Go one more? Borgata $10-$20 hand

[Mike Gallo]

I had the following hand at a $10-$20 game at the Borgata. I played this hand against someone I viewed at the time as a thinking opponent.

I limped UTG + 1 with 44. Two players called the button (thinking opponent) raised the blinds folded everyone else called.

Flop A 4 3

I bet one player folded the button raised. I called the next player called. Three of us to the turn.

Turn A 4 3 J

I checked the next player checked the button bet, I raised both called.

River

A 3 4 J A

I led out. The next player called the button raised. I reraised the next player mucked and the button reraised. Who goes one more bet here? Does it even matter one way or another.

[mmcd]

fold.

[Mike Gallo]

fold.

You would have folded in that spot /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[etizzle]

I say go one more, he probably has AK. But if he makes it 6 bets I think he has AJ every time.

[Mike Gallo]

What if he has JJ?

[Steve Giufre]

Hey Mike,

If he respects you then I would just call because he should be considering the fact that you might have 33 or 44 here. You said he was a thinking player, is he overaggresive? I think this one is too close to really say one way or another, but I would wimp out and just call. I would cut my testicles off before I folded.

[mmcd]

If this is a B+M 10/20 game against a good thinking opponent, he has AJ period. You checkraised the turn and led-3-bet the A on the river. What do you think he puts you on at this point? Even if he did play AK this way, I doubt he 4-bets you on the river with it. Your river 3-bet virtually announces you have 33/44/A3/A4/AJ. If this was a bad player than it would be a different story. If your not really confident in your assesment of this player, then of course call the 4-bet, but I would never 5 bet in this situation unless I was up against a very poor or very maniacal player.

Online I always call (5-betting is moot) and in some bigger live games I may 5-bet and probably call unless the player is real weak tight, but in a 10/20 game against a decent player, your beat here every time.


I remember a relevant 10/20 hand I played a few years back. I had KK in the bb and raised a bunch of limpers including a very poor-playing small blind. Flop was 773. He check-called the flop and did the same on the turn (a rag) The river was a K and the guy went 14 bets (to the felt) with me with his 73. Had this been a good thinking player, I would have stopped somewhere around 6 or 7 because he would not keep raising me on the river w/o the 4 7s.

[mmcd]

He 3-bets the turn probably, but he could have that here. It still beats 44 and he won't fold it.

[SA125]

Your line - limp from EP, lead into an A high flop that's raised and then c/r the turn - says either you have an A or aren't afraid of one.

I think getting 4 bet here from someone you think is decent is a call.

[Mike Gallo]

If he respects you then I would just call

I do not think he respected my play.

I think this one is too close to really say one way or another, but I would wimp out and just call.

My line of thinking exactly.

I would cut my testicles off before I folded.

I would not go that far, however I did not consider folding either.

[Mike Gallo]

If this is a B+M 10/20 game against a good thinking opponent, he has AJ period.

What if I made a mistake in profiling him as a good thinking player. I only had played with him for an hour and a half. Not enough time to really know.

[34TheTruth34]

[ QUOTE ]
Does it even matter one way or another?

[/ QUOTE ]

no. I'd say going one more bet is slightly -EV against an opponent whose play you respect. In the long run, it's almost meaningless, though.

[Riverman]

its the borgata. its a weekend. as long as this guy hasnt been exchanging pleasantries with dealers and other players, i am going to assume he has a big ace only and raise at least one more time.

[Mike Gallo]

i am going to assume he has a big ace only and raise at least one more time

That line of play works.

[mmcd]

Just a note about my 10/20 experience to clarify: I haven't played 10/20 live games in years and never played in an AC 10 game. I'm sure the texture of these games has changed greatly sinced the WPT and the poker boom. When I played 10/20 (at Foxwoods) a good player in those games would NEVER 4-bet that river w/AK AQ 33, and possibly not even JJ. Though the games may have changed significantly, I think the decent players at the 10/20 level are far less aggressive than the decent players in bigger games ESPECIALLY on the river (I don't think this necessarily is a leak in their game since other players generally play more passively and tend to have stronger hands when they value bet)

Given the way you posed the question and your description of this player as "seemingly thinking" , I take it you flat-called and won the hand.

I think here you misread the type of player you were up against, and if you had insufficient info on this opponent to accurately clasify him, then calling is the only play. Don't 5-bet unless you can fold to a 6-bet (but this presents you with the same problem that you have after his 4-bet if that makes sense)

[Michael Davis]

"I would cut my testicles off before I folded."

This should be discussed in Ed Miller's next book. Probably a +EV play that few would make.

-Michael

[Mike Gallo]

I think here you misread the type of player you were up against, and if you had insufficient info on this opponent to accurately clasify him, then calling is the only play.

Thanks for the mulligan.

