Hand to Talk About

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

Here's a hand I played last night (Saturday) in an $80-$160 game at The Bellagio.

I was first one in and raised from an early position with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifK/images/graemlins/club.gif. A middle position player called and the big blind called.

The flop came A/images/graemlins/club.gifJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. The big blind checked. I bet. The middle position player folded. And the big blind called.

The turn was the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. The big blind bet and I called.

The river was the 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif. The big blind bet and I called.

All comments welcome.

Best wishes,
Mason

[shaundeeb]

Any read on the player?

I think you have to raise the river. Very few hands ahead of you, wouldn't be surprised to see a AQs or A10s.

[cold_cash]

I want to raise the river, but I feel like by saying that I'm stepping into a trap.

[shaundeeb]

That was my intial reaction but a set may c/r the flop or turn unless they are 100% sure Mason has AK and they think he will raise so they can 3bet. Once the pot got headsup villian had better options to take I think if he just filled up his set. A c/r also charges the most for mason to draw to a higher boat. Could be 3 to 4 outs if villian has JJ or AJ or could be as many as 10 outs.

[freehat]

raise the river

[afk]

[ QUOTE ]
I want to raise the river, but I feel like by saying that I'm stepping into a trap.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my first instinct too. Guess we'll see how this pans out.

[Victor]

nice hand tommy......

[JasonP530]

You missed a river raise. There are no more streets for him to bluff if he is. The player could be value betting a big pocket pair he smooth called with, a J, or have an ace and not put you on one since that would only leave one. Or, he could be bluffing, and I dont think you want to show your ability to just call his bluffs. You want him to bluff more if he is, and value bet(raise) if he has something he will call with. It cant be that big a mistake to raise, because sometimes you will get 3 bet and still be ahead.....

[slavic]

Mason -

This looks exactly like your stop and go BB defense plan.

So what do we know about the player? I'm having a hard time not seeing a river raise, if he's a reasonable but average player I see Ace/trash, JK, JT, QJ suited or not, almost any pair. His holding seems timid so I don't want to stop him since you're now likely way ahead, but there has to be value in a river raise even though it won't be paid off most of the time.

Thx,
slavic

[The Dude]

Well, you apparantly won, which means raising was the right play.

[shaundeeb]

Or maybe he was beaten by one of the very few hands that do beat him and hes going to bash us all for saying to river raise. Since raise the river is such an obvious response I'm sure theres a lesson hes trying to teach us all. But, I presume anyreason he thinks he may behind is from a tell or from how the player plays that he isn't telling us. Because, based solely on the cards you have to presume you are ahead.

[TStoneMBD]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I want to raise the river, but I feel like by saying that I'm stepping into a trap.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my first instinct too. Guess we'll see how this pans out.

[/ QUOTE ]

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
Or maybe he was beaten by one of the very few hands that do beat him...

[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever read one of Mason's "Hand to talk about" threads before?

[shaundeeb]

No, I guess this is me losing my virginity and all things that are common in other posts don't apply.

[mike l.]

mason not raising the river is atrocious. the rest of the hand is perfect. you will get shown AQ and other worse aces (as well as Js and other pairs that wont let go for one more bet) plenty enough to make a raise on the river (and call a 3 bet) significantly +EV. it's black and white and there's no way around it barring some sort of extra special player details on the bb that might make it closer to reasonable.

the only way i can explain your mistake here is maybe you are out of touch with how loose people's river calling standards have become in today's games, even some players who seem quite reasonable, and at limits as high as 200-400. my experience says reasonably big error not raising on the river. it'll be interesting to see what snakehead says because he's the one who really knows.

[mike l.]

"anyreason he thinks he may behind is from a tell"

hi. welcome to the forum.

mason doesnt do "tells".

enjoy.

[The Dude]

Mason also doesn't post hands that he loses.

Welcome to the forum.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

hi mason, as almost everybody else had stated, why no river raise?

your hand should be worth 2 bets on this river. sure, a bluff won't call, and maybe he'll fold a pair, but the pot will be big enough where he'll sometimes call a jack or QQ or whatever and he'll never ever fold an A here.

or maybe you just want to see his hand so you can have an idea of his play in later hands? sounds plausible, but like stated before, he'll call often enough anyways for you to see and even if he folds you'll know he probably had some type of pair.

[Danenania]

Hi Mason:

Sure this is the right line against some players but there isn't a lot for us to discuss without a read.

[pindawg]

If the BB was going to trap you I tihnk he would have gone for a Checkraise, that being said, not too many hands beat yours, I would have raised the river.

[Entity]

Mason,

I have to say I agree with mike l. here. The concern is primarily with him paying you off when you have a better hand, no? I can see him paying off with the vast majority of worse hands, so I definitely see a river raise here.

Rob

[uvickid]

I think if BB has any more than trips he c/r our hero. Hero raised preflop to show strength and bet the flop which puts hero on an Ace. I think that you missed a raise on the river.
However, I think the betting pattern of the BB is a little weird too. Could it be the case that Hero didn't have much respect at the table and BB bets the turn and river to represent trips (which presumably puts Hero on a small to medium pair) Anyone agree or disagree?? Any thoughts on Villian's betting pattern??

[DrGutshot]

I think Mason gets some sort of sick pleasure out of having people disagree with him.

-DrG

[Lawrence Ng]

Hi Mason,

Unless you are playing against a solid opponent and is extremely tricky, I can see why a flat call down here is possible. If an opponent knows you are too smart to be check-raised, then his option of betting the turn and river is the correct play.

Otherwise against most standard opponents I will 3-bet that river.

Lawrence

[TylerD]

Hi Mason,

Do you put him on AJ or 22 (possibly JJ), if not why no river raise?

Tyler

[ShamaLamDingDong]

I like calling the turn to trap in weaker hands that plan on folding to a raise but clearly enough hands will call on the river that a raise is well worth it. Against a fairly competant player who would fold all hands you beat to a river raise you can just call to. However most players in the 80-160 game at the bellagio will not be able to fold trips with a worse kicker and some will always call the river raise with a jack. It would help alot if you clarified how your opponent plays. Against the majority of players in that game a raise is warrented in my oppinion.

SHAMA LAMA...DING DONG!

[doggin]

if you thought the big blind would call your raise,
which he did, the only logical hand you feared was
5 3 for the straight. Hitting your trip A with the best
kicker, I don't believe you was thinking of him filling up
with his JJ or 22.
So, am I right, the only reason you did not raise the river
was the str8?
Thanks Mason

[BarronVangorToth]

You might run into the random 3-bet on the river but I still think it's the best play, unless I had a big read on the player in question.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Joe Tall]

You let KJ push keep you down here? Why the hell you didn't raise the river, only you can explain.

These games, these days, make this an easy river raise.

[ACPlayer]

Once you call the turn, what hands do you think that BB would value bet? In particular does he expect you to call with KK and QQ?

[SpaceAce]

No matter how many times I read the hand, I can't see a good reason for not raising the river.

SpaceAce

[sale]

Tried to calculate the EV of raising. The EV depends very much on which hands he will call the raise with. It is about break even if:

1) He will fold a jack, but call with a better hand worse than yours.
2) You will have to call a 3 bet, but never win it.

I have no idea how this game plays, but in any game I've played in a raise would be very profitable. What hands do you think he will fold here?

[BarronVangorToth]

While the mindset is bad, this is about as close as I can get:

Pre-flop ... the BB put in the bet, closing out the action, with A-X, hoping you have just a big pair.

The flop comes with an Ace. You bet, apparently not scared. Oh, no, perhaps you have AK / AQ -- he'll call, hoping to dirty two pair you.

Turn: an Ace -- AHA! There is no way you have the case Ace. He'll bet, as you know he has A-X and he wants to make you pay to "catch" -- if you raise ... he'll call you down.

You don't -- his hand is "good" -- so he bets the river.

Likewise, the same mentality with KJ putting you on 10's or maybe KQ suited or something and NOT the Ace seeing as how there are two on the board.

LOTS of hands act like the BB did without having the A2 / JJ / AJ / etc etc.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Stormwolf]

[ QUOTE ]
No matter how many times I read the hand, I can't see a good reason for not raising the river.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

Manson may believe he will not get called by a worse hand, raising the river will make it very obvious to his opponent that he is beat so, at this level, he folds his losers calls/raises his winners.

[randomchamp]

[ QUOTE ]
nice hand tommy......

[/ QUOTE ]
No doubt, these two should write a book together.

[Kevin J]

A little off topic, but would YOU value bet a pair of jacks on the river after Mason called the turn? Don't think I would. In fact, I might even check an iffy ace (although this is more debatable, since I can expect KK or QQ to pay off).

I suppose it all depends on how much (and how well), his opponent thinks. I'd like a river raise better if his opponent had bet the flop (or check/raised). But because of the lack of draws, I think it improves the likelihood that his opponent is betting the turn and river, not to "charge", or get "paid off", but is either bluffing or trying for 3 bets. IMO-

[partygirluk]

[ QUOTE ]

You will have to call a 3 bet, but never win it.



[/ QUOTE ]

?????

[sale]

Yes, just a computational shortcut/assumption. Would take too long to go into the game theory to find the optimal strategy here /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[andyfox]

Nice hand, Tommy. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I'm not so sure about the river raise everyone seems to want. He didn't bet or check-raise the flop, so when he bets the turn, it sure doesn't look like he has an ace Mason can beat. And he's going to fold pretty often to a river raise from Mason, unless he indeed does have him beat.

[mike l.]

"A little off topic, but would YOU value bet a pair of jacks on the river after Mason called the turn? Don't think I would. In fact, I might even check an iffy ace (although this is more debatable, since I can expect KK or QQ to pay off)."

first off mason may check KK on the flop. that's one of his plays he's written about and it makes some sense. no i would not bet a J there but i in particular should because he would call *me* w/ TT and 99 if id been doing the mike l. show and getting out of line. also i can think of just about zero hands with a J that i would be in there with if he raised preflop after one limper. nor any hands w/ an A except AQs.

"I suppose it all depends on how much (and how well), his opponent thinks. I'd like a river raise better if his opponent had bet the flop (or check/raised). But because of the lack of draws, I think it improves the likelihood that his opponent is betting the turn and river, not to "charge", or get "paid off", but is either bluffing or trying for 3 bets."

youre overthinking this. very few opponents he can be against will be thinking on this high of a level. a player looking to get the most out of a very strong hand wouldve went for a checkraise on the flop and/or turn. this is either a bluff or a good but not great hand. either way mason must raise the river and give his opponent the chance to call or reraise with a worse hand.

mason played this hand like his opponent must know he's mason and must care and be worried as a result. that's silly.

[mike l.]

"And he's going to fold pretty often to a river raise from Mason, unless he indeed does have him beat."

have you been sitting in the same game ive been sitting in the past 2 years? mid limit texass hold em? because i see AK get paid there like constantly all over town (and even out in vegas which is noticeably looser than it was before each time i go) just about always.

a maxim for this poker boom era hold em is: no one believes anybody ever has anything. you just have to show them. this is especially true for the 80 and higher ive played. so unless the 80 mason was in was a rock garden and the bb a known no action sort of player, the raise on the river is mandatory.

