** Jim Brier or Bob Ciaffone please reply ****

Dear Jim,


I enjoyed reading yours and Bob's book middle limit holdem poker, especially the numerous example hands shown. However I feel that some of the hands that were close folds really do assume your opponents are neither loose nor overly agressive. Players new to middle limits read these examples and may be folding too often as a result. Your book was quoted in a reply to playing the following hand and I would like your opinion on this hand.


15/30 10 handed


I am UTG with AhQd I open with a raise, fold folded to the button(a medicore player agressive usually at the wrong time) calls, SB folds, BB(overagressive player who suffers from fancy play syndrome) calls.


3 Players 3BB.


Flop comes


Jd 8s 9d


I bet, button calls, BB raises, I call, Now Button reraises, BB calls.


There are now 7BB or 14 bets in the pot with 14:1 odds I call.


Turn 7d, I check, button bets, BB calls, now with 9.5BB in the pot, I call.


River 4d, BB check, I bet, button calls, BB folds.

Button turns over Td Qs.

I take it down with a Queen High Flush.


Comments?

And not the nuts! Fold on the flop. You went

way too far with this hand. When it's reraised back to you, you only have a nonnut backdoor flush

draw and a gutshot draw for a possible half a pot.


Sounds like a fold to me, but you got lucky.

you shouldnt bet the flop, this is not a good flop for you with all those cards in what brier calls the playing zone.


you also shouldnt be in there paying 3 bets when it's clear one of both of your opponents has a T and your overcard and backdoor draw outs are very very iffy. the pots just not big enough her to get to the turn for that many chips.


i dont like your turn call either. someone just made their straight and someone else may have a flush. or they may have the K or A of diamonds along with a pair meaning you may be drawing dead.

this turn call is really awful sorry.


on the river you should not bet your Q high flush. you want the aggro button to bet for you so you can call and not get in a situation where youre paying off 2 big bets on the river with an easy second or third best hand. a value bet here is too dangerous because you cant trust these opponents and you dont want to do anything to jeopardize winning this big pot if you do have the best hand.


if this is a typical hand for you (and perhaps it's not) youd probably improve your game a LOT by posting hands here frequently and seeing what people here have to say.

Jordan,


First off, I doubt that Jim will respond to this post, and if he does he will tell you clearly played it wrong, which you did. Posts like this never get the response that the poster looks for. If you need someone you played the hand well, I doubt you will find it here.


It appears to me that you need attention or someone to tell you that you played this hand well. You won the hand, however you were behind until the river and you didnt even realize it. Your opponent flopped the nut straight. If an Ace hit on the end, you would have paid him off like an ATM. You also were drawing to the third nut flush. Your opponent could have had AJ or AK diamonds.


Did you even consider that your opponent could have had AK diamonds or AJ diamonmds and you were drawing dead.


Perhaps Jim and Bob know what they are speaking about and you are the one who needs to learn. If this is an indication of your game, I would like you in mine.


What a shame that youth is wasted on the young.


Good luck and perhaps instead of critizing expert players you should reevaluate your game.

Thats a little harsh. I think you are going to have to deal with the fact that the young are going to start taking over the game of poker, because unlike the olden days (lol) books can teach players the fundamentals and they don't need ten years of experience of trial and error to figure out what works.


Kids can learn quicker these days.

This hand was actually 6 handed and I beleive to be correct play in a shorthanded pot, from your responses I would say that in a full ring despite it being only the button and BB I have to give them way more credit for a hand.


See interesting hand in heads-up and shorthanded forum where I stand by my play completely.

"Please reply"


"I enjoyed reading yours and Bob's book middle limit holdem poker, especially the numerous example hands shown. . . Your book was quoted in a reply to playing the following hand and I would like your opinion on this hand."


I don't see the sort of disrespect here that you do. Bob rarely posts here; when Jim does, it's never with the attitude of "I know what I'm talking about and you are the one who needs to learn."