[Bigdaddydvo]

Unless someone reeks of being a terrible player, it's best to give them credit for something and just call by the 4th bet. I see dueling full boats at the river more often than you'd think. Several months ago w/10-6 in the blind, after a flop of 7-6-6, 10 on the turn, and 5 on the river, I led the whole way and was mysteriously raised on the river. w/6s full I reraised, and the cycle went up to about 4 bets until my opponent did me a favor and finally just called, only to flip over 7-7. Simply a matter of not falling in love with your hand.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
its the borgata. its a weekend. as long as this guy hasnt been exchanging pleasantries with dealers and other
players, i am going to assume he has a big ace only and raise at least one more time.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a typical Taj 10/20, I think I go one more bet without blinking.

As of May, anyway, I was always astonished by how passive the Borgata 10/20 was on the expensive streets. I think it's probably -EV to go another bet against a typical opponent in that game.

The folks suggesting folding make me sad.

scrub

[mmcd]

[ QUOTE ]
I think here you misread the type of player you were up against, and if you had insufficient info on this opponent to accurately clasify him, then calling is the only play.

Thanks for the mulligan.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually typed up my addendum here before reading anymore of the thread. The 10/20 games that I knew where MUCH MUCH more passive, and I could fold this hand to a semi-reasonable players 4 bet and be right 100% of the time. Going by the general texture of the game, any player who would 4-bet me here with a worse hand would be noticeably "live" and quite LAGGY (compared to the rest of the players) It was a game where I could and often did make very big laydowns because a lot of the players were very tight passive, and almost never bluffed (and absolutely NEVER bluff-raised or bluff-reraised the river).

[Mike Gallo]

Lets recap. I river 4's full of Aces on a board of A 3 4 J 4. I had led the turn and called a raise. I check raised the turn and got called by two players. I rivered the boat and bet. One player called the next player who I viewed at the time as a thinking opponent raised me. I reraised and he popped me back. Should I call or go more raise I thought. I never considered folding.

I wimped out and called. He turned over AQ and I missed a bet.

I did not think I had a good enough read on this player even though I played with him for over an hour. I spoke with poster Tyler Turden about this player earlier today ( Tyler played with him also yesterday), and he agreed with my assesment of this player. He talked a great game but he did not play as good of a game.

[Mike Gallo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does it even matter one way or another?

[/ QUOTE ]

no. I'd say going one more bet is slightly -EV against an opponent whose play you respect. In the long run, it's almost meaningless, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats the answer I had hoped to see.

In the grand scheme of things, I do not think it will make a difference one way or the other.

[Mike Gallo]

In a typical Taj 10/20, I think I go one more bet without blinking.

The Borgata game also by George /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

The folks suggesting folding make me sad.


I agree. I do not think I could ever fold that.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does it even matter one way or another?

[/ QUOTE ]

no. I'd say going one more bet is slightly -EV against an opponent whose play you respect. In the long run, it's almost meaningless, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats the answer I had hoped to see.

In the grand scheme of things, I do not think it will make a difference one way or the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

So is this just a bad beat post?

[Mike Gallo]

So is this just a bad beat post?

Read the results. I won the hand however I think the correct play was to go one more raise.

[BeerMoney]

[ QUOTE ]
So is this just a bad beat post?

Read the results. I won the hand however I think the correct play was to go one more raise.

[/ QUOTE ]


Doh! I was doing other stuff and by the time I posted, the results were up. Sorry MG. Glad to see you're back though.

[Riverman]

Mike I think this result means that I am at 100% correctness regarding your borgata 10-20 posts. I am especially proud of this one since no other responce advocated a reraise.

[Mike Gallo]

[ QUOTE ]
Mike I think this result means that I am at 100% correctness regarding your borgata 10-20 posts. I am especially proud of this one since no other responce advocated a reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good job

[tpir90036]

I think I would go one more although it is probably close either way depending on the player. Your read makes it tough since him 4-betting the river after you have shown strength is kind of odd. Either he is not thinking and can't read your hand...or he has read your hand and has it beat.

You also don't mention his aggression level...so it's hard to know if he 3-bets the turn with AA/AJ/JJ or waits for you to lead the river again or only raises the river with the nuts or close to it, etc.

My point is that if he is 4-betting the river I would think he would have 3-bet the turm with top two or a set unless he is a pu$$ who likes to have the nuts on the river.

Anyway, it's the Borgata, go one more.

[johnnycakes]

Mike,

With all due respect, please learn to use commas and periods. After I read this:

[ QUOTE ]
Two players called the button (thinking opponent) raised the blinds folded everyone else called.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought two players had somehow called the button before the button acted. Then the thinking opponent raised the blinds. Then "folded everyone else called," which finally prompted me to re-read the whole thing.

Still, it was fun interpreting the action.

[ QUOTE ]
I bet one player folded the button raised. I called the next player called. Three of us to the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

You bet one player? I raise two players and a dealer!

Johnny.

