CO w/AK

[Tommy Angelo]

Bay101 $40-80. Folded to guy on my right who raised. I was next in the cutoff with AK and called. The button folded as prognosticated, the small blind folded, the big blind called, and three of us saw this flop: K-8-8 rainbow. They both checked and I checked. The turn was a five. The big blind bet out, the middle guy called, and I called. The river was a 3. The big blind bet out, the middle guy called, and I called. The big blind mucked. The middle guy showed A5. AK good.

[Clarkmeister]

I like it a lot except for the lack of a 3-bet preflop, even if you do know that the button is folding.

[ErrantNight]

with all the hands he could have entered for a raise here this hand wasn't worth just one bet/raise?

i'm assuming you have a strong reason for not doing so...

but given that you hadn't shown aggression would he really be going for a c/r on this flop? assuming he was really just checking this through... why must the bb be betting a missed c/r on the turn? maybe i'm being short-sighted, but i can't see another reason to miss a turn raise here... or on yet another river blank?

enlighten! :-)

[johnnycakes]

Tommy,

When someone hires you to coach them, do you teach them this weak-tight calling station crap? Or do you teach them more old-school Tommy style?

[James282]

Hi Tommy, this hand is terrible. I like the flop check but every other street was bad.
-James

[tolbiny]

With three players and a flop of K-8-8 Tommy is either way ahead or way behind, betting the flop will only make worse hands fold and better hands will c/r or wait till the turn. As he is in last position he can prevent the turn from being checked around aswell. So basically tommy is slowplaying so one of his opponents can pick up a second best hand or attempt to buy the pot.
I don't like to just call this river though- i think a raise is in order here with some potential for both callers.

[vector2]

Did BB put off some sort of tell that made you think he had a 8? How come you didn't bet the flop, and then dump if BB check-raised you two on the turn? At the very least, if you were confident that BB didn't have an 8, how come you didn't raise the river?

[Chris Daddy Cool]

i can't imagine not raising this river.

[gamblore99]

[ QUOTE ]
i can't imagine not raising this river.

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree. but then again i know nothing

[ErrantNight]

i'm familiar w/ the way ahead/behind scheme... but this hasn't been 3-bet and he hasn't previously shown aggression and it's not headsup...

i suppose it's conceivable this extracted maximum value... that had he raised preflop this would have played out differently, had he bet on the flop or raised the river he wouldn't have made any more money...

but i also can't help shaking the feeling this was excessively passive... but maybe that's just my inner LAG speaking

[Chris Daddy Cool]

well the way the hand played out, one can assume that tommy doesn't want to lose his foes by raising. i.e. 3-betting preflop will take it down on the flop, betting/raising the flop might not collect any bets on the turn. raising the turn might get his opponents to fold there or check/fold the river and he doesn't want to get 3-bet by an 8. however once its on the river, and he did extract that river bet i don't see how tommy doesn't raise here. i assume he can use his expert hand reading skills to fold to a 3-bet if faced with one, and it's likely that he won't get 3-bet anyways.

it seems to me that not raising this river can only be correct is if worse hands will not call and only better hands will 3-bet, but i doubt that would be the case here.

[lil feller]

I am having a difficult time understanding why you don't raise post flop somewhere in this hand. Do you think that the BB has an 8? It seems to me that he could be betting anything after the check around on the flop, and the PFR can't have much. I like the turn call, but I would have a very difficult time not raising the river here in the games that I play in regulary. I guess it would be player dependant, in my game A5 would certainly call a river raise

[ErrantNight]

seems fair...

rock on cdc

[mike l.]

big blind played it pretty well

[SA125]

Tommy, this hand reminds me of The Rain Song. It's by one of your favorites but, no matter how much you really want to love it, you can't.

Considering how few and far between the winning hands come, can going along for the ride really be that profitable?

[The Bear]

Oh man, Tommy. At least raise the river.

[Rick Nebiolo]

If you know your going to flop an ace or king (which of course you don't) then just cold calling the raise is a reasonable play - you might as well start your slowplay early. But your usually not going to flop as well as a pair. That's why three betting is the play BTF that gives you the best shot at taking control of the hand and maximizing your EV.