Highly unlikely, it would seem, one of his opponents had Ad-Jd.

why didnt you state it was 6 handed to begin with?

that certainly makes a difference.


also dont get so defensive. they guy who said you want attention is some illogical fool but i think there's certainly some value to what catsclaw and i had to say. esp. the part about posting more hands here.

I don't think Jordan's play was way off on this hand. In fact, Ciaffone in his book "Improve your Poker" on the chapter "Raising and Missing" gives an example similar to Jordan's. The whole chapter is about when to bet on the flop w/ AK or AQ when it completely misses you.


p133-134 Ciaffone in an example advises that if you raise with A-Q spades, get three callers, and the flop comes out J(h)-10(s)-3(c) that you should bet "because a king on fourth street gives me the nut straight. I also have a backdoor spade draw, which is not a lot, but still a consideration. Be more aggressive when you have some extra outs".


Of course if Jordan suspected that he would be raised (then reraised), this play would not be correct, but once sucked in I think he has proper odds to his gut-shot, even if not to the nuts, unlike Ciaffone's hand.


I do agree with the above posters that Jordan should NOT bet the river. Otherwise he does not seem that out of line, although the decision to bet can go either way.


Just my two cents,


JB

The example from the Ciaffone book is very different from Jordan's hand. The gutshot straight draw in Ciaffone's hand is to the nuts, and as it uses both of his hole cards, it is much less likely to be shared with someone else (or beaten). Ciaffone's backdoor flush draw is to the nuts. In the Ciaffone hand, hitting an Ace or Queen is much more likely to be good. In particular hitting a Queen puts four to a straight on the board in Jordan's hand, but only three to a straight in Ciaffone's hand. Ciaffone's hand is much stronger than Jordan's.


I'm still trying to figure out how this went from being a six-handed $5/10 hand to a ten-handed $15/30 hand. Six-handed, I think that Jordan's play was OK, although I think I'd dump the hand either for the second raise on the flop or on the turn. Ten-handed, I can still see how he got caught up in the installment plan, but I think he has a clear fold on the turn. He might fold on the flop, depending on (a) what he thinks BB is check-raising with and (b) what he thinks the button is smooth-calling and re-raising with. I find that when people smooth call and then re-raise on the flop, it generally signifies a big hand or a big draw. Considering that the BB also seems to like his hand, I think that Jordan is in bad shape.

you are correct. The flop is very different.


J-10-3 rainbow--worth a bet.

J-9-8 two of one suit--no nut backdoor--fold!

I think that betting Jordan's flop is fine. He was the pre-flop raiser, and he only has two opponents. When he determines that they both like their hands, I think he has a muck, even six-handed.

You just won't give up on this hand. I quess us old farts who play for a living aren't too stupid.

This post was put in the shorthanded section and I mistakenly questioned his flop call assuming the game was ten-handed. I asked if he would play this hand the same way if it was a 10-handed game versus shorthanded. He didn't agree with my post and wants validation from other players that his 10-handed strategy is correct.

Here's the reply that I mistakenly posted in the shorthanded section asking how he would play the same hand 10-handed. He didn't like my answer thinking my play was weak tight.


On second thought calling on the back-door flush draw probably is a little loose.


Let's agree that I was in the wrong post and can't read...Shorthanded you can't let yourself get pushed off your hand although if your read is right you are drawing awfully thin to the nut straight and flush.


10 handed I had problems with your play on the flop (although in a full game I might limp UTG with AQ offsuit given the limit you were playing at).


"Worst case scenario I am up against a diamond draw. Now I have only 3 clean outs and 15:1 against but I am getting 14:1"


Your worst case scenario given the board is the both the nut flush draw and the nut straight which your correctly put the player on. Now you have 3 clean


outs against the nut straight (15:1) to split the pot since the other 10 is sitting in the BB's hand if your read was correct. The implied odds that the pot is


offering do not support a call here. The back door flush may jusitify a call assuming you were drawing to the nut, which you weren't. Put the Ad in your


hand and I call to look at the turn.