[AviD]

Hey Mike, how goes it bud! /images/graemlins/wink.gif
Good to see you back in the game(s)!

My thoughts...

Against a player whom you view as a thinking opponent, when he 4-bets you here on the river, despite your turn CR and his turn call (not re-raise) you have to think he puts you on a set at that point (or at least two pair {AJs/AJo/A4s/A3s}...suited aces assuming he viewed you as one to limp early with these if the game texture or your limp induced other limper for frequent multiway pots).

Nevertheless, when he 4-bets you on the river, you have to assume you are behind here to Aces full (AJs/AJo most likely) or Jacks full (although I think he absolutely re-raises the turn here with JJ and I don't see him raising with 33 on the button PF) and just call.

Apparently this guy was oblivious and thought his trip aces negated your J3o/J4o/34o (nice image you have at the table there buddy! /images/graemlins/grin.gif ).

I guess that is why you qualified it with "at the time" you thought he was a thinking opponent.

Oh well, hopefully you were able to apply his play later in the session and also hope your session went well. The 10/20s are g00t there...I was at the Borg not too long ago enjoying that game.

Drop me a PM sometime man, maybe we'll hook up some weekend.

[elysium]

hi mike

you can 5 bet it. it looks like you called and he flips up AK, you then hold your arms out flat down on the table, and keeping an eye on the dealer's hands as he pushes the pot, you take this one down, no palming. you want to 5-bet.

i would have played it just like you did here, mike. it would be a mistake not to get in a 5-bet, but that kind of error is very common. the way to reduce the number of times you play it less ev optimally than perhaps you might have, is by developing a good instinct in up close situations when your read should be getting a boost from the extra weight of betting pressure applied by you partly for this reason. you are buying a flinch if there is a flinch to be bought. now, things can backfire a little if you shoulder some of that extra weight you would like your opponent alone to have to deal with. so it's very, very important that you put a little gut behind the weight of your bet, and that the resultant gutter sound which rises up from the depth of your bowels, not be unduly harnessed by the negative forces of stressed breathing aspiration as your opponent's heightened auditory sensors stethoscopically auscult you for esophagutteral tension and resultant vocal constriction. if any of that is unnaturally tense, the gut acids fail to rise up and help tranquilize the trake, and your initial 'reraise' arrives a little flat without the sufficient relaxed resonation necessary to convince the field that you have the AJ; and so you lose the ever so precious spontaneous field reaction that indicates to your opponent that while he may think he has you beaten, the field thinks otherwise, as you are given a brief respite as your opponent turns his attention to the gutteral roar of the crowd.

what you do at this point is crucially important because if you fail to be seen as one of the crowd at this point, everything you have worked for will be upended. you need to realize that if you've worked the field right, and you have garnered the right field noise follow through, your opponent will be listening and studying to the field's 'end of suspense' noises and reactions, and then he will turn back to you to see if you are still selling or if in fact the sale is over. so you need to transpose yourself in real spacetime, into the next round and look back at your opponent. if your opponent is still involved in the hand, you must take away, as best you can, his opportunity to call, by fearlessly trying to get him to reraise. this means doing whatever is necessary to convince him that you want a reraise, but not getting wordy a whole lot. it could be just a very subtle hand motion to your immediate right or left, instructing the field to get into a 'lie and wait' position. or he could find you making some type of pre-rehearsed animated motion that he doesn't think you would be making. sometimes just getting rythmatic with your foot will send a good rythm pulse through the table that your opponent can easily detect is coming from you.

it's easy to see how a good follow through will give a great assist those times you don't have the nuts, but you think that your opponent may have a stronger non-nut hand. eliminating the issue of a 5-bet by following through correctly will not stop your opponent from calling your 3-bet because other factors are at work in that department. the call is more of a necessity to satisfy a curiosity. so dissuading the issue of a 5-bet does not effect the liklihood of a call. it does effect the possibility of a 4-bet though. and this is the other aspect of good follow because although your opponent might 4-bet, you have still, nonetheless, stopped the arising of the 5-bet issue which is an area that is prone to err unless you have the nuts. with the nuts, you can do things to bring up a 5-betting issue. that's another topic altogether. here, you want to make the right kind of moves that only an opponent with the nuts could reraise into, so that you are more knowingly correct when you call his 4-bet. if you find yourself pondering whether or not you should 5-bet, your pondering is caused by a deficiency in your game. you don't have the nuts; how can your opponent 4-bet, then, on the heels of that sensational 3-bet follow through? when they back down to turn strength by you, but give you an opportunity to 3-bet the river, you must 3-bet for value with finality of 'end of suspense' field follow through. if he doesn't quickly call, you must take his calling opportunity away by fearlessly trying to get him to reraise. if he 4-bets, you must call. thinking about a 5-bet is not an option.