Given your BTF call, checking thru the flop seems to fit in but it is a crime against humanity/reason/society/your bankroll (pick one) not to raise at some point later in the hand.

Tommy, you sure are throwing a lot of off speed stuff lately. Have you lost your fastball? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

~ Rick

[Doubling12]

Goddamn that is beautiful. I have tears running down my cheek.

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
Given your BTF call, checking thru the flop seems to fit in but it is a crime against humanity/reason/society/your bankroll (pick one) not to raise at some point later in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Couldn't this be considered a variation of the check your pocket aces on the turn play when the flop paired to either catch up or induce a bluff on the river? I could be wrong, but if you use this play I don't think its correct to check the turn (fearing a check raise) then raise the river unimproved.

From the flop on I love the play, very imaginative flop check (I'm gonna try to squeeze this into my play book), made Tommy lots of extra money (and if he had been behind it would have saved himself half a bet).

[Vince Lepore]

I knew that Sklansky had no idea how to play poker. Raise with A,K huh! You tell 'em Tommy!

Vince

[bunky9590]

[ QUOTE ]
Tommy, you sure are throwing a lot of off speed stuff lately. Have you lost your fastball?



[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't seen a Tommy fastball in a long time.

Probably is more like a batting practice fastball now.
You know if it comes its not much to fear anymore.

[bunky9590]

I respect you Tommy. You know that.

Why you don't find a raise on the river (not to mention a flop three bet, but I'll let that one slide) is beyond me. You really fear an 8? I can see not raising the turn. But for the love of god, raise the river with the way you played it to that point.

Flop check was okay. Made you a lot more money, moreso if you pull the trigger on the river.

[Evan]

Can you explain not 3 betting preflop? For the life of me I can't understand it. I guess you knew the button was folding anyway, but don't you want to get more money in with the best hand? Just out of curiosity, what would you 3 bet here? AA? KK? QQ? Why not AK?

I like the flop check.

Why not raise the river? I can understand calling the turn, but I think calling the river is just about awful. Did you seriously not think your hand was good or something?

Per usual, I'm confused by yet another Tommy post. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[MMMMMM]

I think a preflop reraise is important here. A lot of the value of probably having the CO dominated, and of often being able to win a showdown without hitting anything, goes out the window by letting the third person in the hand. Letting the BB play here is quite undesirable. If the BB hits a middling pair then Tommy's rather likely domination of the CO is worth crap unless he also hits.

I think Tommy could have raised the turn or river, but I can see not doing it too. If I were to raise on a later street it would probably be the river given the absence of draws earlier. One thing which speaks against raising on the river though is that both opponents have stuck around, and it is so unlikely that everyone has a King that Tommy has to fear an 8 at least a fair bit. So yeah, I pretty much like the way the rest of the hand was played.

I am sure you are aware of all this, and I feel kinda bad because I so often find myself criticizing Tommy's play when I do chime in, but I felt it needed to be said. The preflop cold call sucks pretty hard in my opinion. Hey I made a worse play yesterday but at least I didn't post about it /images/graemlins/tongue.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[tolbiny]

add me to that list aswell.

Oh and the river raising one too.

[andyfox]

"You know if it comes its not much to fear anymore."

I disagree. Since it's (apparently) used only rarely, imagine what must be backing it up when it does come.

[andyfox]

"it is a crime against humanity/reason/society/your bankroll (pick one) not to raise at some point later in the hand."

Wouldn't a king have bet the flop? Wouldn't an 8 check the flop? Wouldn't Tommy's non 3-bet pre flop and flop check "tell" the others that there's no way Tommy has anything much?

P.S.: You working Friday?

[skp]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't Tommy's non 3-bet pre flop and flop check "tell" the others that there's no way Tommy has anything much?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't that be a strong reason for Tommy to raise the river? Even Queen high might call.

[andyfox]

It's a reason for raising, but it has to be tempered by the pair of 8s on the board.

I rarely see the middle guy just call a river bet and then call a raise from the guy behind him. I don't see much calling river raises with Queen high in my game. Sure seems like big blind has either a hand that will fold to a raise or 3-bet. But I suppose a weak king would play it this way too and might well call a river raise.