[dankhank]

okay so the BB would make this play because (a) he's bluffing, (b) he turned a boat, or (c) he has a weaker ace and thinks it's the best hand. (d) is that he's betting his jack or QQ-KK.

if (a) happens then the BB will fold to a raise, so in a sense the raise is pointless. you would think he'd fold his jack, and with QQ or KK I'd be surprised that he doesn't check call the river. so this is a loose generalization, but let's say if BB has (d) then a raise is pointless too.

so: are the odds of the BB having (c) that much more likely than (b), that it's worth the risk of losing two bets (if he has a boat and re-raises) to gain one (if he has a weaker ace)?

again a solid/tricky opponent i'm guesstimating it's something like 70/30 that he has (c) rather than (b). i suck at math but it seems like if those are the odds (again, this disregards him calling holdings like KJ to a raise; or leading out with it in the first place) then there is an argument to be made for just calling, since winning the hand will get you one more bet, but losing will cost you two.

for some reason i think tommy's line would include a pop on the river here. mine would too, incidentally.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
mason played this hand like his opponent must know he's mason and must care and be worried as a result.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think is is true. I think Mason just called on the river so he could utilize El Diablo's new Matador showdown style, thus putting his opponent on tilt.


(_) (/) (|)

[William Jockusch]

Let's examine this hand from the point of view of the big blind. This is an 80/160 game, so we have to assume he is an aware player. Mason raised from an early position. When he does this, his likely holdings are no big secret. AK, AQ, maybe AJ or a big pocket pair, or a few big suited hands. On rare occasion, something wild to throw off the opposition.

I don't know Mason's exact distribution, and neither does his opponent. But the important thing is, about 40% of the time, Mason will have a big ace. Depending on Mason's exact distribution, this figure might be 35% or 45%, but it certainly isn't far off.

When two aces hit the board, the chance that Mason has a big ace drops somewhat. Maybe as far down as 20%. But still a pretty big chance. Also, Mason could have JJ or AA, which are both monsters on this board. When the river comes, from the viewpoint of the big blind, there is probably about a 25% chance that Mason has AQ or better.

The big blind knows all this. And yet he is betting!

Returning to Mason's point of view, something really strange is going on here. Why is the big blind betting? The whole situation just doesn't compute. If the big blind has a monster, he should really be check raising Mason's expected bet. If the big blind doesn't have a monster, he shouldn't really be betting into Mason's possible monster.

That said, the one thing that seems sure is that the big blind doesn't have a medium-strength hand. If he did, he would check and call. In this context, medium-strength hands include weak aces, since anybody holding a weak ace would have to be concerned about his kicker.

That means it is highly likely the big blind has one of the following:

1) A monster of his own (and is going for 3 bets), or
2) Total garbage -- a bluff.

In case 1, Mason will lose two big bets by raising. In case 2, he will gain nothing. Hence his call.

[andyfox]

It's Vegas, baby. They love to fold. And to explain why.

And it's Mason. It's not for sure the opponent knows Mason, but it's not unlikely either.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
no one believes anybody ever has anything. you just have to show them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my new favorite poker quote. I don't play at this level of course, but man, I can't count how many times I've been called down to the river by small PP's when the board is practically broadway and I'm still betting the whole way. I can't figure out who's worse, me for firing three barrels with an unimproved AQ or AK, or the other guy for calling down with 33.

Anyway, I hope Mason will drop by and give at least an inkling of his read on this hand. I just can't imagine not raising the river, and I haven't seen an explanation of why the call is correct yet that I completely buy.

[KidPokerX]

raise the river. What are you worried about?

[skp]

That maxim you speak of is oh so right. These days, you don't even have to worry about losing the guy if you raise the turn. He'll look you up with 33 (or even when drawing dead with a Jack). Anyway, having just called the turn, a river raise is clearly mandatory particularly given that the flop and turn have 4 different suits. What this means is that the bb's out of the blue turn bet is not a semibluff with a flush draw. He has some kind of hand. Therefore, it's less likely that he is bluffing the river. He is value betting. Punish him with your Ak.

Put another way: You are more likely to be called here than if the turn ace were to put a flush draw out there.

[tipperdog]

Mason,

I think Tommy Angelo has cracked your 2+2 account and is making posts in your name!

My first thought was to raise the river. Now, I'm not so sure. It depends almost entirely upon the range of hands with which the BB might call your raise pre-flop.

Let's consider ONLY those hands with which the BB might call a river raise (or would 3-bet, if he's ahead). If he's pushing a bluff like KQ (highly unlikely), he can't call your raise, so we don't need to consider these hands.

Let's assume that he'll call (or raise) your river raise with any ace (including A2 and AJ), JJ or 22. I'm discounting the possibility of 35 (would have folded pre-flop), AQ, AK, KK, or QQ (would have either 3-bet pre-flop or check-raised on the flop), and 44 (wouldn't have stayed around until the river).

That range of hands leaves 28 hand combinations that you beat and 15 combinations that beat you. Since you're laying 2:1 with a river raise if you plan to call if 3-bet, a raise is NOT profitable here.

However, if you think my range of hands is even slightly off (if, for example, he might play this line with QQ AND pay off a river raise--I doubt it very much) then a river raise becomes correct. Also, if you can safely fold to a river 3-bet, a raise becomes correct, since you're effectively laying 1:1 odds on the final bet instead of 2:1. However, I can't imagine you could lay down to a 3-bet here, absent a superhuman read on the BB.

[illguitar]

The BB would most likely call with any ace, and mnay other hands, although it looks right now like you are up against an ace. I'm raising....

[Kevin J]

Doesn't the appearance of this 3rd ace make it a little less likely that the bb is betting three aces? If so, shouldn't a lot more thought/caution be put into what he might be betting with? Again, I'd like a river raise more if the 3rd ace never showed up. I only like a river raise here if his opponent is a true pay-off artist.

I actually don't like agreeing with the non-river raise, because I don't want to look like I'm just siding with Mason. Although, maybe he'll say he played it wrong. But I doubt it. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[MicroBob]

If the opponent has AJ or JJ (or even 22) here AND he knows that Mason has a good A (probably is putting Mason on AK or AQ) then he is going to wait for the turn to bet at it KNOWING that Mason is going to raise right back at him.

In other words, instead of going for a C/R, he is essentially going for a 3-bet.

But Mason is going a level beyond that in realizing that the only way the opponent would bet out on the turn (hoping to 3-bet) KNOWING (or 'hoping'...whatever) that Mason would pop right back is if the opponent could, in fact, beat the strong A.


So Mason's read on this guy is that he is sharp enough to not get wacky with his A9o here and would only go for a turn 3-bet with a hand stronger than AK.

There's a good chance that the opponent could play AK this way...in which case there is no advantage to popping right back at him or calling down.
The chances that he would try this with AQ is slightly slimmer and the chances that he would try this with AJ, JJ or 22 is much higher.


That's my theory behind Mason's play anyway.


Will be VERY interested to read Mason's ideas on this hand.

[shaundeeb]

Thinks BB has AKos as well? The more I look at this hand the more I think thats a good chance its going to be a split. If mason raises and BB 3bets there would be a chop. It just makes sense with Ak once the 3rd ace hits hes afraid mason will check behind his big pair and the BB won't get value off his trips.

[jetsonsdogcanfly]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, the one thing that seems sure is that the big blind doesn't have a medium-strength hand. If he did, he would check and call. In this context, medium-strength hands include weak aces, since anybody holding a weak ace would have to be concerned about his kicker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Consider this simple line for a guy with a rag ace: He check/called the flop, maybe because he was concerned about his kicker. On the turn, if he has a weaker ace he is now concerned about Mason checking behind with KK, QQ.

This doesn't seem that unlikely to me. From the BB's perspective Ax is no longer a medium strength hand after the turn hits. When the board is paired, and then a third one hits on the turn, don't you think it's less likely your opponent has the case card? As a simple conditional probability that is correct thinking.

[Turning Stone Pro]

It's very confusing.

TSP

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
This looks exactly like your stop and go BB defense plan.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've never head of this plan. Sounds intriguing. Where is it from?

[fsuplayer]

if you had a J or PP here and you think mason has KQ, or a lower PP, you could lead in and hope he folds, or charge him for his 'overs' draw.

[skp]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't the appearance of this 3rd ace make it a little less likely that the bb is betting three aces?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. But from the bb's perspective, the appearance of the second ace makes it less likely that Mason has an Ace thereby enabling him to bet a hand like KJ. That bet has a dual purpose, Mason might fold QQ or he might call with TT.

overall, now and then, you are going to run into a player who bets out a strong hand like a full on the turn with a view to trying to snag 3 bets. But way more often than not, that turn bet is not a full house i.e. he would try to checkraise wit a full. Thus, Mason will usually be ahead. And as Mike l. points out, you don't have to worry too much about Mason's opponent not calling a raise. They find all kinds of reason to call. If they don't, then Mason should be thankful as he now has the license to raise on a multitude of other hands when he misses because after all, his opponent is prone to fold.

[DeucesUp]

I think William Jockusch and Microbob (others as well) probably captured Mason's thinking here pretty well. The question is not what hands will the BB call a raise with, but what hands is he betting out with on the turn and river in the first place. Clearly he's got to think that Mason is holding a big ace or JJ a decent amount of the time here, so it can be argued that he's got these hands beat (or is bluffing).

But I don't think this scenario quite holds up. From the BB's point of view, will Mason call this down with:

KK and QQ?
how about TT?
Does Mason raise in EP with KJs? QJs? 99? 88? Probably sometimes. If so, does he call down with these hands to pick off bluffs?


If the BB can say yes to even a few of these scenarios, then he's got a decent value bet with his A-rag suited (or whatever) given that he's only got the case ace (and JJ) to worry about. And he clearly has to be worried about Mason checking behind with these hands, so he's got to bet it.


Then the only remaining question is whether he'd call a raise with a hand worse than AK. I think the answer is clearly yes. If the guy lays down trip A's to a river raise here, then there's a paradox in this game which doesn't make sense. If someone will regularly laydown trip A's to a river raise, then it would become correct for players to make bluff river raises frequently. But if it is correct to bluff-raise frequently, then it can't be correct to lay down decent hands to river-raises. Thus the paradox.


So, in short, it seems reasonable the BB is making a value bet on the river with a worse A, and will certainly call a raise back. I think this more than makes up for the times the BB is ahead and calls (22?) or is ahead and 3-bets (AJ).

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually don't like agreeing with the non-river raise, because I don't want to look like I'm just siding with Mason. Although, maybe he'll say he played it wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

For a guy that makes most of his money from selling poker advice, the chanc of him admitting that he played a hand poorly on his own website is ZERO.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't figure out who's worse, me for firing three barrels with an unimproved AQ or AK, or the other guy for calling down with 33.

[/ QUOTE ]
Against people like this, you should almost always fire two barrels and check down the river. In the games I play, at least, if someone calls with some sort of pair on the turn, they are never going to fold it for one more bet on the river, and worse hands than mine never pay me off.

[Noo Yawk]

From all the descriptions I see posted about this 80-160 game, it seems insane to me not to raise the river. We know nothing about the players from this hand, so I'll base my decision on what I know from other posts and a bit of personal bellagio 80-160 experience. The players in this game don't fold reasonable hands and are likely to play back at you. They don't have irrational fear of scare cards and only ocassionally they make a suprising fold with a decent hand. There is no draw out there, and since 2 aces are on the board, I could just as easily give him credit for K's, Q's, KJ, QJ, J-10,A-Q, or A /images/graemlins/heart.gif-x /images/graemlins/heart.gif as I could for A /images/graemlins/heart.gif2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif, AJ, J's, 2's or maybe AK.
I just don't see any value in not raising alot of 2nd best's that will pay you off.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
If the opponent has AJ or JJ (or even 22) here AND he knows that Mason has a good A (probably is putting Mason on AK or AQ) then he is going to wait for the turn to bet at it KNOWING that Mason is going to raise right back at him.