[elysium]

hi mike

something interesting about your description of how you felt during the unfolding action of this posted hand; when you say, "....at that time.', in reference to how you think your opponent thinks, it tells everyone reading your post that he flips the A good kicker, and that your boat holds up. one of the most useful things that you can do here at 2+2 is try to figure out how the hand actually turned out based on comments made in the post. sometimes, it's what is posted that leads you to a certain belief about what the results might be, and sometimes it's what is not posted, but rather omitted, that tends to lead to some idea about what the results might be. personally, if i think that the actual results are not representative of what they are more likely to be in actual play, i post what i think the results actually are, and then i post what i think is more likely to be the result in real play. notice though that of the two, the actual results vs. the more likely results, for me it is more important that i correctly guess the actual results based on the nature of the poster's input. for the reader, it is more important that i get the likely results right. do you see why? however, even for the reader, what i think the actual results really turned out to be can be as important to him or her as the underlying theory of the more likely results, if that reader trys to find what is contained in the post that lead me to the conclusion about the actual results. while he or she may never get as solid a lead in live play as the '....at the time' lead provided by you in your post, the same dismissal of preconceived notions is required for both as you encounter a peculiarity to a given hold em situation that might lead you to a conclusion diverse from the norm and i think that being able to get rid of preconceptions is a prerequisite of putting a good read on your opponent.

you are weak/ tight mike, and getting your ask kicked by the sharks who a running all over you. stay out of these tough games. you are throwing your money away. drop down into the lower limits, beat up on the high school kids, i'm not going to recommend that you read hfap or top because that is something that you will never do; you are street fighting student, and that's how you'll have to learn; go beat up on a few high school kids. use their lunch money to finance your excursions into these tougher type games. lose and drop back down to the lower limits again. keep doing it like that. we need to do some emergency proceedures to cut your losses; nothing too glamorous. drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose; drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose. i like you in that.

[Mike Gallo]

Johnnycakes,

Perhaps I should ask noted poker authority Ed Miller for writing lessons as well as for poker lessons /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I thought posters he got graded on content and style.

I need Mark Glovers editor. Vehn if you see this, would you consider coming back as my editor?

[Mike Gallo]

Drop me a PM sometime man, maybe we'll hook up some weekend.

Dude, I told you I am married can't you take a hint?? /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Mike Gallo]

you are weak/ tight mike, and getting your ask kicked by the sharks who a running all over you. stay out of these tough games. you are throwing your money away. drop down into the lower limits, beat up on the high school kids, i'm not going to recommend that you read hfap or top because that is something that you will never do; you are street fighting student, and that's how you'll have to learn; go beat up on a few high school kids. use their lunch money to finance your excursions into these tougher type games. lose and drop back down to the lower limits again. keep doing it like that. we need to do some emergency proceedures to cut your losses; nothing too glamorous. drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose; drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose. i like you in that.

i'm not going to recommend that you read hfap or top because that is something that you will never do;

What would make you think that. During my absence from playing the game I studied the Theory of Poker. I did not study hfap. Since I want to play a few big tournaments in the fall, I have mostly studied Supersystem and TPFAP.

As far as the rest of your gibberish, I doubt anyone who has played with me or played against me would call me weak tight. Passive aggressive perhaps not weak tight.

If you want to say I played the hand weak tight, fine. However to call me weak tight without much to prove it, I have to shake my head. As a salty vet of Two Plus Two and some of the battles,I have thick skin. However. Imagine how a new poster would interpret this comment... you are weak/ tight mike, and getting your ask kicked by the sharks who a running all over you.

I would think, thanks for meaningful advice.

keep doing it like that. we need to do some emergency proceedures to cut your losses; nothing too glamorous. drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose; drop down, beat up on high school kids, jump into the main game, lose. i like you in that.

I still have a hard time understanding what you mean here. Please elaborate. I will buy the new poker book from noted poker authority Ed Miller to anyone other then Elysium who can interpret this for me. Elysium please flag the winner and compare ideas. We may not have a winner because LSD went out of style in the 70's.

[nepenthe]

You just do not understand or appreciate the quintessence of dust generated by elysium's scintillating posts. It takes time. It's not your fault.

[elysium]

hi mike

simmer down mike. you'd be throwing chips at me all day long like you are now. i know there is no chance of you voluntarily playing in the lower limits, and if you haven't read hfap, there is no chance that you will make any meaningful improvements in your game. really mike, between you and the high school kids, i'd put my money on the high schoolers at this stage of your development. i do think that the lower limits will be less expensive for you, FWIW.

i agree you are a salty long time 2+2 er, but 2+2 won't get you anywhere without the necessary discipline adherent in every winning player's game. you will win often enough to keep you coming back, no doubt. that type of player, however, is still not a winning player, and may suffer the heaviest losses of all players. there is no stopping them. they come back to try and repeat one of their rare winning performances time and time again. often forgetting completely about the piles of losses.

