a limp gone bad

unfortunately I was involved in this hand in the 10-20 at foxwoods.


I had AdJd/6h and limped after there were three callers. The game was fairly weak and I was hoping to catch a high pair.


On fourth street I catch an A. It is checked to me and I bet. one player folds and my opponent raises after catching a 8. He was on tilt and was playing very loose and had just had an argument with another player about bluffing. It was a long story. he had a nine in the door. another player calls after catching a blank and i just call.


On fifth street I catch a jack. I check my opponent with the 89 catches a T. The third player catches a card suited with his door card. The 89T bets I raise both call.


On sixth the 89T catches another 8. He bets third player calls I raise and both call. The 89T8 then checks blind before the cards are dealt.


On the river after he checked the next player checks and I check. Then before the cards can get turned over the 89T8 tries to bet. The dealer informs himthat he already checked and he shows down AQJ in the hole.


Pat

Marginal hands such as (Ad,Jd)6h can be trouble since if you improve on 4th street and your opponents also improve, you're probably behind despite feeling good about catching a big pair.


I don't like the 6th street raise after you're opponent catches another 8. He raised when he caught the 8 on 4th street. That suggests he may have started with (9,8)9 and could have made two-pair on 4th street. Also, his board is very coordinated so you may have already been drawing slim against a straight on 5th street.


Checking blind is so dumb. It's like throwing away money. I see Mirage players regularly doing it with two-pair.


However, I regularly bet blind when I've got two-pair or even just one pair.

CHecking blind has always been sort of a contentious issue. When you bet blind do you make sure the table knows you did not look at your river.


Caro says this strong play usually means a weak hand, doesnt he? Are you playing on this, so they will call the 2 pr with a high pair? What are you hoping for when you make a play like this? A strongish hand folding or a weakish hand calling?


Thanks.


Todd

When I bet the river blind there are usually a few requirements that have beeen met:


1. I'm the high board. Or, if the high board checks to me.


2. I've been in control of the hand. Specifically, I bet on sixth street and wasn't raised.


3. I'll bet regardless of what my river card is. For example, if I've got Aces-up, I'm betting the river regardless of whether or not I improve. I never check my big two-pair hands. I suppose this is the most important reason and perhaps can stand on its own.


There are plenty of times when I bet the river blind and everybody knows it. I usually bet even before all the cards are dealt.


What am I trying to accomplish? Well, if I've got Aces-up, I want two-pair to call. If I have just a lone pair of Aces (which I also will bet blind if nobody has shown any resistance), then I want two-pair to fold. That oughta help. /images/smile.gif


If it accomplishes anything, it may be this: When you're in a hand against me, you're going to have to call a bet on every street. There will be no free showdown for your two-pair of 7s and 4s. You'll have to pay off my bigger two pair or hope I've just got one big pair.

I think you played fine, although the raise on sixth was perhaps a tad over-aggressive. Even players on tilt make trips sometimes. From his board and the action, it certainly looks like has something. I think you may have left out some key information. You have A6 showing on fourth street, and the action is checked to you. Either (a) one of your Aces is out, or (b) someone has paired his door card. Either of these is quite significant.


Did you have some compelling reason not to raise on third?


On the subject of betting and or/checking in the blind, I essentially never do it, as I fear giving away information on those occasions that I fail to act blind. I always mix in my river card with the other two (not taking 30 seconds to do this like some folks) and look at all three at once. I believe that my observant opponents (both of them) know that I do this. Once in a great while, I'll bet in the dark, but this is usually in a heads-up situation against an opponent with whom I spend more time than I do my own wife. I will occasionally fire a dark shot while playing hold'em.

I wouldn't always bet two high pair, even aces up. For example, there are many situations where you may have a single opponent on sixth street who you believe is drawing to a flush. I'd bet on sixth, of course, but not on seventh (assuming I have to go first). My thinking: he'll raise if he made the flush, fold if he didn't so there's no profit in betting here, especially as I'm probably going to call if he does raise me. I think aggression is great against many of the weak-tight players one faces in low limit, but it can be costly when you use it in situations where even weak players can pretty much know they have you beat.