In other words, instead of going for a C/R, he is essentially going for a 3-bet.


[/ QUOTE ]


But if he knew Mason knew that, he also knew Mason wouldn't fall for it, so he would instead go for the check-raise -- or did he know that Mason knew that he knew that Mason knew that he knew what Mason was going to do?

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Sqred]

He has a jack. From what I have seen lately, thats about the only hand it could be. In today's environment there is a lot of fishy play out there. He took a card off to his second pair, bluffed when the top card paired, and decided to bet the river since he was calling anyway in an atttempt to fold QQ or KK.

In my opinion Mason let him off easy because a river raise probably would be called by this type of player.

If you are always fearing a monster when you have top trips with best kicker you are leaving a lot of money on the table these days.

FJM

[Kevin J]

I don't think the rule: "it is better to bet in first position as an underdog, than to check/call as a bigger underdog", applies to the bb here. In other words, I don't think betting a pair of jacks has much value, since there are more likely hands Mason would call or re-raise and win with (any ace, KK, QQ, JJ), than call and lose with (99, TT?).

I know there are bad players who play 80-160, but Mason is still risking 3 bets to win (maybe), 1 more. He would have to think the bb is betting a hand he shouldn't AND would pay off a raise.

FWIW- In trying to put the bb on a hand, I think it's likely he flopped a set of deuces and was going to c/r the turn, but became worried he'd miss a bet after he makes an under-full. Or.. If he has an ace, it's AJ or A2s, and he tried twice to go for 3-bets. Or.. He has some hopeless hand he wouldn't call a raise with anyway. Of course, I'm probably wrong and he could also have been betting a worse ace. But I'm hearing a lot about how strong Mason's hand is, but very little in the way of convincing arguments about what hands his opponent could have that would make raising the river such a +EV play.

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
He has a jack. From what I have seen lately, thats about the only hand it could be.
FJM

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems highly unlikely to me that he has a jack other than AJ. But let's assume for a moment that you're right: He has TJ, QJ, or KJ. If Mason raises, do you seriously think the BB will call?

Mason is the EP raiser this hand. Virtually every legitimate PF raising hand (AJ-AK; AA, KK, QQ, JJ) has QJ-type hands totally buried. The BB knows this and would almost certainly muck to a raise. Given that reality, why would the BB bet a QJ-type hand on the river in this situation? There's no way Mason is laying down a better hand at this point, and he'd know it. If the BB holds JT, he's played the river very poorly.

My bottom line is this: even if you think he has a jack (but you can't be certain, of course), a raise has virtually no value. If he has a J, he'll fold. If you're wrong, you'll have to pay him off if he 3-bets, costing you two bets. Hence, a raise is a -EV play...if you read him for a J.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't figure out who's worse, me for firing three barrels with an unimproved AQ or AK, or the other guy for calling down with 33.

[/ QUOTE ]
Against people like this, you should almost always fire two barrels and check down the river. In the games I play, at least, if someone calls with some sort of pair on the turn, they are never going to fold it for one more bet on the river, and worse hands than mine never pay me off.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hear ya. Most of the time I'm firing that 3rd barrel, it's on a board where there was a flush or straight draw that doesn't come on the river. I think it's been a +EV play for me against most opponents that I peg as drawing, but once in a while they'll turn over their small pair, and I scratch my head wondering how they can call down in a small pot with a PF raiser betting with overcards to their hand on the board.

Of course in their head, they're probably just thinking "I'VE GOT A POCKET PAIR" over and over.

OK, where's Mason, I'm results oriented and I want to see them.

[Kevin J]

I think I had the wrong thread up and posted this somewhere I didn't intend to:

I don't think the rule: "it is better to bet in first position as an underdog, than to check/call as a bigger underdog", applies to the bb here. In other words, I don't think betting a pair of jacks has much value, since there are more likely hands Mason would call or re-raise and win with (any ace, KK, QQ, JJ), than call and lose with (99, TT?).

I know there are bad players who play 80-160, but Mason is still risking 3 bets to win (maybe), 1 more. He would have to think the bb is betting a hand he shouldn't AND would pay off a raise.

FWIW- In trying to put the bb on a hand, I think it's likely he flopped a set of deuces and was going to c/r the turn, but became worried he'd miss a bet after he makes an under-full. Or.. If he has an ace, it's AJ or A2s, and he tried twice to go for 3-bets. Or.. He has some hopeless hand he wouldn't call a raise with anyway. Of course, I'm probably wrong and he could also have been betting a worse ace. But I'm hearing a lot about how strong Mason's hand is, but very little in the way of convincing arguments about what hands his opponent could have that would make raising the river such a +EV play.

[Bill C]

[quote

mason doesnt do "tells".

[/ QUOTE ]

Does he do "crying calls?" /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Mason must have some kind of read on BB, else his play seems unreasonable. While it's hard to say what BB may be holding, Mason's hand isn't that hard to guess. Mason knows that, and knows BB knows that too, and if he didn't respect this player he almost certainly would raise turn and or river. Yet he calls down, which means to me that he has a way to KNOW that BB has a good chance of having him beat or tied. Maybe BB leaned over and said, "Boy, Mason, it's a bitch playing big slick, ain't it?" /images/graemlins/smile.gif

bill

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
I hear ya. Most of the time I'm firing that 3rd barrel, it's on a board where there was a flush or straight draw that doesn't come on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your good ace is beating a busted draw. If you are out of position, I would much perfer to check and let the busted draw bluff, which it often will. He certainly isn't paying you off if you bet. With position, it's less clear since you can no longer try to induce a bluff, but I still think you get paid off by a worse hand (presumably a busted nut flush) too rarely and you aren't going to get someone to lay down a pair because he has to consider that you can be the one on the busted draw (although this may be less true with certain boards and action, as it's hard to put a preflop raiser on a baby straight draw). I really don't see this is as +ev. If your opponent is on a busted draw, this is a classic case where he isn't calling your bet unless he has you beat, and he is going to call if he does.

[mike l.]

"While it's hard to say what BB may be holding, Mason's hand isn't that hard to guess"

are you kidding? all mason did was raise preflop bet the flop and then call the turn when the A paired. that could be all sorts of hands. if someone i didnt know played their hand that way and i was the bb i would not be thinking "gee it's pretty obvious this guy has AK"

[BarronVangorToth]

Given Mason's actions, FEW could put him on AK as most would pop the AK on the turn for a raise ... like I said before, with the BB not getting raised, he must think Mason doesn't have an Ace and maybe his, I don't know, random KJ is good.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[ggbman]

Very interesting hand Mason... I am curious as to why this isn't an easy raise. The hands the BB could have that are ahead of you are 22, AJ, JJ, or J2 which isn't really worth considering. I don't know about the texture of this game, would you expect Jacks to three-bet pre flop? He certainly could have AJ, as it would warrnt the preflop call and then slowplay when he flopped top two. But it's not that likely that all the aces are out there AND he has a boat. He might also be temtped to check the nuts here since you have shown strenth the whole way and may have a monster yourself. I think the most likely holding he has that beats you is 22. He might call from the BB getting 5.5 to 1 on his money and then slowplay the flop. If he had you on an ace, the turn made you trips and boated him up, so he might bet hoping you would raise with trips. In conclusion, i think that raising the river would show profit as the pot is big and he could well have a lesser ace, maybe he was even bluffing with a hand like KJ. I think when you are behind here, it's most liley to 22. I am interested to hear the results.

Gabe

[JasonP530]

I want to say that if you are concerned about the BB having AJ or A2 there, his range of calling hands is wide enough to make raising a viable option. If hes in there with A2, he is in there with any suited ace, as well as ATo and KJ and probably QJ. FWIW, his risk is only 2 bets by raising, as he is surely going to call the river anyways.

[Gamblor]

Next time his opponent has a marginal hand on the river and Mason is strong, he will still value bet knowing that Mason won't raise him without the nuts.

Of course, next time Mason is heads up on the river, he may be able to bluff-raise the river. When his opponent has a good but not exceptional hand, he may let go knowing that last time Mason didn't even raise with top trips top kicker. If he's raising this time, he must have a monster.

Mason is giving up one BB here to steal 5+ next time.

Perhaps?

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Next time his opponent has a marginal hand on the river and Mason is strong, he will still value bet knowing that Mason won't raise him without the nuts.

Of course, next time Mason is heads up on the river, he may be able to bluff-raise the river. When his opponent has a good but not exceptional hand, he may let go knowing that last time Mason didn't even raise with top trips top kicker. If he's raising this time, he must have a monster.

Mason is giving up one BB here to steal 5+ next time.

Perhaps?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point. Nice post.

Rob

[Ulysses]

Great post, Mason. I agree that whether you should have raised the turn or were better off waiting and raising the river is a worthy topic of discussion.

[mmcd]

I really don't see how raising the turn could be better than raising the river here.

[Cornell Fiji]

[ QUOTE ]
Next time his opponent has a marginal hand on the river and Mason is strong, he will still value bet knowing that Mason won't raise him without the nuts.

Of course, next time Mason is heads up on the river, he may be able to bluff-raise the river. When his opponent has a good but not exceptional hand, he may let go knowing that last time Mason didn't even raise with top trips top kicker. If he's raising this time, he must have a monster.

Mason is giving up one BB here to steal 5+ next time.

Perhaps?

[/ QUOTE ]


Wow, It took the 75th response to actually teach me something by proposing a plausable reason as to why The Mason might only call here.

Obviously at face value it seems as though a river raise here seems standard. For reasons stated in the first 74 replies we all would have raised this river (and maybe the turn.)

It also seems that the edge for The Mason, although clear, is somewhat slight (maybe worth 1/2 BB?) as he will be 3-bet by some of the villains possible holdings. So for the cost of 1/2 BB it could set up a steal that could easily be worth 6+ BBs. If this play only has a 1/5 chance of setting up a river steal later vs. this villain it is therefore a great play.

(Edit: I guess I need to discount the EV formula because it is not gauranteed that this play will successfully set up a play later on but either way its value is not in the fact that he will not get called by inferior hands or raised by superior ones, but it is the added value of setting up the villain later on)

Great point Gamblor, great post Mason.

-Steve

[jogger08152]

Looks better after some thought than it did initially, assuming he's a good player - and you're giving him credit for being at least solid. The widest range of hands your play suggests you believe he would call your raise with is: any suited Ace, any pocket pair, and possibly AQ and AJ offsuit. (I assume you also believe he would throw away PP's other than JJ, 22, maybe KK and possibly QQ postflop.)

1. He cannot have called your preflop raise with AJs. (The Aces of clubs and spades are on board, you hold the diamond, and the Jack is a heart.) If BB is the type of player who would call your EP raise with AJ offsuit, he presumably would also call with AQ offsuit and quite possibly worse Aces (suited or off). This would justify a raise you didn't make.

Side note: I understand that he could hold 4 AQ's and 3 AJ's, (throw in AhTh too if you want) so if you believe he would call in this position with any of these hands and any pocket pair but no other dominated Aces your play would be easily correct - assuming you believe there's nothing else he could be playing apart from JJ or 22 in the manner he played this hand. (Any chance he has KK or QQ?) If you have this tight a read on this player, kudos.