BTW, I'm seeing much more of this in my games: cold-calling raises with A-A, K-K (and even Q-Q) or A-K, rather than 3-betting pre-flop. Saw this action recently: all fold to the cut-off who raises. Button cold calls. Both blinds call. Flop A-J-3. Checked around. Turn is a 9. Checked to the cut-off who bets, button calls, both blinds fold. River a blank. Check-check. Cut-off shows T-9s, button pocket queens.

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't Tommy's non 3-bet pre flop and flop check "tell" the others that there's no way Tommy has anything much?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't that be a strong reason for Tommy to raise the river? Even Queen high might call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tommy's image at the table seems to be that of a rock. Do you think anyone in their right mind is going call with Q high against a rock here? What would be your minimum calling standards on this river if Tommy had followed through with a raise given his image? I would have to think long and hard about calling with even AK against a river raise from a rock-like Tommy.

Now if his image is that of a LAG gambler a raise would certainly be correct on the river.

[Tommy Angelo]

"I haven't seen a Tommy fastball in a long time."

I'm a knuckler now. he he he

[Tommy Angelo]

"When someone hires you to coach them, do you teach them this weak-tight calling station crap? Or do you teach them more old-school Tommy style?"

It depends.

[Tommy Angelo]

To all,

I know this hand was a little freaky and it's fair to say that some sort of explanation is required if I'm going to bother to post the hand in a peer-review place like this, but the way it is now is, all hands are freaky. They can't even be spoken of sensibly in regular English because there's no way I can properly impress upon you how people play against me. Like one hand from today when a guy limped in from the cutoff with AA just so I'd have to see the flop from the big blind. I know so because he said so when he limped. "Keep Tommy in." Then he checked behind me headsup on the flop, and turn, and he folded face up after I checkraised the river. Weird stuff like this is happening kind of a lot.

So this AK hand in this thread was actually one of the more normal of the special sort of hands. Here's one from a few hours ago, Bay101 again, $40-80. Two limpers to me on the button. I raised with K-4 suited. Both blinds folded. Three of us to the flop. The flop came T-9-8 and I flopped a flush draw. First player bet out, other guy called, and I called.

The turn was an offsuit six. Check check check.

The river was a seven putting a straight on board. They both checked and I bet, which I almost always do when checked to on the river in a threeway pot with a straight on board. The first guy folded, which is what usually happens, and the second guy, in this case, I believe he just couldn't stand the thought of paying me off again when again it was so obvious what I had. So he folded to.


Tommy

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
he folded face up after I checkraised the river

[/ QUOTE ]
That's awesome

[ QUOTE ]
The first guy folded, which is what usually happens, and the second guy, in this case, I believe he just couldn't stand the thought of paying me off again when again it was so obvious what I had. So he folded to.


[/ QUOTE ]
Also awesome


Despite all this awesomeness, you still should've raised the river in the first hand.

[andyfox]

"some sort of explanation is required if I'm going to bother to post the hand"

And where would that be, sir? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[MMMMMM]

Your opponents really suck. I've noticed this often in other threads, too.

[andyfox]

Isn't part of their suckiness, conceivably, that Tommy's got them zigging when they should be zagging and vice versa?

Also, did you note I called Tommy "sir" in my prior post?
/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[J_V]

What happened to the raise the river, fold to the reraise, Tommy A special?

[MMMMMM]

Yes, Tommy undoubtedly encourages them in their zigging when they should be zagging, which is good winning strategy. But they still have to suck to be so highly susceptible to it.

Put another way, if these guys just played basic solid poker and stuck to it, largely ignoring Tommy's attempted manipulations, then I believe Tommy would be shooting himself in the foot with these antics and his goofy preflop plays. But they don't, and Tommy thereby profits much more than he ought, and that's why his opponents suck. Out loud.

And yes I half-noticed the "sir" but now I'll have to go back and reread it;-)

[andyfox]

"if these guys just played basic solid poker and stuck to it, largely ignoring Tommy's attempted manipulations, then I believe Tommy would be shooting himself in the foot with these antics."

