Enjoyable hand

[PrayingMantis]

It's a $55+5 turbo. Pretty early, but I have some meaningful reads: it's a loose table. MP1 (the PF miniraiser) has been miniraising PF a few times already. He's doing it with very marginal hands, and is making post-flop mistakes with some not so good play (although he was lucky enough to win a big pot). CO is another very loose, half-aggressive, pretty clueless player. I've played him before.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t30 (9 handed)

saw flop|<font color="C00000">saw showdown</font>

UTG (t1480)
UTG+1 (t1540)
<font color="C00000">MP1 (t2545)</font>
MP2 (t1230)
MP3 (t1470)
CO (t1480)
Button (t1305)
SB (t1010)
<font color="C00000">Hero (t1440)</font>

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls t30, <font color="CC3333">MP1 raises to t60</font>, MP2 folds, MP3 folds, CO calls t60, Button folds, SB folds, Hero calls t30, UTG+1 calls t30.

Flop: (t255) 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(4 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, <font color="CC3333">MP1 bets t30</font>, <font color="CC3333">CO raises to t60</font>, Hero calls t60, UTG+1 calls t60, MP1 calls t30.

Turn: (t495) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(4 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG+1 checks, MP1 checks, <font color="CC3333">CO bets t60</font>, <font color="CC3333">Hero raises to t330</font>, UTG+1 folds, MP1 calls t330, CO folds.

River: (t1215) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="CC3333">MP1 bets t390</font>, Hero calls t390.

Final Pot: t1995
<font color="green">Main Pot: t1995 (t1995), between MP1 and Hero.</font>

Comments?

[durron597]

I hope he didn't have KQ, so you could split. I hate a turn check-raise here when you have no idea what your opponent has and he will never fold. Unless you think it was likely enough he was playing at you with just a Jack?

Remember, even fish wake up to hands sometimes. I would just call this one down the whole way. It's not like, after all, the 5h is a scare card for your hand, no reason to win the pot right now and you will get less chips in the times you are behind to KQ.

Unless you are sure he would have reraised the turn with KQ.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope he didn't have KQ

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know which of my opponents you are speaking about, but why would any of them have KQ? MP1 can have a ton of hands, among them many Ax, low PPs, all kind of draws, etc. CO for me is on a J or a draw. None of them has the Q, the big majority of the time. Nothing in the flop action and turn indicates there's a better hand than mine out there.

[ QUOTE ]
I hate a turn check-raise here when you have no idea what your opponent has and he will never fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty confident I'm ahead here, when the action is back to me. I fold to a reraise and I don't need a fold from any of them: at that point I want them to pay for their draws. And they are paying A LOT at this point (only MP1 stayed in, though). I don't quite see your point.

[ QUOTE ]
Remember, even fish wake up to hands sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, Thanks for reminding me. /images/graemlins/grin.gif A more important thing to remember, is that with most fish, when they have a hand you can sense it, if you're good enough. That's why they are fish.

[ QUOTE ]
I would just call this one down the whole way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would I call with a hand I'm pretty much confident (on the turn, when the action is back to me), is the best? Sounds like bad poker to me.

[ QUOTE ]
It's not like, after all, the 5h is a scare card for your hand, no reason to win the pot right now and you will get less chips in the times you are behind to KQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 5h is pretty much a blank, so I don't quite see your point. Anyway, Being afraid of KQ (with this action, and 2 Q's I see) is weak, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
Unless you are sure he would have reraised the turn with KQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I'm not sure who's "he" (I guess you mean CO), but I defintely don't see KQ playing this way.

The whole idea of playing marginal hands like Q9o out of position, is to extract the most value out of them when you think you're against weak enough opposition. Otherwise I don't see the reason to play it to begin with. Calling down when most chances are that I'm ahead, and people will pay me with their few outs on the turn, is -EV when compared to a stronger move.

Thanks for your reply.

[ChrisV]

MP1 is either a complete idiot or has you beat.

