JJ in SB....too straightforward? (long)

I'm in a 20-40 game the other night. What a game. Wow.


This was VERY VERY VERY loose game. I usually folded preflop. I was the only player who can make this claim. Most pots were 2-, 3-, or 4-bet preflop. All of this action was due, predominantly to one maniac who was winning pot after pot with such great hands as Q5o, K2s, 33, etc... He has raised nearly every pot preflop for the last half hour.


With his maniacal-tendencies, people started 3-betting in the vain hopes of isolating. rrrrright. Isolating. Funny thinking, to be sure.


I'm in the SB with red jacks. 8 players are dealt in, and 8 players see the flop. The Maniac, for whatever reason, didn't raise preflop. In many games, I'd raise here (especially games that were tight preflop). However, I wasn't about to do that here, as it would inevitably be limp-reraised, and capped preflop. I didn't want that to happen. So, I just limped.


Flop came 8d 5h 4h, and I bet out. As I think about this, I'm not sure that this is such a great idea. I won't lose many players, unless I can charge them multiple bets. Sure, I may get raised, then I can threebet, but even then, I may not lose any players. I'm beginning to think that checkraising was the thing to do, but that would have been risky, as well.


So, anyhoo, I bet out. Well, with that board, everybody had a pair, a straightdraw, or overcards, so everybody decided to call. Grrrreat. I felt that there was a better chance of Nomar becoming a Yankee this summer than me winning this pot.


Turn paired the 4. Phenomenal.


Board: 8d 5h 4h; 4s.


I bet out again. Two people called, then the maniac raised me.


Let there be NO MISTAKE. The maniac would EASILY take one off with bottom pair. But in reality, I felt he would have raised the flop with bottom pair. I honestly felt that this might have been a sporadic, 'what-the-heck, i have 8 chips, so I'll raise' raise.


I think I would have 3-bet if 3 people hadn't coldcalled. Great. I called a friend in Boston before the river came off to see if he had heard any recent trade rumors regarding shortstops. I called the turn raise, wanting to see one of two cards on the river.


Not to be. The river paired the 5.


Board:


8d 5h 4h; 4s; 5c.


Ho hum. I'm dead. I'm toast. Thanks for playing.


But, lo and behold, the river gets checked around. At this point, I could sorta tell that my jacks were likely good, so I had to restrain myself from getting up and doing a little dance.


My jacks were good, and the maniac showed his 86o. Apparently when you flop that big of a monster (pair of 8s with a 6 kicker), slowplaying is the way to go!!


Any comments on my flop bet-out and my turn bet-call? And to think, Nomar's still a RedSock (what is the singular of RedSox?).


Thanks in advance...


Josh W.

In many games, I'd raise here (especially games that were tight preflop).


S&M advise against raising here and I agree with their logic.


The maniac would EASILY take one off with bottom pair.


so should you getting 11:1.


I would checkraise the flop if there were several players between me and the maniac, because thats where I could expect a bet from. If there weren't I would bet and hope he raises.


When you bet, most hands are getting correct pot odds to call and draw out on you, including gutshots, bottom pair, overcards, etc.

"When you bet, most hands are getting correct pot odds to call and draw out on you, including gutshots, bottom pair, overcards, etc"


I know, and I would call w/ bottom pair as well. But if I could charge two bets, then I could hopefully cut down the field. The maniac was right accross the table from me (Me, 3 players, maniac, then 3 more players). If all players are equal, would you checkraise, hopefully eliminating a few players by reducing their odds to draw?


josh

I think you made 3 mistakes on this hand:


1) Not raising pre-flop. Jacks rate to win way more than 12.5% of the time against 8 random hands. You should have welcomed the cap.


2) Not reraising the turn. You have a very vulnerable hand and need to take any and all available measures to eliminate players. Heck, even if they all called, I think your hand rates to win more than 20% of the time here.