He would if he didn't deanticize. Which he would. He's
usually two steps ahead of them. And now that he's
detoxified his game, I imagine he's always two steps ahead.

[MMMMMM]

Of course, and I considered that he would adjust. But his oppoonents still have to suck to be so completely owned by whatever act he is putting on for the moment, the session, the month, the season, the year.

I think if you put Tommy against decent online 15-30 players, live (who had played enough live poker not to give off major tells), this kind of stuff just wouldn't work very well. Of course Tommy would adjust, but he wouldn't be able to get them to grossly overadjust, which seems to be a major component of his live winning ways--at least according to his posts.

Mid limit: average online player > average B&M player, in my opinion--and much harder to intimidate or manipulate, too.

[skp]

The Queen high call comment was made tongue in cheek in response to Andy's comment that the way Tommy played this hand, he was telling everybody he had zippo. It follows therefore that guys may make weak calls to a river raise from Tommy that comes out of the blue.

[ QUOTE ]
I would have to think long and hard about calling with even AK against a river raise from a rock like Tommy.


[/ QUOTE ]

If I were the bb heads up against Tommy in this hand, I wouldn't fold in a million years with AQ let alone AK (although it's unlikely that I would have bet Ak in the first place unless I felt it was appropriate there to make a value bet with nut no pair). This is assuming that the other guy in between folded. But he called in Tommy's hand. So, when Tommy raises, it is then indeed a raise or fold situation if I had AQ in the bb.

BTW, I have always considered a "rock" to be a derogatory term describing a tight (which is good) but unimaginative (which is not good) player. I wouldn't pay off a rock's river raise with anything less than Ak in this spot. But I would look for ways not to fold against Tommy in this spot with any Ace because he is definitely no rock.

[M2d]

Maybe it's my fault that Tommy keeps posting hands that has everyone shaking their heads. about a year ago, I made a comment to him, in passing, that I rarely post hands here because there are so many other bay area players on these boards that I think I'd be giving up too much if I post a lot of hands and my thought processes behind them. Perhaps Tommy took that to heart and only posts the screwball ones?

seriously, though, tommy does what tommy does. He surely gives up a little, and plays a bit tight at times, but his awareness of the game conditions and the other players is so damn good that it more than makes up for being screwed down (at times) too much.

On this particular hand, he allowed the other player to grab enough rope to hang himself. people argue that he should have raised the river, but should he really have? In his situation, he had a bettor and a caller putting in money in front of him. a river raise will knock out the bluffers and invite hands better than his to charge him more. I think it's pretty certain that there's no other king out here. The only hands that could really be out are a bluff, a smaller pocket pair a smaller pair (on board) or an 8. against Tommy, with the way that the hand played out and assuming they knew him a bit, I can't see him getting a raise called anywhere close to the frequency that a normal player would.
so, the amount of times his raise is called and he wins goes way down, but the amount of times that he's re-raise (or someone has AA and he's beaten but just called) stays the same. Not sure what the numbers are, but I am sure that a river raise vs. call is much closer, in this situation, than most here believe.

fwiw, I fear a tommy flat call of my raise much more than a tommy raise. just my personal opinion from a few years of him holding over me.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't Tommy's non 3-bet pre flop and flop check "tell" the others that there's no way Tommy has anything much?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a paired board three-handed and Tommy would be betting in last position when checked to. While I certainly agree that checking the flop will make it look like he doesn't have much, I don't think his opponents are going to give him credit for much if he bets the flop either. Given the situation (and lack of a reraise preflop, discounting the chance he has AK or some big pair), it looks like he could just be trying to pick up the pot. Checking "tells" his opponents he's weak, but if he bets they may also assume he's weak, and money will be put in the pot. Isn't that better?

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
The river was a seven putting a straight on board. They both checked and I bet, which I almost always do when checked to on the river in a threeway pot with a straight on board. The first guy folded, which is what usually happens, and the second guy, in this case, I believe he just couldn't stand the thought of paying me off again when again it was so obvious what I had. So he folded to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying Tommy is a rock, just his opponents see him as a rock, which can be very profitable in some situations (cite the above example). A river raise may let the cat out of the bag here and its really up to Tommy to decide if this is the right time to switch it up.