no one wants to go back and forth from low-limit to high limit and then back again. if that sounds appealing to you, it shouldn't. i just wanted to irritate you a little to see if you really are a street fighter. you are. you're a bully.

well, i will never be able to keep you out. you are probably sitting in the 20-40, or whatever it is, right now. come back again after you drop the 5 or 10 thousand dollars that you're getting ready to drop, (oh yes. i can sense when someone is about to drop a ton of money), lose the whole dang lot of it, come back and find out whether or not you might be even more predictable while playing than you are while getting ready to play. we will all listen as you tell me that i was completely wrong, but as it unfolded, quirky things kept happening that made my errant assessment of your situation slightly more on line than it otherwise would have been, but that i was still completely wrong. and where will the 10 thousand be at that point in time? over there.

you're going to need to study hfap in whatever form you have developed over the years that serves for you as meaningful study. and i must be very blunt here and tell you that you will not recoup the losses that you are about to sustain by beating up on high school kids. high school kids are not allowed to gamble. you will have to work very hard to recoup these upcoming losses. as you're doing so, i want you to begin to reconsider whether or not reading hfap is for you. if you decide that it might be, and you put in the necessary study time, i can see you cutting your losses down to $20 an hour. don't get me wrong here. i don't hold out any hope of you really making a meaningful effort to be proficient in this game. do follow me closely here though mike, and maybe you can sense how strongly i can believe something after a thorough convincing; 'mike, you are going to lose a lot of money.'. that's pretty much it. that's alls i can do. i can't forcibly keep you out of the cardroom until you improve. you will go back and lose some more. i know you want to be told how well you play, but this isn't a chatroom. play it like some of the hands i've seen you post and all you will get here is an estimate of what you can expect to lose over the course of your life, and how to plan to live and survive without money. continue playing like you do, and shelter and peanut butter is the best advice i can give. skippy mike, if you are going to be a perfectionist. more peanuts per jar than the next leading brand. you will also need a good size piece of tar paper if you intend to use a cardboard box. shelter and peanut butter.

[BarronVangorToth]

Even though you are usually beat, you have enough in this pot and there's enough out there to toss in that last $20 with a call. Do NOT raise, do NOT fold, but call.

Yes, it's most likely wasted money, but if this comes up a few times, one of those times the call will be correct, and that makes up (and then some) for the wrong calls.


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Mike Gallo]

know you want to be told how well you play, but this isn't a chatroom. play it like some of the hands i've seen you post and all you will get here is an estimate of what you can expect to lose over the course of your life, and how to plan to live and survive without money. continue playing like you do, and shelter and peanut butter is the best advice i can give. skippy mike, if you are going to be a perfectionist. more peanuts per jar than the next leading brand. you will also need a good size piece of tar paper if you intend to use a cardboard box. shelter and peanut butter.

Thanks for the advice.

I appreciate your time and effort.

[elysium]

hi mike

sharks.

[AviD]

Can I get some background here on this animosity?
What did I miss in the past between you two?

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
shelter and peanut butter is the best advice i can give. skippy mike, if you are going to be a perfectionist. more peanuts per jar than the next leading brand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This stuff is gold. I may have to dedicate a website to elysium.

SpaceAce

[James282]

Hey elysium, Mike is good enough to beat the 10-20 game at the Borgata without any further study.
Hope this helps,
James

[AviD]

Even Tommy can't find a fold there! /images/graemlins/grin.gif
Advocating folding here is worse than check/calling with a royal (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=946447&page=1&view=ex panded&sb=5&o=14&fpart=#946447).

[AviD]

Noodle Bar + 10/20 > Marriage + Ball + Chain

Listen, sit on my thumb...

http://www.state.nj.us/budget03/photos/budget16_photo.jpg

Or try two...

http://www.state.nj.us/budget03/photos/budget18_photo.jpg

Not good enough, how bout a fist?

http://www.state.nj.us/budget03/photos/budget20_photo.jpg

[elysium]

hi avid

i pucked up. mike got through me. he might be able to afford to play like he's playing now, but i have no way of knowing that. additionally, mike plays like a lot you all out there. a lot of times, people are conditioned to believe that if you aren't jumping all over them, what they are doing is o.k. well, it's not o.k.