2. It would seem a strange combination for a player to be bad enough to call a PF raise with AJ offsuit, catch two pair and then be clever enough to just call on the flop and then bet out on the turn, hoping you'll raise so he can re-raise. (Most players, I think, would just checkraise you in this situation, and given the way you played this hand, they would be correct to do so.)

3. Boats: He didn't raise preflop, which may somewhat reduce the likelihood he holds JJ (not sure how many 80-160 players would 3-bet out of position against an EP raise and a cold-call, but there have to be some). So, while he could hold JJ or slightly more likely 22, I'd have been inclined to throw in a raise on the turn or river, again assuming he could have called you with a reasonable number of weaker Aces and isn't a lock to muck to your raise.

I would guess you'd have to have a pretty strong read on this player (either tell-wise or through previous play) to play the turn and river as you did. I'll be very interested in seeing the results.

Jogger.

[imported_stealthcow]

would someone who has you beat on this kindof flop play the hand this way? it seems like he isn't getting much money in the pot considering he knows you had a good hand to start and probably caught some of it.

more likely he was trying to keep the pot small by not betting out with his weak ace, and on the turn/river is hoping his Axs holds out against a KK or QQ.


i like raising the turn here. it lets you know where you're at in the hand, and should let you know exactly what he has. and unless he stop and goes on the river again, it costs teh same as the way you played it

[LarsVegas]

That is far from clear cut. Actually, I think players who need a full to raise the river on a board with no flush or straight possibilities, are often the most likely to get called on a river raise in other pots.

Given that they indeed bluff a small fraction of the time, the thinking from the opponent should be, "he either needs a full to raise me - for value - or he is bluffing". I don't think anybody needs telling that boats are mathematically hard to come by.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
Next time his opponent has a marginal hand on the river and Mason is strong, he will still value bet knowing that Mason won't raise him without the nuts.

Of course, next time Mason is heads up on the river, he may be able to bluff-raise the river. When his opponent has a good but not exceptional hand, he may let go knowing that last time Mason didn't even raise with top trips top kicker. If he's raising this time, he must have a monster.

Mason is giving up one BB here to steal 5+ next time.

Perhaps?

[/ QUOTE ]


Amazing post. Normally, most players aren't paying attention enough to remember anything -- but given the stakes and that it's Mason, and therefore apt to be memorable for the villain, I can see how this play can seed some longterm doubt and be +EV.

Given John X against Bob Y, I'd still recommend Bob Y popping the river.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi shaundeeb:

I probably should have stated this. The player was someone I didn't know but he seemed to be a little too loose and on the aggressive side. That makes him typical for this game.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Sqred:

I don't know at what level you play at, but at this level the players tend to be a little better. So if he had a jack I'm not so sure he would call. However, I do agree that if you can be very sure that a jack is where he's at, then a river raise is correct.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi cash:

What are your reasons for making that raise?

Best wishes,
Mason

[sfer]

I'd prefer that most opponents value bet me less, since I'm much more likely to have marginal hands than monsters on the river.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi shaundeeb:

Since a second ace hit the board, it's now less likely that I'm holding an ace and more likely I have a big pair. If my opponent has three aces and checks the turn, I might take a free card. Now I have a free chance to beat him.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Aaron Harsh]

Well, I don't like raising the turn here because unless you are in Party's 15/30 you won't get unlimited action from AX. You might even see a good laydown by the BB in the hand, if the perception is of a tight tough player raising or if the BB is just trying to buy the pot.

However, the river bet is the only one that could have been raised IMO. I think the BB would play AX, JJ, AJ or even 22 the exact way it is set up here, and while I believe a raise on the river is probably the correct play for me, I see nothing wrong with the conservative play of possibly sacrificing 1 big bet as opposed to the potential of losing 2 more big bets. I guess I would have raised the river and called the reraise, but that's why I play $15/$30 and not $80/$160.

[James282]

The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading. If this was made by some guy as his first post, he would have gotten maybe 1 response saying "raise the turn or the river" and then it would have went off into oblivion. But because Mason's little brother or Mat Sklanksy or somebody decided to post a hand under Mason's name, a routine hand that was played badly turns into the most replied to hand of the week.
-James

[imported_stealthcow]

can you blame people for bieng more likely to read a post by mason malmuth?

if someone brings up the argument that you shouldn't raise the river in this situation ( or turn ), i think i'm much more likely to take a post from mason malmuth more seriously then i am from someone like .... shawn keller

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Jason:

If he just had an ace, why didn't he raise on the flop?

best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Slavic:

Suppose you just had an ace in this spot. Now that an ace flops, how do you play it?

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Bill:

It should be clear as to why raising the turn is poor strategy. The river is much more debatable.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Barron:

As I already pointed out, raising the turn is clearly wrong. You need to think about the possible hands your opponent could have.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi uvickid:

[ QUOTE ]
However, I think the betting pattern of the BB is a little weird too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

If you're one of today's modern aggressive players are you only going to call with AQ on the flop?

However, I do agree that many players today at the higher limits are much looser than they were just a couple of years ago.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Kevin:

Finally. Congradulations.

The turn bet coupled with the flop check-call is inconsistent. Most players in this spot in this game are going to check raise the flop with any ace. If their hand is worse than any ace then they will often check call, and if it's better than any ace they will also check call a good percentage of the time hoping to get a check raise in on fourth street.

So the question I have to ask myself is what is the possibility that the second ace disrupted my opponent's strategy. Also, keep in mind that on the river, he is less likely to bet a mediocre hand but will still bet terrible hands (like a king-queen) and great hands like a flopped set.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

I have a lot of problems with your post. When playing poker it's sometimes easy to give your opponents the credit to play with the sophistication that you do. Unless I know someone well, I don't give them that credit.

So while it's true that I may check a pair of kings on the flop, I doubt that an unknown player would ever think I would do such a thing.

I also disagree with your statement:

[ QUOTE ]
youre overthinking this. very few opponents he can be against will be thinking on this high of a level. a player looking to get the most out of a very strong hand wouldve went for a checkraise on the flop and/or turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

While this is certainly normally true, having a second ace come may have been a contingency my opponent was not prepared for. Thus an inconsistency appeared in his strategy and I need to take that into account.

What's interesting here is that this is an example of a play a very good player might make as well as a very bad player when they hold a very strong hand. An okay player would probably go for the check raise on the turn with the same hand.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Daddy:

Do you think he would bet only a jack on the river? I agree that he might bet this on the turn, but once I call doesn't it look like I can beat jacks and will certainly call again.

Best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Danenania:

Of course there's a read here. It has to do with the way this type of hand would normally be played versus the way it was played. See my other posts.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Doc:

You're right. I enjoy watching people struggle with the counterintuitiveness of hold 'em. I also enjoy helping our readers in this area.

best wishes,
Mason

[cpk]

Would people behave this way with J2s? Or KK?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Tyler:

Let me reverse this question a little. Suppose he had ace-jack, would he raise the flop? What about ace-queen or ace-ten?

best wishes,
Mason

[cpk]

While this is certainly normally true, having a second ace come may have been a contingency my opponent was not prepared for. Thus an inconsistency appeared in his strategy and I need to take that into account.

As a counter to my previous question, is it possible that the second Ace meant that he was afraid that it was a scare card to you and you wouldn't bet? It's sort of the same reason as why you wouldn't want to go for a check-raise with the A/images/graemlins/heart.gif and four hearts on the board.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi DingDong:

How many players in this game would bet a jack on the river?

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi dog:

No. See my other posts.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
How many players in this game would bet a jack on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very close to 100%.

[SA125]

You figure you both know you'll bet the flop when checked too. When he leads the turn you're wondering why he didn't check raise the flop, or go for it here.

If he had better than TP on the flop, maybe it's because MP folded and he decided to check raise the turn instead. Then he decides not to risk having you check behind, which is a strong possibility if you had bet the flop with anything other than an A or JJ?

Or he figures the odds were now less that you'd have an A and he'll represent one. I think you check behind the turn because you're not sure which.

He bets the river into the EP raiser with nothing on the board to counterfeit AK. You conclude he's not worrying about AK and flat call with the slim hope he rolls AQ.

That's the best I can figure why you didn't raise. Me, I would have raised the river. What do you think?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Joe:

[ QUOTE ]
These games, these days, make this an easy river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I was in a $15-$30 game at The Bellagio I would certainly agree with you. Or perhaps if it was tournament time and there were a bunch of European pot limit players sitting at my table. However in general, the typical unknown (to me) $80-$160 player at The Bellagio does play better than this. Perhaps in some other places this is not the case. But I hardly get out of the house anymore, less go to those other places.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Clark:

Wrong! It can't be 100 percent. I was in the game.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi AC:

Even if he would expect me to call with a pair of queens or kings, that doesn't mean he wouldn't make a desperation bluff.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi sale:

You need to adjust your distribution of possible hands based on how he played the flop and turn. Did you do that?

best wishes,
Mason

[SA125]

"Hero raised preflop to show strength and bet the flop which puts hero on an Ace."

I'd guess they know Mason will bet that flop when checked too with hands that don't have an A.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Barron:

I think this is half the battle. You also have to think about how he might play if he flopped aces-up or a set.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Andy:

Good analysis.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Nolan:

While I agree with you, my opponent wasn't calling down.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Phil:

You have this wrong. The chance of me admitting that the advice in our books is off is zero. How I might play a particular hand where judgement is involved is another matter.

best wishes,
Mason

[FrankLu99]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone:

Here's a hand I played last night (Saturday) in an $80-$160 game at The Bellagio.

I was first one in and raised from an early position with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifK/images/graemlins/club.gif. A middle position player called and the big blind called.

The flop came A/images/graemlins/club.gifJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. The big blind checked. I bet. The middle position player folded. And the big blind called.

The turn was the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. The big blind bet and I called.

The river was the 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif. The big blind bet and I called.

All comments welcome.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]
This is what happened. Mason raises with AKo EP. BB calls with 22.
Flop comes A X 2 rainbow. BB licks his lips because he knows mason raised with AQs or AKo. Mason bets and BB smooth calls planning to check raise the turn and bet the river.
Turn comes an A. BB licks his lips as he expects Mason to raise the turn or the river. BB bets. Mason sees the drool as BB bets and instantly puts the guy on a stone cold bluff or some insane set. With 4 outs Mason smooth calls and BB is pissed that Mason did not raise.
River - blank. BB is poed that Mason just smooth called and bets. Mason notices that BB is poed and is a bit confused. Mason thought he was either far behind or ahead. he thinks and figures that a smooth call is best because if he raises and his opponent was bluffin' his opponent will fold faster than tommy angelo in the SB, but if he raises and is beat then he may lose on average 1.5 bets.

BB exposes his hand, 23o, and is shocked because he thought he had 22 but he does not say anything. Mason also thinking that BB had a boat almost mucks his hand - instead he decides to table his hand to show what an awesome river play he made by just smooth calling instead of raising. He tells BB, "nice hand I knew I was behind all the way but pot odds dictated that I call." Mason turns over his AKo and realizes that BB only had 2 pairs. BB goes crazeee ebcause of Mason's slow roll. Mason says, "With nine WSOP bracelets I would expect you to read your hand correctly. Go back to playing $1/2 LHE on UB where the cards are always right in front of you."

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi dan:

[ QUOTE ]
again a solid/tricky opponent i'm guesstimating it's something like 70/30 that he has (c) rather than (b).