"I do agree with Ciaffone and Brier's numerous explanations about not counting on implied odds too much in situations like this because of redraws (boat


etc.), but the pot odds of 14:1 are ENOUGH!"


The pot was laying you 14:1 against 3 clean outs 15:1 to the non-nut straight and non-nut backdoor flush. You NEEDED MUCH HIGHER pot odds to


make a call here due to the redraws (higher flush) and one-card straight draw to spit (implied odds are reduced).


On the turn you picked up 9 outs an obviously had to call since the pot was laying you the correct odds here.


I liked the hand in a 10 handed game because it describes the borderline decisions you need to make in the heat of the moment. Knowing the pot and


implied odds makes these decisions easier.

"However, I feel that some of the hands that were close folds really do assume your opponents are neither loose nor overly aggressive. Players new to middle limits read these examples and may be folding too often as a result."


Our books usually assumes a "typical (somewhat predictable?)" opponent. The reason for this is two-fold. First, if you cannot beat a "typical" opponent or know what a "typical" opponent is representing by his betting actions, then you will probably not beat a tricky or simply unpredictable opponent either. Second, in presenting sufficient material to fully discuss every phase of the game, it was not feasible to provide multiple answers to every problem based on what kind of opponent you were facing. Dr. Alan Schoonmaker, in his excellent book "The Psychology Of Poker", discusses four different kinds of players which are: 1)Tight Passive, 2) Tight Aggressive, 3)Loose Passive, and 4) Loose Aggressive. Theoretically, we could have crafted an answer for all 400+ problems based on each type of opponent you were facing. But we would have needed to write a multi-volume set of books to do this, not just one book. It simply is not practical to write a book this way.


"$15/$30 10 handed."


Okay, so we are addressing a full game, not a short-handed game.


"I am UTG with the Ah-Qd and open with a raise."


I agree with this raise.


"folded to the button (a mediocre player aggressive usually at the wrong time) calls, SB folds, BB (over-aggressive player who suffers from fancy play syndrome) call."


Okay, so you only have two opponents whose preflop standards are suspect. With a bigger ace or a big pocket pair, I would assume the aggressive button would have 3-bet. So the button merely cold-calling tells me he has at best a medium pocket pair, a suited connector, or maybe two big cards loosely connected.


Flop is: Jd-8s-9d, giving you two overcards, a gutshot straight draw, and a backdoor flush draw.


"(I am assuming the big blind checked), I bet.."


I would also lead at the flop in this situation. You have only two opponents and you were the preflop raiser. You might win the pot outright. You need to bet to figure out where you stand.


"..the button calls, BB raises,..."


So you now got check-raised. By my count you are getting better than 10-to-1 pot odds which seem pretty good. The problem is that none of your outs are clean. A ten gives you a straight, but anyone with king-queen has a bigger straight and anyone with just a queen has the same straight resulting in you winning only half the pot. A queen does not look like an out which will get you the pot given what is on the board. An ace is an out to top pair, but will top pair win? I might take off a card for another $15 but folding is reasonable.


"..button now reraises. BB calls."


Okay, so now your pot odds are up to around 14-to-1, but the likelihood of you being up against some kind of made hand has now skyrocketed. I would definitely dump it here having no hand and remote draws which are very tenuous.


"Turn is the 7d. (I assume BB checks.), you check..."


Having played this far, you have to go for your flush-draw even though it is the third nuts. I would check as you did.


"..the button bets, BB calls, I call."


Since you don't have to fear the pot getting raised, I would also call hoping that I am drawing live.


"River is the 4d (giving you the third nut-flush), BB checks, I bet, ..."


I would not bet here. With four diamonds now on the table you can easily be up against the Kd or the Ad. If you are not, you may not get calls from a worse hand unless it happens to include a diamond.


"button calls, BB folds, button turns over Qs-Td. I take it down with a queen-high flush."


I think you got very lucky on this hand.

Wasn't this hand played at $5/$10. Thought I would post your shorthanded post here on why you called the flop and turn bets.

I asked how he would play this hand 10-handed.