[bobbyi]

Hi Tommy. I've been reading this forum (off and on) for about five years, and have always greatly enjoyed your contributions. I ask this question out of respect: What are trying to accomplish by posting hands like this? This isn't a rude way of saying that you should stop posting them. I obviously don't believe this. This is an honest question: When you sit down at your computer and write out a hand like this AK hand, what is it that you hope to achieve? When I post a hand, I do so in hopes that others will point out how they would have played it differently and why my play might be suboptimal. But that's obviously not what you are doing here. You knew before you posted this that everyone and their brother would tell you to reraise preflop and to raise the turn or river, as if you hadn't considered those options. So clearly you are trying to accomplish something else. Do you just enjoy watching people dissect your words like scripture, trying to find the hidden messages in these hands? Are you trying to teach us something? If so, what? Is it just to show us that feaky play is sometimes required and correct, even if it looks suspect when described out of context? Like many others, I am confounded. These hands are like beautiful artworks from a foreign culture that existed in a time and place I do not understand. Fascinating to look at, but I ultimately cannot understand the feelings that went into their creation. That feeling of foreignness has innate value, in that it shakes us out of our constrained mindset, like a koan. Is that your hope?

On a more mundane note, I was surprised to see that the man who loves the button so much would coldcall here with AK in the CO and let the button come in behind him for two bets. You didn't used to play this way? Or in this case, were you very sure that the button would not coldcall? I know that you like to have tight players to your left (the "synergistic relationship" you've discussed before) as do I. Is that what happened here? Otherwise, I am shocked that you wouldn't try to drive the button out by reraising.

Thanks.

[bunky9590]

[ QUOTE ]
You know if it comes its not much to fear anymore."


[/ QUOTE ]

I was just kidding (I'm sure Tommy knows this)

I think I would laugh at the table if he actually fast played one at this point.

[andyfox]

A checked around pot, at the 40-80 level where I play, is almost always going to get bet, and frequently bet and called, on the turn. So not worried about overcards with A-K, the pot can frequently end up bigger by cvheckinghte flop than by betting.

[andyfox]

"I fear a tommy flat call of my raise much more than a tommy raise."

I started to become a better player when a player who was much better than I told me to fear a call from a good player more than I fear a raise.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't a king have bet the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably.

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't an 8 check the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably, however when I hold the eight in the big blind I often bet in this spot. Most opponents (although maybe not Tommy) just don't believe anyone bets trips on the flop when first to act. I like betting strong hands out of the blinds because I also like to steal out of the blinds.

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't Tommy's non 3-bet pre flop and flop check "tell" the others that there's no way Tommy has anything much?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would think many of Tommy's opponents would be very suspicious of his pre flop coldcall, flop check, and turn overcall. But if he raises the river it would take a very strong hand to make it three bets (and Tommy would make the laydown correctly) but I would think that worse hands would often call, if for no other reason than out of frustration (e.g. an underpair to the king).

[ QUOTE ]
P.S.: You working Friday?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I'm relatively free to get together if you are able to. I just sent details via email (to your hotmail account and your normal company account).

Regards,

Rick

[Tommy Angelo]

bobby,

"When you sit down at your computer and write out a hand like this AK hand, what is it that you hope to achieve?"

For me your question melts quickly down to: "Why do writers write?" After reading what some famous writers had to say about it, what I learned was, no one knows. They just do. It's our lot.

“These hands are like beautiful artworks from a foreign culture that existed in a time and place I do not understand. Fascinating to look at, but I ultimately cannot understand the feelings that went into their creation.”

But the feelings are there. I happen to be closer to them than you. Somebody I hope to understand sufficiently to translate to page. But I can’t possibly do it now. Too much change and motion. I feel like the universe must have felt during inflation.

Here’s an example. In the last year, up until last week, I have raised or reraised with AK from the big blind maybe 20% of the time. Yesterday I cut it out altogether. Indefinitely as of now, I will not raise without a pair from the big blind at limit hold’em no matter who or how many are in the pot.