You need to take control of the betting on the flop, either by reraising or by betting out on the first place. Giving a free card on the turn is a disaster. Of course it's hard to reraise with such a shitty hand, which is why I'd fold Q9 in the first place (that, and the guys I play with are generally not dumb enough to fire out such a lame bet on the turn).

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
MP1 is either a complete idiot or has you beat.


[/ QUOTE ]

I read him as an idiot, before the hand begun. Thus, most chances he hasn't got me beaten.

[ QUOTE ]
You need to take control of the betting on the flop, either by reraising or by betting out on the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

I considered it of course, but decided to go for cold-calling, and seeing their action on the turn. I still wasn't sure enough I'm ahead, and calling was cheap.

[ QUOTE ]
Giving a free card on the turn is a disaster.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it's a disaster. It's a hand I can get out of in a second. If the turn card is some blank (which it was), and the action indicates I'm ahead, I'm taking control on the turn. I think in this case it's better than doing this on the flop, with many opponents, no position, and still not too much invested.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course it's hard to reraise with such a shitty hand, which is why I'd fold Q9 in the first place

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't fold it against such weak opponents when I have to pay 30 into a 225 pot PF, and (practically) closing the action (I don't see UTG+1 reraising). Actually, I'm not sure I'd fold anything.

[ QUOTE ]
that, and the guys I play with are generally not dumb enough to fire out such a lame bet on the turn).

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. I have this great ability of finding dumb opposition. Game selection, that's the key! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
MP1 is either a complete idiot or has you beat.


[/ QUOTE ]

I read him as an idiot, before the hand begun. Thus, most chances he hasn't got me beaten.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was the assumption behind my entire post (that he either is a complete idiot or has you beat). I hate betting on idiocy (though maybe if I did my ROI would be higher at the levels I play).

The reason why the 5h is a good card for your hand is that if you turn out to be against QT you aren't outkicked anymore. Though if you're the one with the better kicker it screws you.

Basically, KQ is the only hand I can put MP1 on without him being a total idiot, and that's only if he's afraid of AQ, Unless he's slowplaying a total monster like 55 or something (which I doubt).

In other words, if MP1 is enough of an idiot that you have the best hand here most of the time, then your line is fine and our comments won't mean anything because the whole hand is player dependant.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
This was the assumption behind my entire post (that he either is a complete idiot or has you beat). I hate betting on idiocy (though maybe if I did my ROI would be higher at the levels I play).

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not betting on idioticy when you are facing idiots? I thought that my first paragraph in the OP made it clear this guy is a very weak player (=idiot). Miniraising limpers with marginal hands PF, as he did a few times already in this game, is a sign of idioticy. What else do you need?

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, KQ is the only hand I can put MP1 on without him being a total idiot

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, this is weak thinking in my book, even without knowing him. He miniraised PF (as he already did in this game), then bet less than 1/8 the pot (a mini-bet!), with "TP2ndK" (that you put him on) on a drawing board, and only called a miniraise. Then _checked_ on the turn. If you read this guy for KQ, well, I don't have much to say. And even if he's on KQ, he's a total idiot, so your point is still not very clear. The only thing that matters for me is that most chances I'm way ahead of him, according to the way he acts.

[ QUOTE ]
our comments won't mean anything because the whole hand is player dependant.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not a case of a hand being "player dependant" (=can't be fully discussed here) as you have all the information I have (I gave it all in the original post). Your comments simply indicate you are probably giving some very bad players way too much respect. ChrisV's comments in this thread were different in this sense, and were more relevant to the real dynamics of the hand and the players.

[PrayingMantis]

Results:

MP1 had K /images/graemlins/spade.gif7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif. My hand is good.

I posted it not because I think there's something very special about it, but because I think there are some big +EV situations to exploit specifically in the early stages of the game (that "solid" players usually give up, playing a safe tight game). That's due to these reasons:

1) good implied odds.

2) more bad players still around (they usualy bust early, naturaly, and it's a waste not to take some of their chips before others do)

3) (on stars, at least) still quite a lot of room for outplaying your opponents post flop, even with very marginal hands.