The beginning of the post reads "5/10 6 handed", not only are you in the wrong forum but READ!


You totally missed why I find this hand interesting. Had I checked the flop and BB bet and BB reraised counting the automatic call by BB I am getting


10:2 odds or 5:1 and by 10 handed thinking could consider folding, in a full ring game in this situtation I give this option more weight.


Further had it been I bet raise raise, I would be getting 12:2 odds or 6 to 1 and now have even more reason to assume one or two hands I am drawing thin


too and can consider making a laydown, again 10 handed thinking.


I find it funny you mention Brier and Ciaffone's book which is exactly the most recent book I read.


But if you READ the hand you will see I bet(not unreasonable even in a 10 handed game with only the big blind and the button calling.) It is because it


went bet call raise ( I am getting 10:1 on the first call and 14:1 on the second one) that I can play and this is prefectly legitimate 10 handed thinking!. Worst


case scenario I am up against a diamond draw. Now I have only 3 clean outs and 15:1 against but I am getting 14:1 and the player on the button is too


unpredictable to be put on a diamond draw. Further, it is unlikely for BB to reraise with a flush draw especially against strength on the button and SB he


has got to know he is drawing.


When BB reraised in this manner it usually means the nuts(or the player is wacky). I was thinking a straight or set and both of these possibilities give me 4


clean outs or better than 12:1. I do agree with Ciaffone and Brier's numerous explanations about not counting on implied odds too much in situations like


this because of redraws (boat etc.), but the pot odds of 14:1 are ENOUGH!


Now on the turn BB bets, I made the correct read of a straight with him, and button did not raise, again noone has the flush and I called.


Now on the river I bet(not letting this get checked down) straight or set will make a crying call. I give no weight to A of diamonds (the king is a slight


worry) as button would have raised with any ace against the blinds.


In my original post I purposely left out my reasoning to see what some pros would say, I simply put in the odds very similar to the explanation that BRIER


and CIAFFONE use for their example problems.


One big word of caution about Mid Limit Poker MANY of the hands in their book, they advise folding even in close situtations. These folds are okay if


everyone is playing correct strategy and not playing overagressive or loose. This is so often not the case. Folding a pot when you have the best hand and


maybe even best hand plus a good draw is just about the worst mistake you can make. I caution you about making all those big laydowns they suggest as


your opponents really have to be solid "rock type" players in a ring game for some of the close ones to be correct. If you are calling in those situtations you


are losing a fraction of a bet and avoiding a major mistake of folding a big pot which is legitimately yours.

I think many of you poster here have some serious READING problems.


My original post is nothing but complementary to Bob and Jim as I highly respect them for a well written book with excellent examples, that is why I have asked them as the writers of it so evaluate a hand I beleive is close enough to call and not fold.


My problem is with very inexperienced players quoting the book as reasoning for folding everytime they see a hand that nearly resembles one of the hands they saw in the book. As I beleive some of the examples are only correct provided the players are solid, non-overagressive types.


This hand I just changed to be 10 handed 15/30 was actually a 6 handed 5/10 hand but a really poor reader such as yourself forgot what forum it was (heads-up and shorthanded) and also decided to ignore the 5/10 6 max in the first line and decided to criticize my play as poor 10 handed play.


Now I agree in a 10 handed game raising UTG with AQo and betting the flop with a dangerous board are mistakes, but that was not the purpose of the post.


I was much more interested in Jim's response to folding the 14:1 pot odds because of fearing the diamond flush draw, when my read of this hand was for sure BB did not have diamonds (flopped straight or set) and given buttons previous overagressive play I would put him on no better than top pair(these two players types were explained in my post). My read of both their hands was 100% correct and is explained in the other forum.


If you bothered to read my post in mid stakes carefully or the entire thread in the heads-up and shorthanded play you would have picked up on this. Your post indicates you have some serious reading problems.

I thought the purpose of this forum was to take the good with the bad...Accepting the fact that I can't read I think Jim's book doesn't say fold in every marginal situation against typical oppenents. Given the limit and the loose agressive nature of your opponents I understand your logic I just didn't agree... Let's agree it's ok to disagree.