The scientist in me craves data and peer-review. A fantasy would be if other people tried my entire blind-play algorithm at B&M poker for a few months and reported in with results and experiences. But as long as I’m the only geek in the lab, there can be no double-blind blinds experiments.



Tommy

[Tommy Angelo]

"if these guys just played basic solid poker and stuck to it"

I'd quit.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
For me your question melts quickly down to: "Why do writers write?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, that sentence answers my question. Thanks. You write about poker because you write about poker. My question made about as much sense to you as if I just asked a guy painting a picture of a tree why he painted a tree. That's different than the rest of us for whom writing about poker is purely a means to an end. Writing about poker is about the poker, not the writing. I post here purely to make my game better; it's a practical thing like filling up my car's gas tank or getting an oil change (I live on the west coast now, which means I had to buy a car; this concept is still foreign to me which is why it's my mind). That's apparently not the way things are for you.

I envy you.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
The scientist in me craves data and peer-review. A fantasy would be if other people tried my entire blind-play algorithm at B&M poker for a few months and reported in with results and experiences. But as long as I’m the only geek in the lab, there can be no double-blind blinds experiments.


[/ QUOTE ]

Now that is intriguing. Almost makes me want to take up poker again. You need about 100 people I think to get a reasonable sound sample base. Just to be contrary to ordinary, I predict that almost all would increase their win rate.

There are certainly enough players that post here that could volunteer to conduct your experiment, if they are willing and able, that is. And a worthwhile experiment it would be.

I volunteer my services immediately.

Perhaps David Sklansky would also volunteer.

-Zeno

[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
"I fear a tommy flat call of my raise much more than a tommy raise."



[/ QUOTE ]

I guess Tommy's calls must be pretty scary. Look at the A5 guy, HE raises before the flop, the flop comes K88, the perfect board to bluff at, he is the perfect guy to do it, three way pot and he checks. There aren't too many players in my game that check this board. They all check king high boards when they have a king!

Of course Tommy slowplayed here, this isn't some genius play.

The genius lies in whatever voodoo he did to A5. When you (and I) don't three-bet with AK, you let the other players take the lead. This means you are left guessing, not when the flop comes K88, but rather when it misses you, but mighta just hit him and he is betting and the pot isn't really that big and this flop could have hit him, and I don't even have a backdoor draw, and my outs are tainted...

[Mikey]

I hope you are being sarcastic, once the BB met resistance on the turn by both players he should have shut down on the river.

[Mikey]

I think Tommy played this hand very very well. Now I'm not being results oriented but I will give you my thought process on this hand.....

from the flop on of course, because I can't control what happened preflop although I will say I would reraise here almost 95% of the time.

On the flop that check is good, he's either way ahead or way behind and why not let some of the other players take a shot there, so Tommy checks, which I think is very good I mean the worst he could have is 4 outs total against him right now or he's drawing dead close to dead since someone could have an 8.

Now on the turn when the BB leads out Tommy should be totally zoned and focused on him thinking and analyzing if he's really behind and now the other guy calls as well. Tommy calls.

The call is fine from my analysis of the flop .... again he could be really ahead or really behind.

On the river when that card is being dealt, Tommy should just be looking at the BB stone cold stare, and then he fires again and the other guy calls.

Now Tommy has to make a decision, does he raise or call??

Tommy probably had the idea of raising on the river and then had to make another adjustment and just call because this is twice now that the BB bet out especially when he met resistance by both players on the turn.

I'm sure Tommy gave raising some thought, but then decided calling was the best play because if he did have the best hand he'd probably only collect 1 or 0 more bets if he raised but if he was behind he would have to pay 2 extra bets to be shown the winner or could be bluffed out of the hand.

I think if it were me in this hand, I would have to study the BB intently and then make my decision on the river of whether raising or calling was the best play.

Now think of what this does for Tommy especially if there are players who are actually paying attention.

1) they'll think he's weak tight since he didn't 3-bet with AKo and didn't bet the flop when he flopped a King.
2) he's added more value to his bluffs throughout the game, especially by taking advantage of scare flops.
3) he will be less likely bluffed to on the turn/river since he played that hand so passively and will seem to be a calling station
4) when 3-betting preflop he may be pegged on a high pocket pair later on in the session maybe forcing someone else to take a lone Ace against him or try to outplay him.