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you take into account how the hand was played on the flop? Also everyone else needs to notice that at the 70/30 ratio that you give my bet is only slightly profitable.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi William:

Good post.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Barron:

While you're right, most players, even at the $80-$160 don't think up to as many levels as Two Plus Twoers do. It's sometimes easy in these spots to out think yourself when you understand poker well and your opponent doesn't.

best wishes,
Mason

[SA125]

I say this. "I think you check behind the turn because you're not sure which."

I must have re-read my response 5 times before submitting. Funny.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I didn't get to read all the posts. It's incredible the number of responses we now get on these forums.

After I called my opponent showed me an ace-ten and I won the pot. Needless to say he would have called my river raise.

So after I played this hand I began to second guess myself and decided to post it here. However, after working through many of the posts and thinking the hand through in detail, I do believe my call was correct but it is close. Also, in a less skilled game, perhaps at a lower limit, perhaps out of town, or perhaps around a tournament my thinking would be to make that raise on the river.

But one thing is for certain. Only a few of you knew to think back to how the hand was played on all streets and how the play on these streets, especially the flop, would influence the likely distribution of the hands that my opponent would hold.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi James:

Are you jealous?

Best wishes,
Mason

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi James:

Are you jealous?

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

What could I be jealous of here? I know you misplayed the hand, you know you misplayed the hand, any player worth his salt who chimed in on this thread knows you misplayed the hand. You have played hundreds of thousands of hands of hold 'em(presumably) and yet you choose hands like this to post. Why? Aren't we supposed to post hands that are debatable, or at least hands that can make us think on a higher level? This hand accomplishes neither of these things in the eyes of myself or from what seems like many good players on this forum. But the problem doesn't lie with them, it lies with the people who are still in the lesser advanced stages of learning who see this hand posted by The Mason Malmuth and then try to puzzle out why such a poker authority would ever play this hand in this particular way.

If you are insinuating that I'm jealous that people don't respond to my hands or give me advice, I've never really had that problem(mostly because I post so few hands), but I have heard this complaint from others whom I've tried to bring to the forum to learn. My point was simply that the amount of replies/thread is losing a lot of correlation with how much can be learned by the analyzation of the hand.

Not that I expect you to read this response nor reply to it.
-James

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi James:

Sorry. I didn't mean to upset you. However, I think if you read the other posts plus my responses you'll see that there is more to this hand than you think.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Josh W]

[ QUOTE ]

After I called my opponent showed me an ace-ten and I won the pot. Needless to say he would have called my river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Anybody else out there able to fold AT to a river raise at least some of the time?

J

[etizzle]

Mason I think you overlooked one possible thing when deciding not to raise. I believe his thinking went like this.

On the flop, he is thinking that a checkraise would probably blow you off KK or QQ, as that is the way most would play an ace, and you know that.

On the turn he fears you might check it through with KK, and again might not call a checkraise if you do bet. So after he is just called on the turn, he figures you will call again with QQ or KK and bets again for value.

If he is capable of not raising the flop becuase he knows you wont call down with KK-QQ then I think a river raise is in order.

[na4bart]

Hi Mason,

Although I play at the 20/40 level I would be somewhat suspicious of him not raising the flop if he indeed has an ace then leading on the turn. I lean towards popping him on the turn to see what he does with the plan of calling down if I get 3 bet and do not improve the river / he calls the raise and bet the river. With your discription of him he does not sound capable of calling the raise then raising the river.

[cpk]

A pot of 9 BB (after the raise) is too big to fold in a game like this, I should think. It invites trouble.

[LethalRose]

Why is raising the turn and river wrong here?

[na4bart]

Hmmm...were you planning on checking behind if he checked the turn?

[bernie]

Hey Mason,


[ QUOTE ]
Wrong! It can't be 100 percent. I was in the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

Clark didn't say it was 100%.

[ QUOTE ]
Very close to 100%.

[/ QUOTE ]

He was right.

b

[J_V]

This thread is a joke, but I can't stomach a poker authority saying raising the turn is clearly wrong against an unknown opponent. Your chosen line is probably only good against a LAG and tricky opponent who is clearly thinking. I also think your vantage point is jaded because many players know who you are and play differently against you.

[J_V]

Maybe like Mason, check call, check call.

[J_V]

Yes, because his life long dream was to become a niche publisher and a blogger. And with your terrific success monopolizing the internet, his dream is dashed at the ripe age of 19. Poor James.

[goofball]

first, if your opponent if bluffing he folds and if you call he might fire another bullet on the river. second, if you're beat he 3bets and might even just checkcall a river K. third, if you call he might even call a river raise with a KK or J or whatever

[Ulysses]

I think you were guilty of the very things you criticized many of the posters here about.

[ QUOTE ]
most players, even at the $80-$160 don't think up to as many levels as Two Plus Twoers do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Only a few of you knew to think back to how the hand was played on all streets and how the play on these streets, especially the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's what is the likely scenario in your opponent's head, and I think this was pretty clear to many of us who play in this sort of game a lot.

Pre-flop he had something to defend with. Maybe a mediocre/strong-ish Ace like A8-AJ. Maybe a suited Ace. (And maybe a pocket pair or some face cards. These fall under the bluff or maybe keep you honest category at the end)

On the flop, he hits an Ace. No, he doesn't bet or check-raise. He just check-calls because a tough player has raised. So you could easily have a big Ace - and you could get away from a worse hand. So, he thinks maybe he is ahead, maybe not, but he's calling you down.

Now, there's another Ace on the turn. OK, now it becomes less likely that you have an Ace. And if you have a pocket pair, you may well check behind. So, let's bet out. If you do indeed have a bigger Ace, you'll raise, and he'll call you down to make sure. But since his three Aces are probably good, he definitely wants to get at least one bet in here.

OK, you don't raise the turn. You surely don't have a big Ace. Probably KK or QQ. And a good chance you'll check those behind, so better go ahead and value bet the river rather than go for a checkraise that will often miss - and get three-bet if indeed you were being tricky with a big Ace.

As I said, I think you out-thought yourself on this one. I think it was very simple to see that your opponent very likely had some sort of mediocre ace - or something he could very well keep you honest with by calling a river raise.

[elindauer]

Hi Mason,

Ok, first off. I admit that had anybody else posted this, I'd just write "clear river raise" and be done. In my game(s), this would be the right play every time.

But... ok... 80/160. Loose aggressive decently smart players. What could he have?

AJ? No way. Maybe he gets tricky and just calls the flop, but now that he fills up and holds ALL the good cards, he bets out?! I don't think so.

Weaker ace that you beat. Possible. I can see check-calling a tight player down with this hand. The turn ace changes his mind and he realizes it's more likely that he's good, so he bets out to make sure you pay 2 bets with KK, and also to limit his losses if he's up against AK (avoid a 3-bet).

Set? Very possible.

And... that's about it, at least as far as raising is concerned. As a sidenote, I don't think a pure bluff is all that likely here, since he can't think you're drawing and your turn call indicates you intend to call the river.

I don't think you can fold if you are 3-bet, so you're offering 2:1 on your raise that you have the best hand. There are 9 weaker suited aces, 3 AQo, 3 ATo, and 9 possible sets, though jacks must be discounted due to the missing preflop 3-bet. Mason is discounting aces though due to the flop check-call, as many would check-raise. AT 15:9, it's just a call. Call it 12:7, just call. You have to discount jacks substantially while keeping baby aces at 100% value to make it a raise. Looks like calling might be right. Note that you would definitely raise if you knew you could fold to a 3-bet.

(edit: I originally put 36 suited aces and concluded it was a raise. bad math.)
(edit #2: added in AQ, AT offsuit to the 9 suited aces. went from clear call to a closer decision.)

my 2 cents.
Eric

[Justin A]

El Diablo,
What happened to your avatar?

Justin A

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading....

[/ QUOTE ]

When a great player does something I don't understand, I think about it because I know it has a lot of potential to help my game. When joe blow newbie makes it, I assume he's making a mistake and spending more time thinking is a waste of time. If I post, I'm probably doing it to try to help him, not help myself, and I don't feel the need to think too deeply. This is totally reasonable. A more complicated analysis would hurt a newbie more than help anyways. You think a 2/4 player needs me to add, when viewing this hand, "but if you were in a tough, slightly loose and aggressive 80/160 game, you might just call the river"? No way.

There are a million poker posts on the internet. It's only natural to start, when trying to improve your own game, with the ones where players you respect do something you don't expect or understand. That's not being a snob, it's just good common sense.

-Eric

[tolbiny]

Why would i raise the flop with a weak A, when i could be way behind, or way ahead? Is it likely that you raised with a weaker A in this situation? Doesn't he want you to keep betting say KK or QQ? I don't see the point to the c/r on the flop here, unless you are folding to a three bet confidently, and also think it is the best way to get more $ out of KK or QQ.

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
...the problem doesn't lie with them, it lies with the people who are still in the lesser advanced stages of learning who see this hand posted by The Mason Malmuth and then try to puzzle out why such a poker authority would ever play this hand in this particular way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you that this hand does not serve a new player well. Then again, the forums are divided by skill after all. One thing that has bothered me about posts on 2+2 is that there is so little difference between the small and mid stakes posts. The rare posts that represent deviations from standard play due to multi-level thinking are interesting and belong in this forum.

Fundamentally, your problem isn't with Mason anyways. It's with the posters. Good luck convincing them not to think about Mason's posts.

my 2 cents.
Eric

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
Consider this simple line for a guy with a rag ace: He check/called the flop, maybe because he was concerned about his kicker. On the turn, if he has a weaker ace he is now concerned about Mason checking behind with KK, QQ.

[/ QUOTE ]


Dead on. It turns out though, that this possibility only makes it close whether or not you raise, unless you a) can fold to a 3-bet, or b) think the big blind would play A9o and weaker offsuit aces. See my top-level post for more details.


Good luck.
Eric

[elindauer]

Hi El Diablo,

I agree with your analysis, but I don't think this makes it a raise. Check out my post and let me know if you agree or think I'm missing something. Note that I'm assuming that AT is the weakest offsuit ace your opponent will hold.

Thanks.
Eric

[sale]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi sale:

You need to adjust your distribution of possible hands based on how he played the flop and turn. Did you do that?

best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I used the following discount factors to discount his possible holdings (in addition to enumerating possible hands based on exposed cards):

Hands that beat you, and is 3bet, discount factors:
JJ, AJ and 22: 100%
44 and 35: 25%

Hands that you beat:
AQ, AT, A9: 100%
A8, A7: 50%
KK, QQ: 75%
KJ, QJ, JT: 50%

Of course, it all depends on these percentages that could be way off for the 80-160 game. But I just wanted to make som calculations to see what is required to make the river raise break even. The raise is break even under the following assumptions given that you have to call a river 3bet and never win it, and assuming that he pays you off with his best calling hands but mucks the J-hands.

How would you discount the various possibilities? And what hands do you think he would pay off a raise with? And would you have called a 3bet? If yes, how often would you expect to win it?

[elindauer]

Hi Gamblor,

I also considered this, but decided this can't be the dominant factor. The problem is that the raise looks so clear, you couldn't possibly make up the lost value with some vague metagame consideration. Mason must believe that it is not nearly as likely that he's ahead and will get a raise paid off as it first appears.

Certainly your point is worth noting, as you have to be aware of how your EV maximizing plays are effecting your table image, and how to take advantage of that. Throwing away money though in an attempt to make this happen is not how Mason plays (though it is how more loose aggressive types play).


my 2 cents.
Eric

[Danielih]

I have been playing this game occasionally over the past couple months and unless Mason gives us very very specific information about the opponent then not raising the river is a crime.