3) Not betting the river. The game was great beause everyone loved to call, right? So give them the chance.


Sorry about the criticism, but I played poorly tonight and felt like picking on someone besides myself /images/smile.gif

Dav -


Thanks for the comments, and to some extent I agree with 1 of them /images/smile.gif.


#1....I do NOT have the bankroll for 20-40. I won't pretend that I do. I know that if you are going to play a game, you should try to maximize your EV, but I am willing to sacrifice EV for lowering my variance. This is a willful choice.


Also, by raising (and hence capping), I eliminate any and all hope of every getting somebody out of the hand. This was a loose game, but it was unusual to have all players see the turn. If I make the pot that big preflop, it will become a foregone conclusion that Everybody will be stuck in the pot until the river.


#2) Not reraising the turn.....hmmmm. Yes, my hand is vulnerable. And I think I agree with you here. I Just had a tough time pulling the trigger 3-betting the turn out of posiiton when I know I may be drawing to 2 outs. Of course, if A5s had dragged the pot, I'd be on top of a tall building now /images/smile.gif


#3). Not betting the river....I had a tough time finding enough hearts, 6s and 7s in the deck to give 6 players hands that I could beat. I thought I was beat (see how many saw the river), and was asking myself as I checked "if it comes back to you for 2 bets, can you call?"


I agree with everything you say, to some extent. I like 3-betting the turn the most. And, if I 3-bet the turn, I like a river bet. The preflop raise is marginal at best, even given an infinite bankroll.


In HPFAP, Mason advocates NOT raising on the Button if everybody limps w/ QQ and JJ....making the pot too big means everybody sticks around, and you likely need to improve because an overcard likely comes. I felt that this was even more likely in my case. This reason, and my bankroll is why I didn't.


I rambled a lot here. I should have said "THanks for the comments, I see the rationale, and agree somewhat".


Josh

Not raising large fields with pairs between 9's and Q's is one of very, very, few points on which I disagree with S&M. I just think the extra EV on the before the flop bet is worth making the pot a little bigger. I can see your bankroll point though. You gave yourself the best chance to win the pot.


As for the river, you're gonna call a bet anyway, and I don't think you needed to call a raise unless it came from the maniac. You said the game was passive and passive players do not raise bluff on the river. I think collecting river bets in these situations is a difference of at least half a BB an hour.

I would add one more mistake to Dav's list. First, ranking the ones he listed, I think that not reraising the turn is far worse than not betting the river, and marginally worse than not raising preflop.


But the worst mistake was playing in the game at all.


Tommy

if maniac is reliable for a raise on the flop here i would bet out, it will put two bet pressure on the three behing him, and when you three bet it puts pressure on the two who have already called one bet. this is your only chance to put two bet pressure on the whole field.


side note, i get scared when a maniac limps preflop like this. it is almost always AKs or AA (against the nuts that i play) because they want to disguise their hand.

tom c.

Tommy -


Why was playing in the game a mistake? Too wild? Or Inadequate Bankroll? Or a combination of both?


Thanks,


Josh

If all players are equal, would you checkraise, hopefully eliminating a few players by reducing their odds to draw?


Yes, I would probably checkraise. Especially because the maniac's bet will get no respect(e.g. maniac bets, someone raises with A5, now you three-bet).

Josh,


Combo.


As to bankroll, if you had been playing $1-2, would you have felt joy over dragging the pot, even though you could have made so much more? Would you have hesitated on the turn and merely called? And not bet the river? And not raised preflop?


As to the game being too loose, those are exactly the games that tend to dull the weaponry we hone here at 2+2.


Tommy

Dav,


I almost did agree with you on #1. But after some thinking, I'd like to present this argument:


In a hypothetic situation, suppose there is a hand (for example pocket 2s) that plays well multiway. It will win 2000000000 bets if it wins, and you will win 1 every 1000000 times you play that hand, if you raise. But it will win 20 bets and 1 out of 10 times u will win if you only call. Would you have raised? You might never live long enough to win that pot. But yes, when you win, you will get paid off more than your fair share......


