Wayfare out-fishies the fishies

[Wayfare]

A good friend of mine said I butchered both hands. Tell me what you guys think, then I will respond with my thought process.

Ok the $300 stack (UTG) is the action player. As said before, I join tables with action players.

Hand 1:

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $1 BB (6 max, 6 handed)

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

<font color="C00000">Wayfare! ($48.5)</font>
CO ($147.9)
Button ($53.95)
<font color="C00000">SB ($99.25)</font>
BB ($77.9)
<font color="C00000">UTG ($354.42)</font>

Preflop: Wayfare! is MP with A/images/graemlins/club.gif, Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="CC3333">UTG raises to $3</font>, Wayfare! calls $3, CO folds, Button folds, SB calls $2.50, BB calls $2.

Flop: ($12) 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="CC3333">UTG bets $9</font>, Wayfare! calls $9, SB calls $9, BB folds.

Turn: ($39) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="CC3333">UTG bets $40</font>, Wayfare! calls $36.50 (All-In), SB calls $40.

River: ($155.50) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(3 players, 1 all-in)</font>
SB checks, UTG checks.

Final Pot: $155.50
<font color="green">Main Pot: $148.50, between Wayfare!, SB and UTG.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by Wayfare! ($148.50).</font>
<font color="green">Pot 2: $7, between SB and UTG.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by SB ($7).</font>

Results in white below: <font color="white">
SB has 7d Ad (one pair, aces).
UTG has 8h Jh (high card, ace).
Wayfare! has Ac Qh (one pair, aces).
Outcome: Wayfare! wins $148.50. SB wins $7. </font>



Hand 2:

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $1 BB (6 max, 6 handed)

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

<font color="C00000">Wayfare! ($143.5)</font>
<font color="C00000">MP ($88.2)</font>
CO ($50)
Button ($34.25)
SB ($141.8)
BB ($317.92)

Preflop: Wayfare! is UTG with 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
Wayfare! calls $1, MP calls $1, CO folds, Button calls $1, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($5) 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, J/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(5 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="CC3333">Wayfare! bets $4</font>, MP calls $4, Button folds, SB calls $4, BB folds.

Turn: ($17) T/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="CC3333">Wayfare! bets $15</font>, <font color="CC3333">MP raises to $30</font>, SB folds, Wayfare! calls $15.

River: ($77) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
Wayfare! checks, <font color="CC3333">MP bets $53.2 (All-In)</font>, Wayfare! calls $53.20.

Final Pot: $183.40
<font color="green">Main Pot: $183.40, between Wayfare! and MP.</font> &gt; <font color="white">Pot won by Wayfare! ($183.40).</font>

Results in white below: <font color="white">
Wayfare! has 8s 9s (flush, ten high).
MP has Ks Kh (one pair, kings).
Outcome: Wayfare! wins $183.40. </font>

[GimmeDaWatch]

Hey Wayfare. Im not really sure what your friend's point is about the 1st hand. You can raise the flop, sure, but if you think villain is bluffing/overplaying his hand, you want him to do all the work I would think, and get all-in on a non-diamond turn. About the 2nd hand, is his idea that you need to fold (if you believe he has a higher flush) or move-in if you think he's semi-bluffing? Clearly, this was another "action jackson" you were up against, but youd at least think he'd have the good sense to check behind on the river. At any rate, I think moving in on the turn is better but against this opponent it didnt make any difference.

[Wayfare]

Thanks for the comments, I'll wait a little more before posting my thought process

[DrPublo]

OK I'm the friend Wayf was talking about...and no I didn't say he "butchered" them but I did say I didn't like the way he played them at all. I'll explain...

Hand 1:

Lets assume the PFR is action man. Great, this is exactly a spot we want to be in....calling the raise PF (rather than reraising) and hoping to stack him if we catch TP or better. Except the problem is one pair hands play horribly multiway for a stack (in fact they play horribly for stacks in general). If you've decided to play for your stack in Hand 1 against action man, essentially trapping his aggro style with TP, then you really dont want the guy behind you hanging around. I say behind you because he actually has position with respect to the raiser, putting YOU in the middle. Since the PFR is betting through you into the SB, if the SB decides to wake up on the turn with a monster then you're in trouble.