The overwhelming range of hands that the opponent will be holding that he will call a raise with and Mason beats makes it an easy raise. Even if you factor in the percentage of the time that he has a better hand and 3bets Mason (and mason calls) it is still worth it. One other factor to consider in todays super LAG environment is that with a weaker ace or a J this guy will occasionally 3bet mason and mason will win 2 extra bets.

I think the most likely hand he has is KJ QJ JT or a weak ace.

Over the past 6 months the level of play in the 80 game has declined significantly.

[Danielih]

I agree with El Diablo on this one. You are giving the average bellagio 80 player way too much credit.

If you dont raise this what do you raise?

The opponent may be playing in what seems to be a confusing manner becuase they are a moron not because they have you beat.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi tolbiny:

The flaw in your argument is that you are comparing with how a hand should be played versus how typical players do play them. So while I agree with you that it is probably best to check and call with a weak ace, in my experience most aggressive players rarely do this.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi JV:

While it's true that many players do play differently against me, at the $80 game almost all players are aggressive with some being clearly too aggressive, and many of them try to be tricky.

You need to keep in mind that I'm not in most pots and I do pay attention some of the time.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi JV:

This is actually a different topic. Over the years there has been some animosity displayed towards us on the Internet. In my opinion, one of the main reasons for this is simply that our success does make it more difficult for someone new to break in. We're aware of this and are trying to open the door for some new talented people. Ed Miller is a good example as well as some of the posters whose articles we published in our new Internet magazine.

Thanks for your post and best wishes,

Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Josh:

He had three aces, not a pair of aces. I doubt that anyone in this game, including me, would have made this fold.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi etizzle:

Your scenario is certainly a possibility. However, it's my experience that the unknown players in this game don't think at that level. They assume that if you have some like kings, you'll at least call the flop raise.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi elindauer:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
AJ? No way. Maybe he gets tricky and just calls the flop, but now that he fills up and holds ALL the good cards, he bets out?! I don't think so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Given the way he played the flop, ace-jack becomes more likely. Furthermore, if he wasn't mentally prepared for how to handle an ace on the turn, I think a bet now becomes likely.

[ QUOTE ]
Note that you would definitely raise if you knew you could fold to a 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably correct.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi elindauer:

I think the real value in this discussion are all the variables that need to be considered and the weight each variable should receive. Notice that once all the variables are stated it becomes difficult to disagree with any of them. So if there were any variables that you missed, then there is a lot of value here.

On the other hand, how important each variable is can actually be the subject of a lot of debate and these arguments can be quite confusing even to expert players. So that part of the discussion may or may not have real value for you. This would depend on your experience and general knowledge of the game. Also, slight differences in opinion can dramatically change the way a hand should be played.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Gamblor:

I don't think so. I'm not known to sit in these games for many hours at a time, or day after day. What you're suggesting isn't the right strategy for me, especially against someone I'm not familiar with. There are some other regulars that it might be more appropriate for.

Interesting post nonetheless.

Best wishes,
Mason

[tolbiny]

Mason-
I haven't taken the time to read the whole thread, skimmed about half of it. I didn't see you describe him (or specifically the game) as "aggressive". Lately in my 10-20 games i have seen the few aggressive players around me go for more raises or c/r on the turn, with weaker hands like top pair.
My thinking when i first read your post was that he could have a fairly wide range of hands on the flop- but when he bets out on the turn its screams "Ace" to me. My initial impression was that he saw his trips and didn't want to have the hand checked through, he also doesn't want to get raised, but that thought should come to him second after the, "i don't want this to get checked through" goes through his mind.
That was just my impression reading the post initially, which is probably close to what i would read at the table. If i think he is the type of player to go on first impressions, then i go with mine.

[SA125]

I doubt there's anyone, other than Mason, who can honestly say that they agree the river call is correct and Diablo's take on the play is wrong.

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]

If I was in a $15-$30 game at The Bellagio I would certainly agree with you. Or perhaps if it was tournament time and there were a bunch of European pot limit players sitting at my table. However in general, the typical unknown (to me) $80-$160 player at The Bellagio does play better than this. Perhaps in some other places this is not the case. But I hardly get out of the house anymore, less go to those other places.

Best wishes,
Mason

[/ QUOTE ]



This is the key element to this post, other than the player is playing against Mason and therefore knows he's against a far better than average caliber of player. That element is the level (80/160) which is a level of play I'd say less than 10% of this board plays at (and it's probably more like 1% of this site, in reality).

Me, personally, in any 10/20 game or even 20/40 game, I'd either raise the turn or the river and I know I'd still get called by a guy with a holding as weak as KJ -- in fact, something almost like this happened last night where I bet top pair, the top card paired, and the guy still called me down with THIRD pair.

There is a group of horrendous players out there that many of us are used to playing with -- but they are probably NOT playing 80/160 at the Bellagio and if they are, they aren't playing that game for long (barring some random fortune that they inherited).

With all of that said, you are absolutely right, Mason, that raising the turn with these types of players is incorrect. However ... do you think you ONLY get called with a river raise to a hand that beats you? Or were you laying seeds for further confusion when you call or raise as people have just seen you call down with AK on an AA-XXX board?


Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Noo Yawk]

[ QUOTE ]
one thing is for certain. Only a few of you knew to think back to how the hand was played on all streets and how the play on these streets, especially the flop, would influence the likely distribution of the hands that my opponent would hold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this at all. As a matter of fact, the only way to put your opponent on a range of hands was to look back at the play on the flop. With 2 Aces out there why wouldn't Ace-x not bet the turn when he thinks he may not get a bet out of you? Why wouldn't he bet a J or some other big pair on the turn now that he could account for two Aces? Why wouldn't he bet the river for value with a big pair and call a raise or bet the Ace and either call or re-raise? All of these hands you beat are consistant with his flop play.

I think you may have lost more than one extra bet here which in my opinion swings it from a close raise to an absolute must. The range of hands you beat is larger than the range that has you beaten, as is the range of hands he's re-raising with. After a few years the better posters on this board beat it into me not to fear monsters and get some value out of my hands. I think you fell victim to your own overthinking.

[kagame]

basically seems clear to me also that the opponent thought there was a good chance he was beat UNTIL he saw the 2nd ace hit.

thats what makes his play bizarre, he reevaluates his hand strength in the upward direction. yet, it makes little sense, its as though someone with AA put his opponent on KK until a K hits the flop, and then decides he couldnt have KK, do you see what i mean?

i think that anyone who could put this opponent on that sort of mental process instead of what Mason discusses either has ESP or is suffering from delusions.

[That guy]

at 80/160, is it normal for the BB to call a TAG EP raise with a caller already in?? What do you want to flop?? Ten high? and hope Mason has AK and the caller has 99??

vs 1 EP raiser, mediocre... vs EP raiser and a call, eww.

[Gamblor]

I'd prefer that most opponents value bet me less, since I'm much more likely to have marginal hands than monsters on the river.

The point of my post was that Mason didn't raise with a great but not "monstrous" holding on the river.

Thus, he can represent monsters later on by raising the river in another pot, knowing that the Villain here would have to give serious respect to any sort of river raise, regardless of whether Mason actually has it.

Having never played the 80 game at the Bellagio, that's my blind defence.

[mplspoker]

James, for what it is worth I think what you said - is totally true and has to be said. I'm a business owner (not a professional poker player), but if I was concerned about making all of my money playing poker this hand was clearly played wrong. I don't play any higher than 30/60 (maybe 80/160 is totally different) but for 99.9% of the people reading this forum that generally play 30/60 and lower it's a complete joke.

I would also like to know why the raise on the turn is so bad? What if he has ace rag or a pocket pair - do you just want to let him catch up? What if he has 2 broadways and ends up catching a str8 on the river? It seems a little rediculous to let him catch up or at least not raise the river here.....

Mason is assume on the turn that either he has a full house or nothing that can even catch up. I'd doubt that is the case, I'd guess it is likely something that can catch up....

[skp]

Bingo bango.

One has to play with one's nose as much as one's head when playing poker. We have all encountered this situation (or a close variation thereof) dozens of times. A checkcall on the flop coupled with a bet on the turn rarely represents a monster that is looking to get excessive action.

One can easily drum up reasons as to why calling is better on the river but the smell test says raise and that is usually the most reliable sign.

[Philuva]

Perfect. And I don't think Mason's opponent misplayed the hand at all. In fact, with Mason not raising the river, he played it perfectly.

[Robb]

Hi Mason,
You wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
What's interesting here is that this is an example of a play a very good player might make as well as a very bad player when they hold a very strong hand. An okay player would probably go for the check raise on the turn with the same hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the first thing I would think against a great player. He filled up and wants me to raise the turn or he has nothing and probably won't call a raise. However, I feel you aren't accounting for:
A great player may also lead bet the turn with merely trip aces for the same reason.

Yes trips are different than a boat because he may not want to 3-bet your raise. But against you....a lead bet is better than a turn cr because but he gets out of the turn for 2 bets vs 3 if he's beat. (Now if you would raise the turn with KK/QQ than that's a different story. But it still doesn't hurt him because the turn lead bet still got money in the pot with the best hand.)

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
Pre-flop he had something to defend with. Maybe a mediocre/strong-ish Ace like A8-AJ. Maybe a suited Ace. (And maybe a pocket pair or some face cards. These fall under the bluff or maybe keep you honest category at the end)

On the flop, he hits an Ace. No, he doesn't bet or check-raise. He just check-calls because a tough player has raised. So you could easily have a big Ace - and you could get away from a worse hand. So, he thinks maybe he is ahead, maybe not, but he's calling you down.

Now, there's another Ace on the turn. OK, now it becomes less likely that you have an Ace. And if you have a pocket pair, you may well check behind. So, let's bet out. If you do indeed have a bigger Ace, you'll raise, and he'll call you down to make sure. But since his three Aces are probably good, he definitely wants to get at least one bet in here.

OK, you don't raise the turn. You surely don't have a big Ace. Probably KK or QQ. And a good chance you'll check those behind, so better go ahead and value bet the river rather than go for a checkraise that will often miss - and get three-bet if indeed you were being tricky with a big Ace.

[/ QUOTE ]

This pretty much what I thought. Of course, he could have flopped a very strong hand, and now that an A is less likely for Mason on the turn, he bets. The only hands that would do this are JJ, 22, and AJ. (There are three each of these.)

If the guy plays say AKo-ATo and any suited A, and Mason will call a 3-bet on the river, raising the river would be +.125BB for Mason. However, his opponent may not 3-bet 22, because he may be afraid Mason slow played AJ, JJ, or AA. (It would be incorrect for him to 3-bet with 22.) In fact he may not 3-bet even JJ on the river, as tight as Mason plays.

More over, his opponent may play off-suit A’s worse than AT. The guy may have been somewhat inclined to still go for the C/R on the turn with 22 or JJ, even though an A was now less likely for Mason, and therefore we can consider 22 and JJ are not quite as likely. In addition there is a chance that the guy is value betting KJ when he sees the 2nd A.

However, if Mason is going to argue that the guy would not play any off suit A worse than AT, no suited A worse than A7s, and that he will fold anything worse than trip A’s on the river, then just calling the river is good.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading....

[/ QUOTE ]

When a great player does something I don't understand, I think about it because I know it has a lot of potential to help my game. When joe blow newbie makes it, I assume he's making a mistake and spending more time thinking is a waste of time. If I post, I'm probably doing it to try to help him, not help myself, and I don't feel the need to think too deeply. This is totally reasonable. A more complicated analysis would hurt a newbie more than help anyways. You think a 2/4 player needs me to add, when viewing this hand, "but if you were in a tough, slightly loose and aggressive 80/160 game, you might just call the river"? No way.