It's just hypothetical, what i am trying to say is, maybe improving the chance of winning IS better than LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG term EV, if the term might be TOOOOOOOOOOOOO long. (in here I tend to agree with HPFAP)


In any case I do think your post was very very well thought and I agree with other points. /images/smile.gif


Kenny


ps. I recovered from a tilt session in live game 5-10, from 600 win to ~700 loss (tilt), but I grind my teeth and faught back and walked away with 800 winning as the biggest winner of that session on that table. /images/biggrin.gif

I strongly disagree, Tommy. These games are pretty well the best games to play provided that one has an adequate bankroll and is able to control tilt....and ya, three bet the turn...not doing so was the worst mistake here made by Josh.

I've always had trouble winning in very loose, maniacal games and it's not a bankroll or tilt problem. Seems to me it degenerates into a card-holding contest. Abdul once said something about the fish inadvertently schooling together, each bad call making the other bad calls less bad until they're all good (or something like that, apologies to Abdul if you're lurking out there if I've mangled the quote).

The reason why I think these games are easier to play is that you can forget about level 2 and 3 thinking. All you need to know is what you are holding, what the board is offering and pot odds. You don't have to worry about reading hands (okay, there is still a little of that but minimal) and you don't have to worry about what he thinks you are thinking etc. The game can be played essentially on autopilot.


In a tough 20-40 game, I am mentally spent after 6 hours. In a 20-40 game full of pot splashers(and I played in one of those for close to a year before the game died out), I am able to log 10 to 12 hours no worries.


Now, the reason I did well in those games was probably because:


1. I could do simple math better than most of my opponents many of whom were absolutely clueless.


2. I realized that position still counted for a lot.


3. I recognized trouble hands and situations.


4. I realized that in these games position in relation to the probable bettor on the next round of betting was more important than position in relation to the button.


4. I had excellent tilt control because I knew that the nature of the game was such that the variance would be very high and therefore fully expected losing nights (some of them big) and periods of time where I may not win (or even play) a hand for hours.


5. I folded a lot preflop but kept myself from getting bored by doing cryptic crossword puzzles :-)


That "skill list" is a lot easier to master than the ones you need to beat tough games.

Well thought out and well written post (as usual) (except for the 2 point 4's /images/wink.gif)


My thoughts:


1. I could do simple math better than most of my opponents many of whom were absolutely clueless.


-the math doesn't count for much because they're almost always getting the right odds to call a bet, even to call a raise.


2. I realized that position still counted for a lot.


-I think some of the advantages of having the button (for example, pre-flop a lot of players have already folded; getting in the last raise pre-flop; having them check to you on the flop or on the turn) are minimized when they bet and raise without giving a thought to what you did in the previous round.


3. I recognized trouble hands and situations.


-This is key, I think. You're in the big blind and you're delight there are 8 players when you have, say, 8-7s. But if the flop comes 8-4-2, normally one you would like, when 7 guys and their cousins stay for the turn, just about any card that hits is trouble.


4. I realized that in these games position in relation to the probable bettor on the next round of betting was more important than position in relation to the button.


-I think that this is very important in all games and more difficult to discern in a manical game where someone will more likely bet without concern for who showed power on the previous round (or rounds)


4. I had excellent tilt control because I knew that the nature of the game was such that the variance would be very high and therefore fully expected losing nights (some of them big) and periods of time where I may not win (or even play) a hand for hours.


-Not a problem for me, but a good point: it's important to realize that you're going to get drawn out on a lot since there are so many players taking the worst of it.


5. I folded a lot preflop but kept myself from getting bored by doing cryptic crossword puzzles :-)


-Seems to me these type of games don't last all that long since guys tend to lose all their chips.

I fold a lot preflop anyway.