I think I did the right thing, but I'm being disputed.

[Key West]

I'm playing the $1/$2 at Party Poker, which seem to be disproportionately tight/aggressive on the whole, but that's all I can afford to play right now.

I've played 134 hands tonight, I've seen 16% of flops (~13 of them from the blinds, so you do the math) and of the 8 hands I've actually been in intentionally, I've managed to eek out 2 wins. Pretty shitty start to the night.

Anyway.

I'm dealt 33 in the small blind. There's 2 callers, one from early position and one from middle, and I call, BB checks. $4 in the pot.

** Dealing Flop ** [ 9s, Jc, 3h ]

Sweet, a set. And a paint. This is an aggressive table, board is a rainbow, no connectors, so I'll go for the check-raise:

Key_West checks.
PeachyMer checks.
PokerFreddie checks.
XSPEARMINT checks.
** Dealing Turn ** [ Td ]

Grrreeeat. Now there's a 3-straight out. I'd better go ahead and bet it in case someone's drawing.

Key_West bets [$2].
PeachyMer folds.
PokerFreddie folds.
XSPEARMINT raises [$4].

Crap. Bluffing? Let's find out.

Key_West raises [$4].
XSPEARMINT raises [$4].

Hm. Probably not. Well, either he's betting an open-ender (unlikely) he's made the straight (probably) or he really is bluffing (no.) KQ I think he raises preflop. 76s, maybe. Alright, 76s it is. Where's that put us? $18 in the pot. I've got 9:1 to hit my boat. 9 boat cards out there, plus 1 more trey, gives me 10 helpers and 46 hurters, so I'm 10:46 or 1:4.6 against a winning hand. No-brainer, right?

Key_West calls [$2].
** Dealing River ** [ Qh ]

At this point, there's an open-ended 4-straight on the board. I don't think it's remotely possible I have a winner here. (Why, oh WHY did I try to check-raise the flop?) I check with the intention of folding if he bets. For some reason, he checks it down and shows Q8, which negates my 67 theory but he DID hit the straight on the turn, like I thought.

The point of this thread, however, is to get a verdict on the comments of a buddy of mine who watched me play the hand:

Buddy says:
check/call
Buddy says:
wow.
Key_West says:
check/call with a 4-straight out there?
Key_West says:
That's a check/fold at this table, homey.
Buddy says:
not given the turn action it isnt
Key_West says:
Say what?
Buddy says:
the river didn't change whether or not you were beaten
Buddy says:
if you call the turn action you have to call the river as well, otehrwise you should have folded on the turn
Buddy says:
he had a straight before the river

At this point I basically told him he was wrong, but he never replied.

Am I off my rocker? Was that really a check/call situation? In a normal LPG, I would agree, but this table was really tight and pretty aggressive. It was a miscalculation of that player since he did call with a Q8o, a very, very loose call, but I don't know that I could have predicted that kind of action.

I know I made a mistake or two in this hand, but my intended showdown action was right, I think.

What do you think?

[fyodor]

I think you are both wrong.
Yes you call the river but not just because you called the turn. You call because of the size of the pot - you're getting 10:1 now right? - and there is at least that much of a chance that he is on 2 pair or worse.

[thirddan]

id probably call the river also, pot is pretty big now...

[Key West]

What two pair do you think he would have?

[Key West]

Dammit, I meant to say I put him on 87s, not 76s, and now it's too late to edit the thread! /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[fyodor]

The way the betting went he could have T9
He checked the flop with 2nd pair but then hit 2 pair on the turn

[bicyclekick]

You do not posess the mindset needed to play party 1/2...let alone it's debatebable you could even beat .5/1.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
You do not posess the mindset needed to play party 1/2...let alone it's debatebable you could even beat .5/1.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is a bit harsh and I'm not sure I entirely agree (super-duper fit-or-fold tight should PROBABLY win at .5/1 I think)....but I do understand the general point that keywest's game could use a LOT of improvement to be able to do better than barely break-even in most games.


First, I would suggest NEVER listening to your buddy's poker-advice EVER again. This is not debateable. If he's a friend in real-life just tell him that you decided to quit poker because it bores you and then talk about other subjects when you see him.

second, read up in the micro-limit strategy forum (where this post belongs honestly) and also Small-Stakes Hold-Em by Ed Miller.

third, I highly suspect your pre-flop standards are too tight....i'm basing this on your general tightish approach to the hand that you played along with your other small-sample stats you presented. This is just a guess though.....could be WAY off for all I know.


fourth, as someone already mentioned....the reason you call the river is because you are getting 10:1 on your call and it's reasonable to assume there is a 10% chance your set will still be good.


[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's remotely possible I have a winner here.

[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree.