These would be the things I would be thinking about if I never played with him before and saw him play this hand just like this and then I'd have to make adjustments when I given new information.

[pistol78]

The flop gets checked to him and he checks?

So we just gave a free card to any pocket pair?

This is solid poker?

Either I am missing something or he must of had a really good read on this guy, but I still think giving a free card sucks.

[Tommy Angelo]

The flop gets checked to him and he checks?

So we just gave a free card to any pocket pair?

This is solid poker?

Either I am missing something or he must of had a really good read on this guy, but I still think giving a free card sucks.
-----------

I strongly agree. I've always been very sensative to the drawbacks of giving free shots to two-outters and I never even considered trying a different way. No amount of persuading or talking or writing could have convinced me that checking behind when an opponent has outs could ever possibly be better for my score than betting.

But now, after letting people draw dead (or nearly so) a thousand times, and watching what has happened, to them, and to my score, I'm a believer.

(It's easy to think that the extra money comes from seducing opponents to putting in bets on the turn/river with hands they would have folded on the flop/turn had I bet. But that is just the half of it. The rest comes from those times when they were planning to check-raise a street with a hand that beats mine, or in a spot where I would have folded a better hand than their's after they checkraised, and now, by checking behind on a street or two, and calling down on the river in those spots, I'm saving thousands of dollars of non-lost bets and winning thousands of dollars in extra pots and somewhere in there, it way more that balances out those occasion times when a two-outter would have folded to a bet, and gets there, IMO.)

(Here's a typical case of a backfire from yesterday. I openraised with AK. The pot was headsup against a blind. The flop was Q-6-5. He checked and I bet. He called. The turn was a jack. He checked and I checked. The river was a 2. He checked and I checked. He turned over A-2 and took it.

He had three outs to win the pot. I had two outs to win an extra bet. Bad deal for me, on that alone. Meanwhile, I was guarenteed to see another showdown with a showdown hand. That's the main sourse of additional income IMO. Starting with the best hand, and still being in there at the end when the lead never changed.)


Tommy

[fnord_too]

So basically what you are saying is that you have such a tight image, cultivated over many many sessions, that when you raise even with a strong hand the only hands that will call have you beaten? So raising is now reserved for rivers where you have monsters or are stealing the pot (and of course pre flop in late position)?

In previous posts you said you are making more than ever right now, but were not sure exactly why. It sounds like you are getting way too many free cards and way too much respect (especially the former, but it sounds like people haven't fully tuned into the fact that you make plays on the river, even automatic ones like firing at the river three handed if it is checked around).

These hands are truly strange to me (but my image and style are considerably different than yours. Also, I play in very aggro games). You must have great table selection skills, too.

[roy_miami]

Tommy,

IF the guy on your right was a solid player and he was planning on calling the river he should have raised the turn in this spot. What would you have done if he had raised the turn?

[Tommy Angelo]

ME: Some sort of explanation is required if I'm going to bother to post the hand.

YOU: And where would that be, sir?

-----------

Andy,

The problem with any explanation is that it must start somewhere, and the very act of starting at any particular spot cannot help but be interpreted as a statement of emphasis. For example, if I start the explanation with something about position, the implication is that, oh, it's a position thing, but then, I have to shout louder to say no, it's not really about position as such, it's a "cards" thing, a by-the-book type concept that makes all the plays on every street make sense, with hyper detailed projections and everything, but then, no, too much emphasis on that, and the other thing, before even mentioning that it's really a tilt issue, about creating it, and avoiding it, and bigger than that, it's not about merely meta-game considerations, but rather, it's about the consideration that there is nothing but meta-game considerations, but then, no, it's not just that either, or the other things, it's really about playing the players when I'm in position, and playing nothing but the very best cards when I'm not, like, always, but oh, wait, there comes position again, but it's more than that. It's ...


working

[lil feller]

There is this part of solid poker that involves deception...and when you have Tommy's squeeky tight image, you can't just value bet every time you have something, or you are only going to get action from a superior hand.