another thing; i see a not too well concealed tendancy around here to keep a fish a fish. there's a mistaken belief that educating a fish will lower the ev of the shark; that making the fish aware of the high level of danger involved in placing a wager on a complex given hand in a very unpredictable setting, will spook the fish out of the game. that couldn't be further from the truth. actually, since the only real interaction is going to take place between myself and the sharks; the fish have no understanding for anything i post; my posts provide relief for a possible guilty conscious that crops up in a shark here or there from time to time. occasionally, the shark will suffer a tinge of guilt, and slow down on a group of fish he thinks are in over their heads without sufficient warning. if andy or clark seemed to be a little less merciful of late, it is due in no small part to their ability to proceed knowing that the fish have been duly warned, and have even flagged the herald of the warning for warning them in clear, explicit terms too clear-cut for them to construe into some other meaning. if a fish here or there is able to use the warning to navigate clear of the $100,000 club, so much the better. for all i know, gallo could have dropped that much last night, like it was nothing. but he plays like many of you. and what applies to gallo, applies to you too. if your post indicates that you might be in over your head, it might play on tommy's conscious. he might be inspired to take it easy on you. so hear ye well; fish, you are duly warned. i'm not going to have any of my guys going around feeling sorry for yous. it is too late. they are under orders to mercilessly attack.

sharks peoples. pretty savage too, i hear. everyone talking about that commerce game. whew...that commerce game tough lately.

warning, warning.

[AviD]

This is certainly one of the most confusing posts I've read on 2+2, or at least one of the most difficult to decipher.

I'm assuming you've played with Mike before and have some solid background for thinking he'd lose as much as 100K in a single night. Strange that you'd think that, considering you think of him as weak-tight. How many big bets is that at 10/20 anyway?

Somehow I don't think your vision of "mike playing the way he's playing" has anything do with going one more bet in this hand.

I guess thanks for the warning, I'm still waiting for sharks to dominate the games at the Borgata...most/none of them aren't sitting 10/20 or below...which is the scope of my play thus far.

Still struggling to understand where you are coming from with your posts, but perhaps I haven't been here (2+2) long enough to understand it...

On a final note, please include a cryptograph with your next post? Thanks! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Apocalypse]

i think posts like these go way beyond the point of 'teaching someone a lesson the hard way'...this is sheer pounding with no point whatsoever (perhaps except for gloat?).

Being succesfull at cards (or anything for that matter) doesn't equal being a succesful human being in any way thats for sure. It strikes me how often these different qualities are mixed up in everyday life,

[Tommy Angelo]

"Even Tommy can't find a fold there!"

Sure he could. Especially against a thinking someone who has played against me long enough to know that if I open-limp up front and I'm still swinging on the turn, that's a set.

Tommy

[Mike Gallo]

[ QUOTE ]
hi mike

sharks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funniest thing I have ever read here. This beats Joey-Bloey.

Thanks for the warning.

[AviD]

If I counted correctly (not taking out rake) there is 20.25BBs in the pot by the time it comes back to Mike...you can't possibly find a fold at that point for 1 more BB...can you?

Tommy say it isn't so buddy! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[mmcd]

It's not that tough of a laydown if you know your player. There are 10/20 players that would NOT value bet a worse hand and wouldn't dare bluff there. I think they less common now than they used to be.

[elysium]

hi avid

oh no avid, i didn't mean real sharks. i know there are no real sharks at the bogota. they can run aground at times, but they are still pretty much waterlocked. i must admit, i myself am also having a hard time visualizing a real shark at the card table in the bogota; and for extra clarification, that doesn't mean that i can visualize a real shark being able to play even a modestly reasonable game at the commerce, or the mirage for that matter. sharks do very poorly on dry ground whether 3 feet inland on the beach, or in a cardroom.

i think you grasp this fundemental concept about sharks avid. i think what you mean is that there are many/ many many many nice people surrounding you at the bogota.

hi avid,

nice people.

[JTG51]

oh no avid, i didn't mean real sharks. i know there are no real sharks at the bogota. they can run aground at times, but they are still pretty much waterlocked. i must admit, i myself am also having a hard time visualizing a real shark at the card table in the bogota; and for extra clarification, that doesn't mean that i can visualize a real shark being able to play even a modestly reasonable game at the commerce, or the mirage for that matter. sharks do very poorly on dry ground whether 3 feet inland on the beach, or in a cardroom.

I just think that needs to be repeated.

[elysium]

hi apocalypse

although i'm having a little problem with the name, i can dig some of your views about humanity.

[nepenthe]

This thread can be summed up in one simple yet profound sign:

/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Tommy Angelo]

"you can't possibly find a fold at that point for 1 more BB...can you? Tommy say it isn't so buddy!"

Just for fun let's see what sort of case there is for it being so, and dare I say it, rightly so.

Let's say it's you [or any thinking 2+2 er] and I playing, and we've been playing for a few sessions over a few days, and at the time that this big hand came down, we'd played no hands against each other that had had three big bets each from us, turn and river combined, and only a few headsup hands with two big bets each. (This is my usual entanglement rate against 2+2ers. About one hand per day.)

We’ve noticed many things about each other along the way. One thing you noticed is that every time I limped in early position, I then called whatever preflop raises that followed, and I checkfolded the flop every time.

Hmmm. Must be a pocket pair every time, you thought. And you’d be right. And I’d know you know this, when the big hand came up. And you’d very likely know that I know. I’d probably assume you did know, which is the same as you knowing in how it might affect a bet I might make. Let’s just say we’re pretty much in the know by now.