That's why I thought it was interesting. Thanks for the replies.

Edit: it's very important to add that these moves are probably not recommended for players who are still not too sure of their game, or don't have enough expirience of course. Personally I do it quite a lot with quite a lot of success.

[Jason Strasser]

PM,

I think the most important thing you did in this hand was wait until the turn to raise. It doesnt take much to bet 30 into a ~250 pot, and it doesnt take much to min raise the 30 bet. It is very likely these players have a pair (which is probably drawing against you), or a straight or flush draw. You waited until a friendly turn hit to raise. Now people are going to be paying a crappy price for their draws, and you also are in a situation where there is a good chance the worst that can happen is a split pot.

If you raise on the flop, you invite a reraise with a draw, and other crap you don't want to deal with.

In terms of preflop, the insight behind your call is boring. It is very easy to see why a good player can call here. On party sometimes stacks are too shallow, and often to make this type of play you need reads, which means if you play a lot of tables you wont often have good reads.

FWIW, I would not have value bet the river unless you were against uber fish. I like the check because it induces a bluff from hands you beat, and a bet will often result in a fold from a hand you beat.

I like the way you played this hand, I don't think I would've played it so well. I probably would've just called it all down, I generally dont have a good enough read on my opponent to justify value raising this turn. Against an average opponent I'd think this raise is borderline.

ni han,
-Jason

[PrayingMantis]

Thanks for the reply, Joson. You have it very similar to how I see it.

PF: I'm not folding this.

Flop: I am patient enough, and can pay a little here, to see another card in order to attack on it. As you described it very well, on the flop you are more "vulnerable" to a reraise. On the turn, OTOH, your opponent/s are more "with their back to the wall". There are situations where the turn is the better place than the flop to come out strongly - I think this is one of these situations (some factors here are: the marginality of my hand, my position with regard to the MP1 and CO, the amount of opponents, the nature of the board, the pot size, and the relatively deepness of stacks).

Turn: it's a friendly card and I do make my move. Now I basically put MP1 on a draw: straight and flush draws are possible.

River: I agree with you completely that value betting here is useles, especially since I put him on a draw previously. I want him to bluff me out with his busted draw - it's significantly more profitable. Especially if he puts ME on a busted draw or a turn bluff (if he puts me on anything).

And he does pretty much what I expect him to do, almost on the dollar.

BTW, I don't think this kind of playing by my opponent is very rare - he's a fish (a specific kind of fish), not some completely crazy and idiotic kind of player, and there are such fish even in the highest buy-ins. Most of the time they are living "short, early levels life". The point is to recognize the style of the relevant fish. There are opponents you can read as such "loose, overplaying, mini-raising, calling and betting very marginal hands" fish even after a few hands - that's because they play almost any hand, and make very exploitable moves early on. With a zero read on him, I wouldn't recommend such a play of course.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
1) good implied odds.

2) more bad players still around (they usualy bust early, naturaly, and it's a waste not to take some of their chips before others do)

3) (on stars, at least) still quite a lot of room for outplaying your opponents post flop, even with very marginal hands

[/ QUOTE ]

2 and 3 are the reason why 1 may be true

those chips mean less with the blinds at this level and this is a hard hand to hit well enough to play confidently post flop - the pot odds dont impress me much

i like fold - sit back and barrack for the chooks - but i usually play in a better field (where this sort of action is rare) and several at once

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[PrayingMantis]

Your points are well taken, but I guess we're simply seeing this differently.

[ QUOTE ]
those chips mean less with the blinds at this level

[/ QUOTE ]

I generally don't accept this. This hand moved me up from ~t1500 to ~t2600, i.e, first and dominant position. Of course, the difference is not the real EV of the move, but the potential to go into first position, getting your stack ~1.8 times bigger, is close enough to a double-up in my book. I cannot see how these chips don't matter, especially if there are some non-fish players around, waiting tightly for the field to narrrow. Part of my advantage on them (not all of it, of course), is that I'm willing to take +EV chances they won't take.

