no-limit question

The game was No-limit Hold’em (paradise poker) with blinds of .25 and .50. I opened for $2,50 from middle position with AhKc. I got two callers, one from late position and one blind. The flop came


Ks 3h 5h


The fist player checked, made a $6 bet, the second pre flop caller folded, and the fist player called. I had $93 in my stack, the caller had $40. Turn came:


( Ks 3h 5h ) 9h


My remaining opponent checked.


If I bet now, I thought to my self, I will only get action from the flush, and I don’t need that kind of action. If I check, I might out draw him if he has a flush. On the other hand, if my hand is good, I can perhaps extract some more money from him on the river.


I checked too.


However, an off suit queen came on the river. My opponent made a seven dollar bet, and I paid him of. He had K Q for two pair. Of course, this was annoying way to loose the pot, since he had only two outs.


Did I play this hand well?


/S

I would have played it EXACTLY the same as you did. Had the ace of hearts not been in your hand it might have been correct to fire away on the turn.

Two things that i have to say, first of all i would not check in that situation and would instead bet out again you are probably ahead and even if your not your have 9 outs to the nut flush. Second of all, you thought he might have a flush so you checked behind him on the turn, now the river didn't bring another heart so why in God's name did you call his bet on the river. You had a plan and you didn't stick to it. Either pump it on the turn or release it on the river


-MJ

Why did I call on the river? Because I didn't think he would be one third of of the pot with a flush. I thought it was a pretty weak bet. I would have folded to a normal size bet.

it hard to say but the way i think is that he made no plays to indicate he had a flush and your hand is quite large at this point why not bet. especially since he has only 40 bucks left and you can bet many different amounts depending on your read of him.


plus there are many hands he might have that he will call a bet with but not get broke on the river. by checking you lose those opportunities. and since you figured you would fold to a bet you left yourself to be bluffed out say if he missed.

finally if you would only get action from a flush then you should make large bets every time a three flush hits to rob whats out there.

I like the way you played the hand, maybe not for the same reasons you stated.


Bet the flop. You're probably big.


There's nothing much to draw to on that flop. Either hearts or 42 or 36. So when he calls he's probably on hearts or on a king or he has you beat.


Once the heart turns you're only ahead if he has a worse king. If you bet the turn and he checkraises you all in you have a tough call. If you're ahead he probably has at most 3 outs to improve so giving a freecard isn't that dangerous.


You must realize that hand if you check the turn you're inviting him to bluff you on the river. Or he might bet a worse king for value. Either way, you must call any reasonable bet on the river no matter what falls.


Sincerely, Andreas

Don't underbet the pot on the flop. One problem with checking the turn is that you could set yourself up to be bluffed out on the river.


-MD

his bet on the river looks pretty weak? how about your check on the turn? if you check in position every time a 3rd suited card falls on the turn, you will be losing a lot of money to rivers that will crack you. so far there's no real indication that he has a flush, and if he check-raises you, you can make a decision on whether or not to continue with the hand. when you checked the turn, all you did was tell your opponent you did not have the flush. OK you got a free card for yourself by checking, but you gave him the card that beat you for FREE. think about that!


Since the turn IS a scare card, remember it's a scare card for both you AND him. you made a $6 bet on the flop. ask yourself, "should a bet on the turn be more proportional to my prior bet? or should it be more proportional to the pot? or his stack?" if i have the player covered, and i have a hand like yours, like top pair top kicker in position, i usually like to bet as if i'm after his whole stack. Also you have to ask yourself when you bet the turn, what are you trying to do? make him fold? make him call? or make it LOOK like you want him to call? without knowing anything about the player, i probably would have put a $20 bet in. if he raises all in, it's an easy fold because that's a significant check raise.


Think about it: if you bet only another $6, it makes it both easy for him to call, and also easy for him to CHECK-RAISE you to 18, or whatever he feels would be enough to get you to fold. A sizeable bet on the turn is mandatory. Of course this is easier said in hindsight, but there was no indication that he had the flush, and even if he did, you had outs for the flush anyway.


this is a classic example of how weak KQ can be when you're being heavily bet into with top pair 2nd kicker. he not just got lucky, but you LET him get lucky!

If you look back at the action. The ONLY reasonable hands that you beat on the turn are KQ and KJ. Furthermore, I at least wouldn't play neither KQ nor KJ in the blinds vs. a raise. If he has one of thoose hands he has two or three outs.


I actually feel that giving a free card is superior over an automatic bet on the turn. The key is that there is no other reasonable draws out.


If it had been KQ4 twotone flop I'd be much more inclined to bet again on the turn. Had the Q not fallen on the river you can collect an extra bet if he bets or bet for value yourself (since you showed weakness on the turn you're more likely to get called aswell.)


Sincerely, Andreas