[ QUOTE ]
Hm. Probably not. Well, either he's betting an open-ender (unlikely) he's made the straight (probably) or he really is bluffing (no.) KQ I think he raises preflop. 76s, maybe. Alright, 76s it is. Where's that put us? $18 in the pot. I've got 9:1 to hit my boat.

[/ QUOTE ]


this is where I think you stray from good poker-strategy the most. It's POSSIBLE you are behine here and it's POSSIBLE he has 76s....but it's also very likely you're hand is still good here and he has ANYTHING.
You seem overly focused on hand-reading and putting your opponent on a single-hand AND staying with that read. You need to recognize that you can't necessarily KNOW what specific hand he has and you need to think in terms of what RANGE of hands he is on and the approximate likelihood of each.
You also need to factor into that the possibility (sometimes small....sometimes not-so small) that your opponent has absolutely NOTHING.
Anyway, at the turn there is a very significant chance that you are ahead here as there is a wide-range of hands that he could be playing this way OTHER than catching a straight.


Anyway, take my advice and the others on this board and work on your game. We've all been there at one point...I was totally ripped on the first hand I posted here which was of a similarly weak-tight/bad approach to poker nature.

It's kind of harsh to be told you really need to work on your game....but it's up to you to decide whether you can put aside your ego in order to truly become profitable at this game.

[Key West]

He wouldn't have kept re-raising on the turn with a simple two pair in the face of an open-ended straight draw and an overcard.

[Key West]

I appreciate the time you took to reply, but I totally disagree with you here. You are making the assumption that, because it's a $1/2 game at Party Poker, it then must be completely loose/passive, necessitating looser play and a bigger emphasis on drawing hands and sets. Despite the small stakes, this was not that kind of game, so your analysis is incorrect. Read Sklansky's chapter on loose/passive play in HEPFAP and you'll see that he explains that certain High Limit games can suddenly become loose/passive, and the opposite is also true with low-limit games. This was one of those, "are we playing $1/2 or $100/200?" I expressed this in the opening line of my original post.

I've been playing and studying very seriously for years, and I have an extremely comprehensive and very beat-up poker library. I eat, breathe, and sleep this stuff, and so does my friend. I respect him and his opinion greatly, and he and I are both consistently winning poker players. We just have limited bankrolls and are wisely playing within our means.

The fact of the matter is, I read this player correctly, and I consistently read players correctly. I knew what this guy had, and there was very little doubt in my mind that I was beaten. You can say it was too risky all you want, but I know what my hand reading ability is. I've been wrong plenty, but I wasn't wrong this time.

What I AM new to is on-line poker, but I've been playing the $.50/$1 on a $50 referral bonus, and I turned that $50 bonus into $182.38 over a course of 55 games. I don't multi-table because my screen resolution sucks, so it took me from 10/21 - 10/31 to build that BR playing a few hours a day. I keep meticulous records, I've read SSHE, practically memorized Sklanky's "Theory," S&M's "HEPFAP," Schoonmaker's "Psychology," Super/System, Caro's Book of Tells, Sklansky's Tourney book, Scarne's Guide, Peter O. Steiner's Thursday Night poker, Caro's Fundamentals, Killer Hold'em, etc., etc., etc. I am not new to this game.

That being said, I should NOT have tried to check-raise there. Despite my skill, I somehow have neglected to find absolute rock-solid perfection in every single hand I play. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif I screwed up on the flop. I know I screwed up on the flop. I stated that I'd screwed up on the flop. I wasn't asking about how I played on the flop.

All I was saying was that I'd had a debate about what I should have done if my opponent had bet into my check on the end. I say fold, he says call. I think calling is a mistake because my read is better than 95% accurate in that situation, for the reasons I've listed in this thread, ad nauseum. If I'm 95% accurate, then 10:1 is not enough to call. I don't understand how anyone can purport to know the accuracy of my reads without an intimate knowledge of my game. If you think it's 50/50, then why not 60/40? Why not 70/30? Why not 95/5? Where do you draw the line, and why? I drew the line at 95% because I had been observing this player's betting pattern and decided that he couldn't have anything other than a straight.

As an aside, while typing this, I ran into a very similar hand and flopped a set of treys, this time with 2 flush cards out there instead of straight cards. This time, I bet the flop because the game has since become far looser and more passive. The third flush card came on the turn, but I put my opponent on top pair high kicker this time, which, indeed, he had. And he, of course, kept check-call chasing to the river. I got a crapload of action and took down a 12 BB pot. Yay for playing it smart this time!

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
He wouldn't have kept re-raising on the turn with a simple two pair in the face of an open-ended straight draw and an overcard.

[/ QUOTE ]



Why not??
Because it's not the way YOU would have played it??