There are a million poker posts on the internet. It's only natural to start, when trying to improve your own game, with the ones where players you respect do something you don't expect or understand. That's not being a snob, it's just good common sense.

-Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

By the very nature of what you're saying it's snobbish. Also, it's possible that a lot of very good players have leaks. By trying to emulate their worst hands, you just create leaks for yourself. All of a sudden you aren't raising your overpair at any point in the hand because Tommy Angelo didn't, or raising the river with trips, top kicker against a loose-aggressive and tricky opponent because Mason did it. Why? Because you can reason 1 or 2 scenarios where this might be the correct play. Ask yourself how you would play a suited ace in this hand, besides probably mucking preflop. Frankly I would play it exactly like the BB, and so would a number of posters on this board. Check-raising the flop would be juvenile and I doubt that most if any good players would do this with pretty much ANY ace in the BB, since it would be terrible. Also, I would rarely go for a bet-three-bet against Mason because I know how rarely he puts in extra bets postflop. Note that against more aggressive players I would probably do this, but against Mason, no thanks. I know he is checking behind KK and QQ on the turn. Anyways, you can respond to whomever you wish, of course. I don't have a problem with the posters of this board per se, just a problem with the general direction the board is taking(or has already taken).
-James

[David Steele]

It is an obvious raise and the follow up reasoning by Mason seems inconsistant.

In these quotes your argue that the game is tougher and at a higher level


[ QUOTE ]



If I was in a $15-$30 game at The Bellagio I would certainly agree with you. Or perhaps if it was tournament time and there were a bunch of European pot limit players sitting at my table. However in general, the typical unknown (to me) $80-$160 player at The Bellagio does play better than this. Perhaps in some other places this is not the case. But I hardly get out of the house anymore, less go to those other places.

Also, in a less skilled game, perhaps at a lower limit, perhaps out of town, or perhaps around a tournament my thinking would be to make that raise on the river.



[/ QUOTE ]
but in these quotes your argue that the players are at a fairly low level.

[ QUOTE ]

The flaw in your argument is that you are comparing with how a hand should be played versus how typical players do play them. So while I agree with you that it is probably best to check and call with a weak ace, in my experience most aggressive players rarely do this.


Your scenario is certainly a possibility. However, it's my experience that the unknown players in this game don't think at that level. They assume that if you have some like kings, you'll at least call the flop raise.



[/ QUOTE ]


If the guy plays ok then it is like ElDiablo describes, he was likely doing the standard check-call, check call ( bet the river perhaps ) when he decided you might check a weaker hand after the Ace hit the turn.

If he plays poorly then he could have any goofy hand. If he is really bad, he might not even reraise his something-full of aces ( in the unlikely case he has it ) as he is afraid you slowplayed a bigger monster, so that is one more reason to raise his probable loser.

When a weaker player makes an unusual sequenced (out-of-the blue ) bet, the default assumption is a poor bluffing attempt not some devious plot to extract an extra bet.

Either with a weak player or and agressive advanced player the river raise is right and it is not close IMO

D.

[Robb]

Actually El Diablo already made my point (with a little more detail as well)

[mike l.]

"I think this was pretty clear to many of us who play in this sort of game a lot."

mason this is exactly what's going on here. youre not adjusting correctly to today's games. give your opponent's less credit and you will doing better.

[etizzle]

Fair enough. I wonder why he did not raise the flop then? Strange line. Thanks for the reply.

[Turning Stone Pro]

"thats what makes his play bizarre, he reevaluates his hand strength in the upward direction. yet, it makes little sense, its as though someone with AA put his opponent on KK until a K hits the flop, and then decides he couldnt have KK, do you see what i mean?

i think that anyone who could put this opponent on that sort of mental process instead of what Mason discusses either has ESP or is suffering from delusions."

Dear kagame:

I'm not trying to be rude, but if you don't understand how the 2nd ace on the turn decreases the odds that Mason has an A, you need "to do more work with your ears than with your mouth," as Dragline said in Cool Hand Luke.

TSP

[Turning Stone Pro]

Excellent analysis of a rather basic situation, that should not have drawn all of the attention it did.

TSP

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you were guilty of the very things you criticized many of the posters here about.

[ QUOTE ]
most players, even at the $80-$160 don't think up to as many levels as Two Plus Twoers do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Only a few of you knew to think back to how the hand was played on all streets and how the play on these streets, especially the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's what is the likely scenario in your opponent's head, and I think this was pretty clear to many of us who play in this sort of game a lot.

Pre-flop he had something to defend with. Maybe a mediocre/strong-ish Ace like A8-AJ. Maybe a suited Ace. (And maybe a pocket pair or some face cards. These fall under the bluff or maybe keep you honest category at the end)

On the flop, he hits an Ace. No, he doesn't bet or check-raise. He just check-calls because a tough player has raised. So you could easily have a big Ace - and you could get away from a worse hand. So, he thinks maybe he is ahead, maybe not, but he's calling you down.

Now, there's another Ace on the turn. OK, now it becomes less likely that you have an Ace. And if you have a pocket pair, you may well check behind. So, let's bet out. If you do indeed have a bigger Ace, you'll raise, and he'll call you down to make sure. But since his three Aces are probably good, he definitely wants to get at least one bet in here.

OK, you don't raise the turn. You surely don't have a big Ace. Probably KK or QQ. And a good chance you'll check those behind, so better go ahead and value bet the river rather than go for a checkraise that will often miss - and get three-bet if indeed you were being tricky with a big Ace.

As I said, I think you out-thought yourself on this one. I think it was very simple to see that your opponent very likely had some sort of mediocre ace - or something he could very well keep you honest with by calling a river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just so correct, Mason comments on 25,000 other replys in this thread, yet fail to acknowledge one of the only correct replys?

The real question is; Is Mason Losing It?

[amulet]

while i found the discussion fascinating. i think the most interesting part of this is that it took place at 2 + 2. i really enjoy the site, but the bet, bet, raise, raise, check raise overly aggressive style that is pervasive in the advice here is way over the top. however, in this example an expert player, did not go crazy raising. he did not check with the purpose of check raising the flop, he did not raise the turn, he called it down! a rare thing even discussed here at 2 + 2. sure the river call vs raise is debatable, but the point is the clear thinking throughout the hand. not an old style as some here who misunderstood the aggression in terrific books like ssh would say. just pure good poker. i think many 2 plus 2 'ers could learn a lot from this type of controlled play. mason, as the site becomes more popular and more profitable, a pro responding to the conflicting answers would be great.

[J_V]

People will always be envious of successful people. I'm sure you've received your share of unfair animosity in your day.

That said, most of us here, don't care about how much 2+2 is making in advertising or how many registered users there are. We just remember the day where we would sign on and there would be 5-6 fantastic threads a day, where each response was well ariculated and meaningful.

Those days are long gone and so are many of the great posters. Ikke, Creampuff, backdoor, snakehead (no more strategy posts), abdul.

Those of us that don't care about the WPT forum and such have lost our good old 2+2. Someone once told that there was a blog law called Sullivan's law, that stated that as the limit of all responses to a thread went to infinity, so did the ad hominem attacks. Guess the same is true for forums.

[J_V]

Mason seems to think that when players flop and ace that they bet it out or check-raise it. The most common action from a typical 80-160 player in a heads up flop with a weak ace, check call. The idea of way ahead or way behind isn't new to most players.


Check-raising is the ace is this spot is a great way to win the minimimum and lose the maximum, unless you can back it up w/ a vigorous counter-balance where you are often dry bluffing the ace. In my experience, this is something that very few people are willing to do.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
the only way to put your opponent on a range of hands was to look back at the play on the flop. With 2 Aces out there why wouldn't Ace-x not bet the turn when he thinks he may not get a bet out of you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right.

[ QUOTE ]
Why wouldn't he bet a J or some other big pair on the turn now that he could account for two Aces?

[/ QUOTE ]

An early player raised. What do you think he raised with? If it's an ace, it's not likely A9 or worse. If it's not an ace, it's probably KK, QQ, JJ, or possibly TT or a couple other less likely hands. JJ is far less likely than Ax (that would account for all 4 jacks). Even if AK, AQ become less likely because of the 2 aces on the board, that does nothing but make KK or QQ more likely. So why bet a lone J on the turn?

No, the most likely hands for the BB player are AQ, AJ, AT, some other ace, or a set (the combination of AQ, AT, Ax are much more likely than AJ). Out of all possible hands, a hand with an ace that you can beat is most probable IMO. But not a jack. It's possible, because all players have seen early players raise hands like 88, but not likely.

[ QUOTE ]
Why wouldn't he bet the river for value with a big pair and call a raise or bet the Ace and either call or re-raise? All of these hands you beat are consistant with his flop play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right.

[J_V]

Yes, the inconsistencies in how his opponents are thinking/playing are glaring, IMO.

For example, Mason insinuates that a player might lead the turn out with a full house. However, in many threads very similar, Mason has said something to the effect of "Wouldn't he wait until the turn if he had that hand?"

[Turning Stone Pro]

I'm not familiar with that.

TSP

[David Steele]

he called it down! a rare thing even discussed here at 2 + 2

You must get on here more, calling is all the rage now.

a pro responding to the conflicting answers would be great.

Many pros did respond, more won't hurt although the score is about 20 to 1 against Mason so far.

D.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading. If this was made by some guy as his first post, he would have gotten maybe 1 response saying "raise the turn or the river" and then it would have went off into oblivion.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't a "indicator of the direction that the forum is heading". Mason's Hands to Talk About have always gotten the most responses of any posts, by far. There may have been individual hands that got less than others, but this is still true. The phenomen you cite above is no more true now than it was four years ago.

[amulet]

i of couse believe in tight aggressive play. however, as i mention i think many here at 2 + 2 go too far with the aggression. whenever i post something saying, "do not bet", "check", "with that board how card you be ahead", i get a flood of posts telling me how wrong i am, and that beting, raising, or check raising is correct, and they seem angry . the idea of discussion, or the idea that sometimes you call or fold seems to offend many here.

[Philuva]

So you admit that you misplayed this hand by not raising the river?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi bobbyi:

You're right. The hands I have posted over the years have always gotten a lot of response. Part of the reason for this is that I usually pick hands that are often debatable and the decisions are sometimes very close.

What this means is that the thought process behind the play is more important than the play itself. If you think about strategy correctly, there will be other situations where these thinking exercises will be very beneficial.

best wishes,
Mason

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
The hands I have posted over the years have always gotten a lot of response.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, in recently rereading Poker Essays III, I was thinking about I found the Hands to Talk About section to be by far the most valuable section of the book and how awesome it would be if you wrote a whole book of annotated hands like those. Given the strong response to all of the hands you post here, I am sure that such a book would be very well received. Although I understand that you are busy with many projects now and probably don't have the time to start also working on something like that.

[SoBeDude]

Turn: an Ace -- AHA! There is no way you have the case Ace. He'll bet, as you know he has A-X and he wants to make you pay to "catch" -- if you raise ... he'll call you down.

What about "Hey! I just filled up and I want to bet out to give Mason a chance to raise me with his AK/AQ so I can 3bet him!

-Scott

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Daddy:

Do you think he would bet only a jack on the river? I agree that he might bet this on the turn, but once I call doesn't it look like I can beat jacks and will certainly call again.