[ QUOTE ]
this is a hard hand to hit well enough to play confidently post flop - the pot odds dont impress me much

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree of course it's hard to play confidently post flop. But getting into marginal situations with the best of it might the a big advantage of a strong player. I don't know what pot-odds exactly you are speaking about (PF?), but, again, I don't see a good reason not to see a flop for ~2% my stack, when the pot is laying me almost ~8:1, and two of my opponents are weak player, who are able to make big post-flop mistakes.

[ QUOTE ]
i like fold - sit back and barrack for the chooks -

[/ QUOTE ]

If calling and playing is higher EV than folding, folding must be a mistake.

[ QUOTE ]
but i usually play in a better field (where this sort of action is rare) and several at once

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's getting rare the higher you climb. There are games where it's pretty common (especially the lowest). I, too, play several at once - however, not more than 3 or 4, and many times 2. I agree it's hard to get strong reads when you are multitabling.

Thanks for you comments, stripsqueez.

[joeboe2001]

What site is this on? Except for free rolls I rarely see anyone willing to bet that much AFTER they don't make their hand!!! I want some of this action!!!

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
What site is this on? Except for free rolls I rarely see anyone willing to bet that much AFTER they don't make their hand!!! I want some of this action!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

It's on stars. And if you've never induced a river-bluff at the right spot, well, it's a very usefull and important weapon, on any level, and any kind of poker. The whole point of it, is that some agrressive players will try to push you off your hand after they missed their draw: the pot is pretty big, they sense your river's "weakness", and the know they probably have zero chance to win the hand if they check behind. And they should bet big enough to scare you. It's very common, certainly not something you see only on freerolls (actully I haven't played a freeroll for ages... good memories).

[KenProspero]

Preying Mantis:

Comment/question from a relatively new player.

It seems like what you're saying here is that if you trust your read on a player, you have to go with it. If you're right more than you're wrong, then you're a good player. If you're wrong more than you're right, either figure out why, or you're the fish. Do I get the point?

With my (lack of) experience, I don't know that I'd have been able to make your read, pretty early in a tourney. But maybe someday.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems like what you're saying here is that if you trust your read on a player, you have to go with it. If you're right more than you're wrong, then you're a good player. If you're wrong more than you're right, either figure out why, or you're the fish. Do I get the point?

[/ QUOTE ]

You get it perfectly. think about it this way: what is one of the big advantages of a good player? the fact that he usually has better reads than others. better reads = better chances he's spot-on with the range of hands he puts his opponent on, and generally being succesful in anticipating his opponent/s behaviour at different situations. Now, if that's the case, NOT using these reads to act upon them, is a clear waste of potential money, and thus -EV. Of course, there will be times when even the greatest players are wrong, but if they are correct enough times (depending on the situation), they might be very far ahead of others, on the long run.

And yes, it comes with expirience: seeing _a lot_ of situations again and again. Recognizing patterns (in case of on-line play). And also a lot of thinking about the game, expiriencing with it, acting with some courage, and, I suspect, some natural talent, that I can't really quantify.

Basically, I think that good, simple intuition is a very important part of the game, even on-line. It's not something "mystical" - it's just the ability to sense where you stand against others, and to do so time and time again.

In many cases, folding a rather strong hand is as important as playing a marginal hand very strong. It's all part of the meaning of "outplaying".

[ QUOTE ]
With my (lack of) experience, I don't know that I'd have been able to make your read, pretty early in a tourney. But maybe someday.

[/ QUOTE ]

Take your time. After a few thousands of these games, if you are good at it, many hidden things (now) will start looking much more obvious to you. It is true for many aspects of the game, not only reads.

BTW, I titled this thread "enjoyable hand", because these are the hands I enjoy playing more than any others. Solid SNG play can be rather mechanical in many aspects. That's why such hands are such fun (and also a nice boost to anybody's ROI, IMO). Personally, I play them more and more, but it's certainly not something I'd recommend to anybody.