Thus I think the way to play this hand is to raise the flop to get rid of the SB and give yourself position...or alternatively find out that SB has a hand and maybe save yourself $30 or so.

Also FWIW I dislike calling down with TP 2nd kicker as you gain no information about your opponents hand and set yourself up to call down with a 2nd best hand.

Hand 2:

First, fold PF. Are you kidding? What happened to the Dave I used to know? 89s is not a hand to play out of position, period....playing draws out of position is tough enough as it is, and playing non-nut draws is even worse. Don't do it.

Given that you had a brain fart and decided to play the hand, I like leading out on the flop. You've got a flush draw and a backdoor straight draw and are essentially trying to clean up some of your outs if the turn/river should give you some type of hand with showdown value (runner runner 2 pair maybe). You got 2 callers though, so it looks like one might have a jack and the other some other sort of draw.

Flush makes on the turn and you bet again, which is nice. But here comes the hammer...and a min-raise of a hammer at that, which in my experience usually indicates monster. Hmmm, getting action when an obvious draw makes and you hold a weak made hand (I say weak because all the paint spades are still in the deck)...this is not action you want. I think Reuben and Ciaffone say suited aces are nice because when you make a better flush than someone else, theres just something about a flush that makes people not want to release their hand.

That being said, you need to deicde right away if you're drawing dead or if he's on a draw. Possible draws include: Any higher spade, any overpair including a spade (which might not have reason to think its behind) or a set. Against any of these hands, IF you're going to call, you would rather get the money in now because you do NOT want to call 15 here and then fold the river when the lovely As falls.

So push or fold the turn, and since when you decided to play 89s preflop you implicity told yourself you're going to the felt if you make a flush, I suppose you have to push there. But don't be surprised to be shown a better flush a lot more frequently than you'd like.

Moral (adapted from Super System): suited connectors are nice when you can put your opponent on a big hand preflop, like AA, KK, etc--a hand that you think your opponent wants to back with his stack no matter what the flop is, and you can break him when you hit. When suited connectors get a lot of action when an obvious draw makes, the low suited connectors usually lose. End of story.

The Doc

PS: Given that you called the turn, don't check/call the river. Checking there is incredibly weak....and on deep stacks an opponent will push and you will have to fold. FIre out $25 or so and hope for the best.

[cornell2005]

hand 1: fine. you will play this for your stack everytime vs that type of player and with those bet sizes

hand 2: fold preflop, raise all in on the turn. the turn flat call then check raise river line isnt any good. he will check behind with too many hands for it to be worth it, and he will fold to your turn all in with too few.

[soah]

Hand 1 is fine against a super-LAG.

Hand 2 wow... let's start at the beginning. Fold that preflop. On the flop with five people in the pot you obviously have basically no folding equity so the only reason to bet is if you think you'll get enough callers to make it a value bet, and to disguise your hand if you do hit it. But what's your plan if a blank hits on the turn? Check/fold? There's a reason not to build drawing hands from UTG. On the turn you hit your draw and you get raised. I think you're ahead a LOT here against partypoker players. They don't think you have the flush. But what if another spade falls on the river? It either costs you the pot, or kills your action. You just call to try to milk him but you can't even be sure that he'll bet the river for you. Overall this hand demonstrates how bad it is to play cute suited cards out of position. Cards fell absolutely perfect for you in this hand; if they come just a little bit differently you're in some ugly situations.

[Wayfare]

Soah:

If the river falls another spade I muck. If he checks behind that is fine with me. If a blank falls on the turn it depends, probably check-fold. Pumping the pot on the flop was a good idea regardless.

[cornell2005]

betting the flop in hand 2 is fine.

[DrPublo]

Question: At a bigger NL game, either deeper stacked or bigger blinds (say at least 2-5, maybe even 5-10), how often is hero getting significant action on the turn by a hand that he's beating?

The Doc

[Wayfare]

Just to note the obvious: this is not 5-10, or even 1-2. This is short stacked PP fishiness. I don't play like that when I am not at these tables.

[DrPublo]

You don't improve your game by making -EV plays and rationalizing them as against PP morons.