I agree with your reasoning on every street and would have likley folded on the flop to the raise.


I misposted this hand and feel very foolish as I can't remember the actual hand but I was sure a king gave me the nut straight.

I am truly sorry. I misposted this hand from the very beginning(in the other forum) and cut and pasted the same misposted hand here as well. In the actual hand I needed a king for the nut straight (using both my cards) and the flop is wrong for this to be true and I can't fix it so it makes sense.


You are 100% correct for a 10 handed game and calling the flop raise or reraise is a bit loose for shorthanded as well.


I totally agree with your original post in the other forum (except the misreading part).

This is almost comical. You change it from a six-handed $5/10 game to a ten-handed $15/30 game. You now admit that you got the hand wrong to begin with, so wrong that you don't know how to fix it. And you're heaping abuse on Shiva because he misread the original post. It's easy to forget which forum you're on. I mean, there's what, thirty of them? And I don't think that people with obvious spelling problems should criticize people with possible reading problems too harshly.


I agree that if one blindly follows the advice in Brier/Ciaffone too rigidly, that he is in danger of being run over by observant opponents. You can't get pushed off of every hand just because people show aggression and the board is scary. In this case, though, you have no hand. You have Ace-freaking-high. You have some dubious draws, none of them to anything like the nuts, on a highly coordinated board. Both of your opponents like their hands. Dump it, even six-handed.


Perhaps the board was JT8 and the other guy had Q9 for the flopped straight?


And why the hell wouldn't you raise UTG with AQo in a ten-handed game? If you raise pre-flop and get two callers, betting the flop should be your default strategy. Betting this flop was fine.

I agree that if one blindly follows the advice in Brier/Ciaffone too rigidly, that he is in danger of being run over by observant opponents. You can't get pushed off of every hand just because people show aggression and the board is scary.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well you agree then with the original intention of my post.

------------------------------------------------

In this case, though, you have no hand. You have Ace-freaking-high. You have some dubious draws, none of them to anything like the nuts, on a highly coordinated board. Both of your opponents like their hands. Dump it, even six-handed.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If you read the other parts of this thread you will find I have already said the same thing. This is really not the hand I played and is a POOR example to prove what we both agree on.


------------------------------------------------

JT8 and the other guy had Q9


Your hand is not bad for illustrating this point.


In this case if the 3 better has 7 9 then UTG has 4 clean outs and if they have a set UTG has 4 clean outs. Against Q9 UTG only has 3 outs assuming noone is on a diamond draw.


UTG either has approx 15:1 or approx 12:1 assuming diamonds are not out there. The agression on the flop is not likely to indicate diamonds as Button could have called and ended the betting and it is not worth it for them to raise unless they also had top pair and a diamond draw. BB is unlikely to have a diamond draw and 3 bet with it, unless they have specifically KQ diamonds and that is impossible given that UTG has the Queen.


The pot odds are 14:1 so it becomes a close call, with these opponents a set, two pair, top pair weak kicker, nut straight, second straight, or just a straight draw are not out of the question and most leave 4 clean outs thus UTG can here. I am not going to consider reverse implied odds here due to redraws in a 3 handed pot, maybe it makes the call a little less attractive but not by much.

Given the limit of the game he was playing, I am assuming you have a typical low limit table where raising with AQ offsuit means you get 5 callers trying to crack the raisers hand. However, AQ offsuit is not a hand you want to play multiway so a raise is the right idea. Raising UTG with AQ in a loose game is discussed in HPFAP.


I think he got upset because I told him if he doesn't fix the leaks in his game post flop its going to cost him a lot of money as he moves up to higher limits. Lucky draw outs sometimes reinforce bad play.

I don't agree that raising utg with AQo is a mistake in a full game.

this whole thread reads like someone who knows a lot of pokerspeak but doesn't really understand what he's saying. There's nothing more irritating than the indignant pisser.