No Limit hand results

Wow. So many people got it right or very close. I would NOT want you all in my game.


The result is that Sam called, which should cement it for most of you.


I think the key to getting the answer is changing your read on the weak player. If you are in Sam's place and the weak player goes all-in for 10x the pot, what do you call with? It can't be AK, it can't be another middle pair. That leaves very little doesn't it? You KNOW the odds are good that the all-in kid has a big hand. And you KNOW that another good player may try to shut you out of the pot if you just call and they happen to have a large pair or even AK.


So when Sam B cold-calls, the alarm bells should go off. Sam is NOT trying to encourage a multi-way pot here.


If you are sitting behind him, you KNOW that he can't cold call the all-in without having a hand that can stand more heat. If he has a hand like that, why didn't he raise? He's trying to trap. He knows there's a loose aggressive big stack behind him. NOBODY is going to come in and play with Sam for 250. Sam is going to get raised or he's going to face the weak player heads up.


So Sam obviously has AA or KK. KK is slightly less likely because it is slightly more risky.


Once Bernard moves all-in, you now realize that the weak player was overbetting a medium pair at best, maybe even something lame like KQ. Because both Sam and Bernard have damn big hands.


Once Sam calls, you know that Sam trapped Bernard's KK with AA.


For Sam to make the first with ANYTHING other than KK or AA is a terrible move. The two fold situation of calling an all-in overbet, and risking getting pushed out by a big bet behind him, means that he can only have two hands. Sam would have to fold JJ here and since he's an expert he would also fold QQ I believe. He MIGHT call with QQ and release to a big bet, but I doubt it.


This was one of the best traps I've ever seen, and the funny thing is that since you know the players are good, you can know for certainty what Sam has. If you are the player holding KK, you can consider folding when Sam coldcalls the all-in since you have one of the two hands Sam can possibly hold. It's hard to blame Bernard for committing with his KK, but once he got called, he knew it was over and that he had made a huge mistake.


I liked this hand a lot because the supreme expert at the table made a move that had NO disguise. He could only have one, maybe two, possible hands. You're sitting at the table, you watch him call, you know exactly where he's at. There's absolutely nothing else he could be holding. Especially after the call of Bernard's all-in bet. After that, you can bet the house on what Sam and Bernard have.


Sam: AA, Bernard:KK, weak player: JTs


natedogg

I think Bernard can call with his K's knowing that Sam has A's. He knows Sam has A's making it very unlikely that the All-in player has far less then his K's. Now I don't know if Sam will pay off Bernard if he hits his set, but if he will not Bernard may be able to make a move on Sam if a flop comes ragged or Q high. Sam would see the call, and he would know that Bernard is trying to draw out on him... Bernard would be very hard to put on a hand if he had just called, and he could have made a set with anything from 99 thru KK. This also leaves room to consider that Bernard, acting last, can make a move on the flop or turn.


Obviously Bernard did not consider this because he overbet the pot by 6X.


The weak player is obviously clueless. Go all-in, for several times the pot... so that you will only be called by hands that dominates you.


Just my thoughts,


Great Post


Derrick

Great post! You're right, once Sam calls, it's clear. It brings to mind a post DS made a year or so ago about the cost of information. I think Bernard pays too much to find out he's beaten.

I agree with Derrick. I think if I am Bernard I can call with hands like 99-KK. This is why I am not sure it was a great idea for Sam to call 250 rather then raise. With a 3K stack you have great implied odds if you do flop a set. If Sam only had 1K I think he is right to call with AA.


Clearly Bernard was mistaken to move in here with KK. I think calling, or even making it 1000 is fine.

No miracles on the board I'm guessing?


AA: 64.68%
KK: 17.17%
JTs: 18.15%



assuming best case scenarios for JTs (ie, AA and KK have 4 suits, and the only one with a suit of the JT is the AA).

I have seen Sam call overbets that size from crazy players with much less than AA and KK.

The weak player made two pair to win the main pot of $750. Sam busted Bernard for the rest.


natedogg

Not sure either where you get your numbers, or why you think JTs is better off with some of its suit in the hands of other players, I get these results:


Hand 1: JH TH Hand 2: AS AH Hand 3: KC KD 1370754 boards are possible. Winnings per hand are: Hand Fair Outright At least Outright No Equity Odds wins split Losses -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 01 18.0938% 0.2209:1 18.0233% 18.2348% 81.7652% 02 64.7429% 1.8363:1 64.6724% 64.8839% 35.1161% 03 17.1633% 0.2072:1 17.0928% 17.3043% 82.6957%


and:Hand 1: JH TH Hand 2: AS AC Hand 3: KC KS 1370754 boards are possible. Winnings per hand are: Hand Fair Outright At least Outright No Equity Odds wins split Losses -- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 01 19.8800% 0.2481:1 19.7782% 20.0837% 79.9163% 02 64.9813% 1.8556:1 64.8795% 65.1850% 34.8150% 03 15.1387% 0.1784:1 15.0368% 15.3424% 84.6576%


Iain.

Matt, no limit is almost entirely situational. I know you know that! :)


Neither the weak player nor Bernard was described by me as "crazy".


Sam may have done all kinds of things in other situations in the past, but in THIS situation, there is really only one or maybe two hands he COULD have held, given the players and the action and the stacks and the position.


natedogg