Now back to the pocket fours vs the other hand. For the sake of whatever point I’m after here, it doesn’t matter which one of holds which hand or if the betting rounds start with checkraises or betting out or whatever. And it doesn’t matter what sort of misdirection might have been caused by any preflop betting or flop betting with unexpected hands. When it comes to crunch time, on the turn and/or river, if there’s a pair on board,

--> you and I <--

will be very, very much inclined, because of all that being in the know stuff, to put one full round of betting less into the pot than most players would with our cards. That means if it’s trips vs trips where the kicker plays, or a boat vs boat, or boat vs straight or flush, or even if, especially if, we both connected huge, like quads against the nut full house, lets say. Pick a scenario, and we’ll stop a round sooner. And we’d both be right to do so. If we can agree that such a relationship between us could exist, then the next thing is …

On the pocket fours hand, I can see myself folding 44, or AK in the other spot for that matter, if I made it three bets (or four bets), and you then made it four bets (or five bets). I’m not saying I would. I’m just saying if I did, or if it turns out that you were the one who folded to a fourth or fifth bet, it’d be the right play, in other words, whoever folded would have had a less than 20-1 chance of having the best hand.

Let’s say we agree on all that. The next question is: By how much could such a fold be correct?

This is where I seem to be unable to express my thoughts in a way that doesn’t come out sounding like I’m talking about the difference between 95% certainty and 99% certainty. If that were the case, then the most a fold like this could be right by would be a few percent, which would translate to a few bucks at $20-40, so it’s like, so what, either way, right or wrong, it’s hairsplitting anal stuff that hardly ever comes up anyway.

Well, no. Facing a bet on the river when you are not holding the winner comes up a lot. And calling the final bet on the river if you know you’re beat is not a mistake of a fraction of a bet. It’s a full bet. It doesn’t matter what the pot is offering. It’s like if I showed you a two-headed coin, and I said you call it, and you said tails. It doesn’t matter if I offered you a hundred billion to one. You made a bad bet.

Now, if you feel it is impossible to ever know if you are beat, then to that I would say, fine. That is a separate issue. And I would never try to convince you otherwise. But if it is possible for you to know you are beat, and you find yourself knowing that you are beat, and you call the final bet on the river, then that was a mistake, and it was not a partial-bet mistake, and that's why it matters.

Tommy

[SpaceAce]

If I know that you know that I know your actions mean a set and I know that this knowledge on both our parts makes a laydown by you entirely possible, why wouldn't I just invest the extra bet on the river and try to take the pot away from you with any two cards at all? With a moderately sizeable pot, this move doesn't have to work very often to be profitable. Eventually you catch me and I stop getting feisty for a while.

SpaceAce

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
If I know that you know that I know your actions mean a set and I know that this knowledge on both our parts makes a laydown by you entirely possible, why wouldn't I just invest the extra bet on the river and try to take the pot away from you with any two cards at all? With a moderately sizeable pot, this move doesn't have to work very often to be profitable. Eventually you catch me and I stop getting feisty for a while.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

Without revealing all specifics of the game (although I'm pretty sure neither read this site) I know about one hand where two opponents who were quite familiar with eachother had multiway action on the turn where opponent A four-bet with top set, and opponent B five-bet (cap) with second set on a board with one straight possible, feeling very confident opponent A had top set (since the cards to make the straight were cards opponent B could hold due to his position, but A most likely couldn't due to his EP raise and uncreative TAG style). The board did not pair on the river, opponent B bet and opponent A did in fact fold his top set face up because he thought he knew B well enough to know he'd only cap the turn with the nuts against an obvious top set. The board was of a J8x7y nature and opponent B was in a blind.

Just something to consider when opponents are thinking at very high levels since even one mistake tends to be extremely costly.

[AviD]

[ QUOTE ]
Now, if you feel it is impossible to ever know if you are beat, then to that I would say, fine. That is a separate issue. And I would never try to convince you otherwise. But if it is possible for you to know you are beat, and you find yourself knowing that you are beat, and you call the final bet on the river, then that was a mistake, and it was not a partial-bet mistake, and that's why it matters.

[/ QUOTE ]

If these conditions were met, it is equivalent to the other player showing you his cards (as in showing the 2 headed coin) and calling when you are 100% certain you are beat, is indeed throwing away money. But you'd have to be playing some pretty unimaginative, uncreative, and relatively ABC TAG player to have that solid of a read to be 100% sure. I'd imagine it is possible, but I wouldn't be comfortable or confident 100% to make a fold here in a 20BB+ pot (unless he/she literally showed me his cards). That is indeed what sets you and I apart.