Mason Malmuth suggests an interesting tell to watch for in this situation on the river (you have a good two pair, but your opponent was drawing to something that will beat you if he catches): if he looks at his last card, then collects just enough chips in his hand to call a bet, you can go ahead and bet with confidence. Mason claims that some sloppy opponents will do this, and that it's never an act when they do.

....checking blind on 7th st is such a dopey play - and you see it all the time, from Vegas to A.C. See straights and even flushes do it - forget about 2 pairs - they're almost never bet on the river. For the amount of times you get raised and lose, the called money that you win, will give you a long-term profit. Plus, you might win an occasional pot without having the best hand. It's like the blackack equivalent when a non-counter does not split 8's against a 10 or Ace or always insures his blackjack. Flushing money down the tube.

It is extremely rare for Stud players to raise on the river with anything less than trips. In fact, they usually have at least a flush in order to raise on 7th street. Just be sure you don't get an image of constantly folding to raises on the river. That would be a disaster.


I think you can "always" /images/smile.gif bet your big two pairs on the river. The money you'll make by getting called by smaller two pairs will more than make up for those time you get raised and call the raise.


I stunned a "Mr. Poker" (a guy who talks a lot and predicts hands) when I raised on the river with nothing but Jacks-up. He predicted I had a flush and couldn't believe I would raise with just Jacks-up. I had raised on 3rd street with split Jacks and was leading the betting. Then, someone made an open pair and started leading. I didn't make two-pair until the river and when I did I extracted an extra bet. Sadly, my opponent caught a King on the river and made Kings-up (for the popular three-pair) and won. I still like my river raise.

Hello,Dynasty,

I apologize for the "one-liners"

I'm one of those lazy sitting bull's.

I will be more considerate in the future.

Thanks for shaking the "laziness" out of me.


A former lazy Sitting Bull

I felt at the time that he was drawing to the straight but didnt have it so I raised onsixth street. Plus if he did have it the raise will force him to check the river even if he catches it since he will see that I raised into him when he was showing a straight. Or so I thought at the time! I guess he wanted to bet.


The raise is a play I often make here since if he will check on the river with a made hand I lose the same amount as if I check call teh river and he bets. But if I fill can bet and he will call earning me an extra bet.


Pat

This hand is a good lesson for those who check blind. Essentially the opponent lost two big bets at least by checking blind when he would have bet had he looked at his card. That is a heavy cost, two hours worth of work.


Pat

I didnt raise on third because the ante is small and there are enough callers that my hand makes more money by calling I think. If the ante was bigger then I would have raised, and also if I were in earlier position I would have raised. Also If I had the A up I would have raised.


That is not to say that I made the right play. In fact I think that those who said I should have raised on third are probably right, which was one of the reasons I posted this hand.


Pat

I think you are right that you can normally bet two pair on the river. But that is usually if it is heads up. against two draws like this you are better off checking and calling I think since if you bet and they both missed they will fold most of the time unless they have a pair. I felt that I showed enough strength that they would not call unless they could beat me so i was better off trying to catch one of them bluffing.


Pat

I'm not saying your inconsiderate. But, nobody is going to get much out of such short responses.

This is a hand I usually don't even play unless I'm the last player to act. Even then, I often fold if it's just AJ rather than AK in the hole.


Why would you raise? It seems like nothing but a pure bluff- not even a semi-bluff.

I misread the hand. I thought Pat had a three-flush. The diamonds and hearts look the same to me. This is a pretty marginal hand, but I usually limp in with it.

I dont think it was worth raising, but if you could knock out two of the limpers then you would raise. But at the time I felt that it was a good hand to limp since it cost me very litlle and if I caught an A I woudl win the pot and could knock out some players. ALso If the A were up I might raise and try to win by getting a scare card. But raising is marginal with this hand in a small ante game.


Pat

I agree Dynasty,

After all,this is not a poetry forum!


Sitting Bull