[Tommy Angelo]

"IF the guy on your right was a solid player and he was planning on calling the river he should have raised the turn in this spot. What would you have done if he had raised the turn?"

You make a good point about how a different player might have played the turn with a hand worse than mine.

But it's an impossible question for me to answer as to what I would have done at the table had RHO raised the turn. The decision would definitely be made during the time span between when he began to raise and when it was my turn to act. In other words, when I checked behind on the flop and I was playing out and planning for the most probably upcoming turn action, having it go bet-raise to me was not in primary focus.

I can't really wrap my mind around your question because it doesn't flow that this player would play any two cards that way. Like if he had a pocket pair lower than kings, I believe strongly that he would have bet the flop. And with a king, I think he would have bet too, but I suppose he could have maybe checked with AK, though it's an especially rare day when any player here raises prelop, flops top pair, and checks the flop. So what else could he have to raise the turn with after checking the flop? Pocket kings is one hand, trip eights in another, and pocket fives (filling up on the turn) is another. Would he raise with, say, AQ, to isolate a bluffer? I suppose he could. But would he check the flop with that hand? I don't think so.

Upon further review, if all the above bla bla is good, then I guess the right answer would be for me to fold the turn if he raised. I might have come up with it. No way to know.


Tommy

[skp]

Yes, I think that you would have folded had RHO raised the turn. That's one of the risks of playing it cute on the flop but it's a risk worth taking i.e. I very much like your flop check.

[ACPlayer]

Having read most of this thread the thought that occurs to me:

1. Image matters a great deal in B&M poker and not enough is done to create and manipulate the right image for your game style. For example, even you would have been caught with the straight on board bluff bet in your post on-line.
2. Online poker is different, there value bets/raises are more critical as the players in the game is more fluid and hard to create and manipulate image. And people are always paying off.
3. Tells in middle limit B&M games are plenty and of more value than Mason suggests, in my opinion.

I strongly prefer B&M for this reason. Understanding image is a big edge.

[David Sklansky]

The tactics Tommy used in this hand are totally reasonable against tough aggressive 80-160 type players.The preflop call and the lack of a raise on the end can be justified against them. However against weaker, less agressive players, they can't be.

[William Jockusch]

I understand the value of an occasional cold call preflop with a hand like AK. But wouldn't be better to do it with AKs? The point being, that a cold call lets the big blind in more than a raise, which tends to shut the BB out. And I think you'd rather let the big blind in when you have AKs than when you have AK.

[SLEEPER]

Could you please elaborate on this? I don't play as high as 80/160 or even as high as 40/80, but I am pretty sure you are giving up chips when you don't raise in this situation.....

[SA125]

You're obviously right about your reads and what is the right play because anyone who'll play AA that way against you is looking for an excuse to give you their money. Awful.

[Six_of_One]

[ QUOTE ]
Andy,

The problem with any explanation is that it must start somewhere, and the very act of starting at any particular spot cannot help but be interpreted as a statement of emphasis.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did that with this post, and look, it still makes sense. Easy solution -- write out an explanation, and then rearrange the sentences in random order.

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
Andy,

The problem with any explanation is that it must start somewhere, and the very act of starting at any particular spot cannot help but be interpreted as a statement of emphasis. For example, if I start the explanation with something about position, the implication is that, oh, it's a position thing, but then, I have to shout louder to say no, it's not really about position as such, it's a "cards" thing, a by-the-book type concept that makes all the plays on every street make sense, with hyper detailed projections and everything, but then, no, too much emphasis on that, and the other thing, before even mentioning that it's really a tilt issue, about creating it, and avoiding it, and bigger than that, it's not about merely meta-game considerations, but rather, it's about the consideration that there is nothing but meta-game considerations, but then, no, it's not just that either, or the other things, it's really about playing the players when I'm in position, and playing nothing but the very best cards when I'm not, like, always, but oh, wait, there comes position again, but it's more than that. It's ...


working

[/ QUOTE ]

I have two friends who have shown interest in learning the game and so I've started putting together reading lists and those sorts of things. Given that both are writers, I wish I could just link to Tommy's posts and have that be the way that they arrive at an understanding of poker. Everything else is vulgar by comparison.