You will not always be playing shortstacked PP and the PP games will not always be this easy. I think that in general when you're getting this much action on the turn when an obvious draw makes (hand 2) you need to have serious doubts about your way-non-nut flush.

The Doc

[Wayfare]

At each table I sit down at I try to play optimally for the table. That's why there is SSHE and HEPFAP, two different books with two different sets of optimal play.

Same thing on this party $50 table.

[thatpfunk]

They aren't -ev when played against PP morons. Playing optimally in the PP 6-maxes is much different than a deep stacked game.

As far as the hands, 1) i like it against that player 2) i muck preflop

[gergery]

Hand 1, I like, with these opponents and tables letting their overaggressiveness get the best of them pays off.

Hand 2, I'm not a huge fan of betting out the flop. With 2 still to act, and maybe 2 waiting to chkrs i don't see the flop bet winning this that often. And you only hit the flush 1 in 5 on turn card. so ~75% of the time its a blank and you have 1+ caller out of position. Can you elaborate why you and BK like this bet? It's gotta be for deception and stacking him him if you hit the flush for this to be good.

i also like pushing in over his turn minraise.

--Greg

[cornell2005]

[ QUOTE ]
You don't improve your game by making -EV plays and rationalizing them as against PP morons.


[/ QUOTE ]

it has nothing to do with this. you adjust your game everytime you sit down at a differnet table, and make each play based on the average expectation of your opponent. pretending your opponents are good when they arnt will only lose you money.

[Wayfare]

Interestingly, after building up a $250 stack at that table I got 2 AA in a row. Raised both, got no customers, not even action guy. The second time I strongly considered the move of honor, but thought better of it.

And I also fundementally disagree that playing differently at different tables is not "improving your game." I would say that being able to adapt to different textures and opponents is essential to improving your poker. Like the CO limp-reraise of the coked up guy at the BPC that got me all in real easy.

[GimmeDaWatch]

In keeping with my membership in the department of redundancy department, Publo's points are valid if you're in a game with a bunch of solid players, which you obviously were not. The chances of SB having you beat on hand 1 are low enough to try and lure maniac in, b/c if hes got any sense at all he's folding to a raise. I would almost never play for my stack with AQ there at even the Stars $25 games, but here it clearly made sense. Flush over flush is also pretty uncommon, especially 6-handed and against these players its not a time for laying down, just move in on the turn (he almost certainly would have called anyhow).

[Tilt]

FWIW

I disagree that you should be worrying about the flush over flush. If you play 89s and you hit your flush, you have to be willing to push. In the long run I think you will lose alot more money by worrying about higher flushes than you will lose to higher flushes on a 3 suited board. If another spade falls on the river then its another story.

I think playing 89s out of position is a somewhat questionable but not a terrible play under these conditions. When you have good fish in the pool you sometimes have to bait your line with whats available.

What's amazing is how awful the play of your opponent is. Why on earth is he waiting until the board gets scary to bet his kings with any strength? Awful.

[Wayfare]

Yes, the opponent gets the nod for the worst possible way I can think of to play kings. I have been limped suited connectors up front more often and been having success with them, but it seems to be getting a lot of negative press.

I generally treat it as TPTK when I hit a good draw with it, and have been getting folds a lot of the time.

[jslag]

[ QUOTE ]
hand 1: fine. you will play this for your stack everytime vs that type of player and with those bet sizes

hand 2: fold preflop, raise all in on the turn. the turn flat call then check raise river line isnt any good. he will check behind with too many hands for it to be worth it, and he will fold to your turn all in with too few.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh... what BK said! Took the words out of my keyboard.

I re-raise all-in everytime on that turn (Hand #2).

J.

[DrPublo]

[ QUOTE ]
If you play 89s and you hit your flush, you have to be willing to push

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why you don't play drawing hands out of position. If the villian in hand 2 is willing to limp KK in MP and then wake up on the turn with it (when he did in fact pick up 7 outs to beat you), he's perfectly capable of playing A /images/graemlins/spade.gif K /images/graemlins/spade.gif the same way. Or A /images/graemlins/spade.gifx /images/graemlins/spade.gif, or ANY two spades involving a spade higher than your 9.

