry about fruit plates as much as he does, but that's a minor river quibble compared to the big picture of the ocean he presents so beautifully.


It will probably be a long time before I sit at a poker table again, but Tommy's poker/life commentaries are better than any card game anyway.

I sure as heck haven't, but Tommy did mention that his strategy was specifically for him. I am just another LL lurker here, but making general statements about a play designed for a specific player seems a little quick. I also believe that posts should not be sugarcoated, but they should take into account all of the information provided.

I may have. I don't know what he looks like so I am not sure. But I have put some time in to both the 30-60 and 15-30 in Vegas.


Anyway, his prescribed strategy was outfoxed by Bob Morgan. Tommy strategy, call down with any legitimate holding............Bob's strategy - get a very strong hand against Tommy.