[Key West]

No, because it's not the way HE would've played it. I had been watching him for over an hour.

[MicroBob]

Interesting.
You seem to possess more knowledge of the game than I had assumed in your original-post (my original ideas of something/someone are frequently wrong....oh well, I am somewhat flexible).
you also took my criticisms rather good-naturedly.


i still believe you are putting WAY too much stock into your hand-reading ability.

[ QUOTE ]
I had been observing this player's betting pattern and decided that he couldn't have anything other than a straight.

[/ QUOTE ]


what exactly was his betting pattern??
perhaps he ONLY gets aggressive when he holds the nuts or near-nuts.....
but his betting-pattern also consisted of limping with Q8 (I'll assume suited....but who knows) from MP after just 1 EP limper. He doesn't seem like that tight or strong a player to me.

[Key West]

I probably am over-estimating my read quality. In fact, there's pretty much no-doubt. I get too cocky and over-confident, and even over-aggressive at times.

And, good catch on the right read that was the mis-read. I put him on the made straight, just the wrong made straight, and that put my pre-flop read in jeopardy of being incorrect. I gave him too much credit, which is another issue I'm working on squeezing out of my play.

The T9s is the only hand that made any sense that wasn't a made straight. It was down to that and 87s on the turn, and when he re-re-raised me, I decided that, rather than a very strong hand, he had a nut ornear-nut hand; i.e., the straight. Okay, so he had a different straight than I thought he had, and it wasn't quite the nuts, so my read was "wrong" and happened to turn out "right."

I guess it just boils down to: if you know for sure you're beaten on the end, save the bet. Unless the pot is freakin' huge, which it usually is in micro-limit. And it was pretty big in this case, but my confidence level on my read exceeded the size of the pot. That's the only thing I was trying to say.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I respect him and his opinion greatly, and he and I are both consistently winning poker players. We just have limited bankrolls and are wisely playing within our means

[/ QUOTE ]

This begs the question: Where? Homegames don't really count.

Anyways, your friend is wrong. If you read this guy right, and he has a str8, you miss your hand on the river, you fold. Folding on this turn, even knowing he has the str8 is idiotic. Now does it matter if it's the nut str8 or bottom end? No. The fact you read that this guy will cap with only a str8 in this spot is enough. That's the 'type' of hand you read him for. Now if you read him for a possible overset also, then it's a little more of a problem. But you still basically play it the same.

Just be sure you know the guy well enough before folding on the river. If you don't, and you're just doing it to make a 'big laydown,' it could be costly. If this were an unknown, im calling him.

The flop c/r: It's not a bad idea. Sometimes you miss it. If you really thought it would get bet behind you, try it. When that doesn't happen it doesn't necesarily mean it was wrong to try it. It doesn't work all the time. Personally, i like to bet out with sets because i could be betting out with many types of hands. I also like 3 betting with it when it gets raised on the flop by a top pair. But there are times i might go for a c/r.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
what exactly was his betting pattern??


[/ QUOTE ]

Capping the turn with a str8 possible. No mention of maniacal play on prior hands.

[ QUOTE ]
but his betting-pattern also consisted of limping with Q8 (I'll assume suited....but who knows) from MP after just 1 EP limper. He doesn't seem like that tight or strong a player to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know better than this. A betting pattern isn't the same as preflop limping standards. Many loose players have very tight betting standards, much more tight capping the turn standards especially when factoring in the texture of the board. Regardless of what they limp in with. Don't combine the 2 and assume because a guy could limp with anything, that he's a maniac and could be betting anything. It's far from how it really is.

In regards to the hero playing too tight:
[ QUOTE ]
I've played 134 hands tonight, I've seen 16% of flops (~13 of them from the blinds, so you do the math) and of the 8 hands I've actually been in intentionally,

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't enough to determine level of tightness. I've been on many loose tables where i couldn't get anything to play for extended runs.

b

[KowCiller]

I'll admit that I didn't bother to read the entire post, but if the table you're at has turned so tight/aggressive that you don't think your set is good at least 10% of the time in this hand, then you need to work on your game selection skills.

Just my thoughts...
KoW

[rloftin]

Bet the flop no one will put you on a made set at this point. What makes you think someone will bet a rag flop like this. Then you have to call one bet on the river if you think there is any chance your hand is good.

R Loftin

[charlie_t_jr]

[ QUOTE ]
No, because it's not the way HE would've played it. I had been watching him for over an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Heads up with a set...no way I fold the river for one bet.

[fyodor]

You asked if it was a check/call situation on the end. Pretty much everyone here thinks it is.

You dispute this by purporting to have a 95% reliability in your read that he had a made straight.

Why are you asking then?