Didn't someone famous once say something about going broke in an unraised pot?

The Doc

[cornell2005]

sure he could have a higher flush but that isnt the point. he just doesnt have it enough of the time not to reraise the turn all in.

[Wayfare]

I didn't go broke in an unraised pot. He did /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
Hand 1:

Lets assume the PFR is action man. Great, this is exactly a spot we want to be in....calling the raise PF (rather than reraising) and hoping to stack him if we catch TP or better. Except the problem is one pair hands play horribly multiway for a stack (in fact they play horribly for stacks in general). If you've decided to play for your stack in Hand 1 against action man, essentially trapping his aggro style with TP, then you really dont want the guy behind you hanging around. I say behind you because he actually has position with respect to the raiser, putting YOU in the middle. Since the PFR is betting through you into the SB, if the SB decides to wake up on the turn with a monster then you're in trouble.

Thus I think the way to play this hand is to raise the flop to get rid of the SB and give yourself position...or alternatively find out that SB has a hand and maybe save yourself $30 or so.

Also FWIW I dislike calling down with TP 2nd kicker as you gain no information about your opponents hand and set yourself up to call down with a 2nd best hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

All stacks are not created equal. This one is less than 50 BB. Good one pair plays fine for 50 BB against many players. This guy was one of them and Dave recognized that.


[ QUOTE ]
First, fold PF. Are you kidding? What happened to the Dave I used to know? 89s is not a hand to play out of position, period....playing draws out of position is tough enough as it is, and playing non-nut draws is even worse. Don't do it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. This call is pretty thin. I wouldn't get all histrionic about it, but I don't think it's a great call. It gets worse the shallower the stacks get. Here it's just an "eh" call assuming the game is not aggressive preflop.


[ QUOTE ]
Given that you had a brain fart and decided to play the hand, I like leading out on the flop. You've got a flush draw and a backdoor straight draw and are essentially trying to clean up some of your outs if the turn/river should give you some type of hand with showdown value (runner runner 2 pair maybe). You got 2 callers though, so it looks like one might have a jack and the other some other sort of draw.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've been playing limit too much.


[ QUOTE ]
So push or fold the turn, and since when you decided to play 89s preflop you implicity told yourself you're going to the felt if you make a flush, I suppose you have to push there. But don't be surprised to be shown a better flush a lot more frequently than you'd like.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. This is also why I don't like betting the flop--it means you've got to get in on the turn if you make your flush and get action in front of you or behind you. But I think Dave and opponent are shallow enough here, and opponent is a member of an inept enough player pool here, that getting in isn't so terrible. Calling sucks, but pushing is right, I think. But it's more of a value push than a gleeful push.

[ QUOTE ]
Moral (adapted from Super System): suited connectors are nice when you can put your opponent on a big hand preflop, like AA, KK, etc--a hand that you think your opponent wants to back with his stack no matter what the flop is, and you can break him when you hit. When suited connectors get a lot of action when an obvious draw makes, the low suited connectors usually lose. End of story.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why SS should come with a warning label. This is great advice in deeper games than this one, which are the kind of games that DB was playing in and writing about. Unfortunately, the way you usually put someone on a big hand preflop is by noticing that they have raised preflop. Calling raises with these hands on stacks this short sucks.

[ QUOTE ]

PS: Given that you called the turn, don't check/call the river. Checking there is incredibly weak....and on deep stacks an opponent will push and you will have to fold. FIre out $25 or so and hope for the best.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is dumb.

scrub

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
it has nothing to do with this. you adjust your game everytime you sit down at a differnet table, and make each play based on the average expectation of your opponent. pretending your opponents are good when they arnt will only lose you money.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with BK and Dave.

Poker is a game of adjustments, not prescriptive playbooks.

scrub

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
Didn't someone famous once say something about going broke in an unraised pot?

[/ QUOTE ]

While "go broke" sounds all masculine and folksy, substitute it for "lose 100 or more BB" and it might actually be a useful phrase.

I'll repeat: shorter stacks are worth less money and offer lower implied odds than deep stacks.

You don't lose any more money than what you had in front of you just because you dropped a whole stack.

scrub