Good post and great thoughts, but given the dynamic of many poker players, even if you knew me and I knew you, and we knew how the other played, deception becomes an important and obvious element of play to reach a higher level of profitability. If I thought you were capable of folding a 20BB+ pot, then investing 1 more BB to make 20BB+ in those RARE times you and I are involved in such a pot heads up, seems like a great edge to push EVERY TIME...and somehow I don't think you could make the dual mistake of letting another player push you off a pot that big (you are doubtfully going to make that much back off them by folding and showing you are capable of such folds, given that few hands such as this arise between you two) and by giving up that much equity for 1 more bet when you do have the winner (which is a huge mistake, not just 1BB you are giving up 20BB+).

[DeeJ]

[ QUOTE ]
not be unduly harnessed by the negative forces of stressed breathing aspiration as your opponent's heightened auditory sensors stethoscopically auscult you for esophagutteral tension and resultant vocal constriction.

[/ QUOTE ]

Put that on the elysium appreciation website too. I think he merely means you have to 5-bet swiftly and confidently...
and he hopes you like peanut butter. Or something like that /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[AviD]

Aquariums are nice. SeaWorld is fun, I remember it as a kid, although no sharks. Killer whales are cool.

Although I disagree as sharks seem to do just fine on the Jersey shore when on land as someone is always more than willing to try and see its teeth. A few fingers later, they find out they indeed still work...even when not in water.

I don't know about sharks in the Bogota...hopefully they never swim into my bogota, but I haven't seen the new aquarium yet in the Borgata...must be quite a sight!

[scooby]

Schneids-

I'm too lazy to look for it now, but didn't you post a live hand you played once against a friend when you had 88 on an AA8xJ board and debated folding when he put the extra bets on the river since you knew he'd "only do it with the nuts" when I think he rivered the boat with his AJ, IIRC. Were your friend very tricky, couldn't he have pulled the same move? (which I guess wouldn't have worked, since you called, I think)

[IlliniRyRy]

[ QUOTE ]
fold.

[/ QUOTE ]


Worst...play...EVER.

This river play is totally player dependent. I don't think I'd put in the extra re-raise most of the time because if you're beat, he's definitely going to raise again and you're stuck putting in two more bets when your hand is no good. Good god though, folding is just not an option, I think that guy was joking.

[Schneids]

[ QUOTE ]
Schneids-

I'm too lazy to look for it now, but didn't you post a live hand you played once against a friend when you had 88 on an AA8xJ board and debated folding when he put the extra bets on the river since you knew he'd "only do it with the nuts" when I think he rivered the boat with his AJ, IIRC. Were your friend very tricky, couldn't he have pulled the same move? (which I guess wouldn't have worked, since you called, I think)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea I think I may have?

The hand was against worm33 of 2+2 where I had AJ and he had AA on an AJ58J type board. At the same time he says if I'd have 5-bet the river he would have mucked. Believable? I dunno, maybe.

[j0n_blayze]

THIS MAN IS ON LSD!!! BEWARE!!!

edit: Elysium that is.

[Thomsen]

still only call - it will cost you two more to see a showdown if he has AJ or JJ - you dont want that

[mmcd]

Mike,

Just to eplain this to you a little further:

You asked the wrong question. Instead of asking whether you should go 1 more or flat call, you should be asking how and why you got yourself into such an untenable situation on the river.

Judging by how he played this hand, I have a good idea of what this guy's "profile" is. I bet he called your turn raise almost defiantly. He doesn't quite fully grasp the concept that hand values are relative, but he's not necessarily a run-of-the-mill LAG or maniac.

You're in a situation where you cannot make a correct play on the river. Anything you do here WILL BE WRONG.

Folding is clearly wrong.

Raising is clearly wrong.

Calling is just inherently wrong in this situation.

How you should have played this river:

Check-raise and 4-bet when he 3-bets you. Though this guy might 4-bet a worse-hand, he is incapable of 5-betting one.

Now he is in the situation of not being able to make a correct play on the river.

He can't raise, He can't fold, and calling is still just as inherently wrong in this situation.


You force him to make the mistake rather than setting yourself up to make it.

[chio]

Read the results. I won the hand however I think the correct play was to go one more raise .

[/ QUOTE ]

if you did indeed 5bet and your opponent 6bet and you called and he turned over AJ, would you still "think the correct play was to go one more raise"? not to repeat a cliche, but isn't this the definition of results oriented thinking?

in my opinion, i think you have a clear call of his 4bet on the river. obviously your opponent doesn't have much skill in the hand reading department, because only an idiot would 4 bet you with AQ there given the flop and turn action - he doesnt even beat AK!

[balkii]

Hi mike - havent read all the thread yet because I havent eaten breakfast yet so I dont know whether this has been discussed, but did you think about leading the turn? Its a great way to play because he will almost certainly pop you again with a big ace and then you can 3-bet. Whereas he is unlikely to 3-bet himself when you checkraise.

As for the river a thinking opponent should be slowing down with trips here unless he thinks you are a LAG. I just call.