Best wishes,
mason

[/ QUOTE ]

Mason,

Don't you think he'll bet a weaker Ace than yours on the river?

-Scott

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
Turn: an Ace -- AHA! There is no way you have the case Ace. He'll bet, as you know he has A-X and he wants to make you pay to "catch" -- if you raise ... he'll call you down.

In this situation, raising the turn would've generated an extra BB as this guy isn't folding the Ace -- however, in general, I agree with Mason's point that raising the turn is wrong as you'll often push guys off holdings like the random KJ.

However, I still think that raising the river will be correct more often than wrong and +EV long term in isolation. Since this is Mason, though, and his opponent likely to take note, the extra BB he could've earned has potential GREATER EV longterm by the nature of alerting people in the future to the fact that he will simply call with a hand like AK in this scenario.

Most people in most games though with far less talented competition and people less likely to remember you, raising the river I believe to be correct.

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

What about "Hey! I just filled up and I want to bet out to give Mason a chance to raise me with his AK/AQ so I can 3bet him!

-Scott

[/ QUOTE ]

[mikelow]

Mason, were you really afraid of ace-deuce? Or maybe A4?

Not raising the river is way too pessimistic about your hand. I agree, the play is much looser these days and maybe the lack of a threebet preflop from BB means there aren't that many aces you can beat. But could the BB have something like QJ or JT which he might bet the turn with, since the ace on the turn makes it "less likely Mason has an ace" thinking come into play.

Just my two cents.

[Clarkmeister]

In the end, this hand is almost worse than the one where you didn't raise the river with the second nuts (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=mediumholdem&Number=626274 &Forum=,,f4,,&Words=%2Bhand%20%2Bto%20%2Btalk%20%2 Babout&Searchpage=2&Limit=25&Main=626274&Search=tr ue&where=bodysub&Name=3&daterange=1&newerval=1&new ertype=y&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post626274 ) simply because someone made a "bet out of nowhere". Almost. Both are strikingly similar examples of what has got to be a leak given the current game conditions.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The hands I have posted over the years have always gotten a lot of response.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, in recently rereading Poker Essays III, I was thinking about I found the Hands to Talk About section to be by far the most valuable section of the book and how awesome it would be if you wrote a whole book of annotated hands like those. Given the strong response to all of the hands you post here, I am sure that such a book would be very well received. Although I understand that you are busy with many projects now and probably don't have the time to start also working on something like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's usually because they are debatable. This one is barely debatable at best and would be ignored completely if posted by someone who wasn't Mason or one of the posters who people "trust" to post interesting hands. Read that link that Clark gave. If these are the best possible ways to play such strong hands, I must be doing an awful lot wrong.
-James

[Danielih]

I could not agree with Clarkmeister more. This is clearly a leak in Masons game. Maybe even six months ago he could make his argument (I would still think its wrong) But todays game conditions dictate a raise.

[Josh W]

Mason -

Yes, I am fully aware that he had three aces. But a guy with 22 on an AAAKQ board has a fullhouse, and still likely isn't any good. His hand is irrelevant. His hand RELATIVE to yours is what's important.

Let me ask you this...IF you raise the river (and you acknowledge that you may in similar situations raise the river), what are the chances that his AT is any good?

With 10ish Big Bets in the pot, I'm guessing that his AT is good much less than 10% of the time. So, I guess what I'm saying is maybe some people (other than me) should consider making the fold.

Josh

[Gabe]

This one is not nearly as bad. In the older hand, it was almost impossible to make logical assumptions about the other person's hand, that would make not raising the river correct.

[URMeowed]

I think Mason needs to play on Party Poker for about a month to see how the new breed of poker player plays. I bet that would cure how he played this hand and the one Clarkmeister posted about calling with the second nuts last to ace when he hasn't raised a single time. But what do I know...I'm just a cat. Meow.

[Michael Davis]

I completely agree. This is the worst Hand to Talk About ever. This is going to be the 200th reply in this thread and that is a joke. Most other people posting this hand would have immediately gone on ignore lists across the board.

-Michael

[amulet]

Human nature is a fascinating thing. People say they come here to learn, I think some come here for other reasons. The reaction to MM's original post seems strange. We all have opinions, however, MM is an expert Hold 'em player, and he has made his living gambling and writing the books that most of the posters read to learn about aggressive play. If you look at Hold 'em for Advanced players and Small Stakes Hold 'em Mason Malmuth IS one of the authors! And I can not imagine a book advocating aggressive play more then SSH. Therefore, does Mason write one way, but play another? Maybe a little, but I doubt much. Or are there things to learn from this expert that most posters are missing? Having read his books clearly he is smart, and he has played for so many years that I certain he has seem every type of game including the very aggressive games some poster are calling "new". To reiterate he was an author of SSH a book on playing in loose aggressive "new" games. I do not agree with everything I read, and I too question things. And while it can be OK to disagree with an expert sometimes, there is often more to learn vs to show how much you know. Everyone has an opinion, they are like _________ seems slightly appropriate here.

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
Having read his books clearly he is smart, and he has played for so many years.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not an argument though. Pro online player can play in one year all the hands live player could ever play in 10 years.

I played in november 47K hands and it's only 4-tabling of full games. Some people play 8 of shorthanded. Do you think this cypher of hands can be accomplished by live pro by play in one year? I seriosly doubt this.

Ok, i agree that live game have more psychology and online game has a lack of this part of a game and im honestly believe that live pro player will make much more money than me in live game (maybe i will even suck at these game). But this is not an argument for me to take very close to heart his advices or style of thinking and playing when im playing online. I would prefer to listen to ones who beat the online games 2-3 years and played over 1 million hands than one who played 15 years off line.

I don't usually post in live games discussions cause they are differ from place i play and i can't say anything quite right cause i don't know the environment well.

But one of the thing i now well - live players often try to reduce variance cause they play a little hands/hour and need to know exactly that after 3 months they will win with high probability (and not after year but with higher bb/hour) and online players like me and many others trying to maximize profit and don't really care about swings as with very high probability anyway we win good amounts after 2 weeks of playing (4-7 hours/day).

[B Dids]

Ed Miller wrote the vast majority of SSHE. If you'd actually read the intro to it, you'd realize that.

I think El Diablo (who after all, is one of the 20 Smartest Poker Players Alive) made an excellent argument, and I'm hoping Mason responds to that.

I think that there's a ton of merit to discussing WHEN to raise in this hand. I think it's a waste that we've spent more time talking about raising at all.

btw-

amulet says fold (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=smallholdem&Number=1455147 &Forum=,,,All_Forums,,,&Words=&Searchpage=2&Limit= 25&Main=1453149&Search=true&where=&Name=21498&date range=&newerval=&newertype=&olderval=&oldertype=&b odyprev=#Post1455147)

[URMeowed]

[ QUOTE ]
MM is an expert Hold 'em player, and he has made his living gambling and writing the books that most of the posters read to learn about aggressive play

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a very good feline Hold'em player and I have made a living playing poker for many years. Although I haven't written any books on poker, no one but cats could understand all the meowing.

[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, does Mason write one way, but play another? Maybe a little, but I doubt much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can virtually guarantee you that Mason doesn't play exactly how he writes. His books are not a "How To" way to beat Hold'em but a foundation of sound strategy.

[ QUOTE ]
Having read his books clearly he is smart, and he has played for so many years that I certain he has seem every type of game including the very aggressive games some poster are calling "new". To reiterate he was an author of SSH a book on playing in loose aggressive "new" games

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe instead of saying "new", I should say "more common Norweigan, Canadian psycho poker".

[ QUOTE ]
And while it can be OK to disagree with an expert sometimes, there is often more to learn vs to show how much you know

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read one of Mason's replies, he conceded that there might have been a better way to play this hand and hence the reasoning to posting it here.

But what do I know, I'm just a cat. Meow.

[amulet]

i'll respond to both posts.

1st the online player and the b &m player have the same goal. to talk about a different goal is absurd. as for experience, everyone plays online these days. i know david sklansky plays, and i would be schocked if mason has not logged a many many hours. i play a lot online, and i still sometimes play live. what i have found is the the difference is not longer as great as it first was. i find upper limit b&m to be wild sometimes just like when i 4 table at party - and it has been that way for a few years now.
2nd. sure ed miller wrote much of it, but you do not get your name on the cover for being the publisher. look at harrington, feeney, other two plus two books. sorry, but if the name is on the cover he was one of the authors. and since he published it, he had additional input.

i think you both have a right to your opinion, but you would be smart to learn from an expert.

the 2+2 raise, raise, reraise, check raise formula is out of hand. and many here would have better results if they understood the game better. here was a perfect opportunity to learn and think, but look at the responses.

for the record, i can also disagree with the experts here. david sklansky responded to a post that i thought was incorrect. i then got bob ciaffone's and dan harrington's opinions on this limit play. who was correct, i will never know, but it made me think and learn. i believe many here should do the same.

[SA125]

I think the biggest mistake Mason made in this hand was figuring how his opponent would play the flop if he had an A.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
the 2+2 raise, raise, reraise, check raise formula is out of hand. and many here would have better results if they understood the game better. here was a perfect opportunity to learn and think, but look at the responses.

[/ QUOTE ]

By far the most widely suggested line on the limit Hold 'Em forums is the way ahead/behind check/call line.

[Peter_rus]

[ QUOTE ]
i find upper limit b&m to be wild sometimes just like when i 4 table at party - and it has been that way for a few years now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't know as i haven't seen any live US games. But recent Tommy's, Clarkmeister's, Mike l's and Mason hand's posts make me think the way i describe above.

[ QUOTE ]
to talk about a different goal is absurd.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's called risk aversion. And BJ-players as well as poker players choose their personal comfortable level. Live player forced to use higher levels of risk aversion as the time they need to punish the variance is 10-12 times higher than in online games. So the play is differ due to different levels of risk aversion. The one goal is winning maximum at this month, and the second goal is to win for _sure_ in three month's. And play required for these tasks is different.

[ QUOTE ]
everyone plays online these days. i know david sklansky plays, and i would be schocked if mason has not logged a many many hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's ok, im just saying that playing excellent live doesn't mean playing excellent online as well as in reverse. Of course talented player will quickly adapt.

[ QUOTE ]
i think you both have a right to your opinion, but you would be smart to learn from an expert.

[/ QUOTE ]

This topic is absurd for online 15/30 as player with description Mason gives above online would bet on turn any Jack and any ace, some draws (which call a turn raise), some bluffs (which would fold to a raise), but very rare boat. Called a raise on turn and called a river with ace and jack. Any ace occasionally also can 3-bet turn against agressive player but maybe will just call river-raise. Safe play here online means call turn and raise river (reducing variance in case of rare cases of -boat first bet turn-). Maximizing EV play here is to raise/cap turn, bet river if checked and call if betted.

But of course, i think 80-160 live have different *basic* rules of playing and thats why online analyze inconvinient here. As well as all these Mason's thoughts here are wrong for online.

Though he put somewhere in this topic more deep reads on a player and according to them this hand isn't even worth a word.

He said that opponent would raise Ace on flop so opponent doesn't have ace as he didn't do it (or have way better than just pair of aces) - he has eather Jack or boat. He didn't say a word of cold call standarts of this guy, so we supposed that by default he able to cold call middle pair, medium to big ace, or maybe KJs. So Mason's line is almost always correct and don't even close in these conditions .

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
the 2+2 raise, raise, reraise, check raise formula is out of hand. and many here would have better results if they understood the game better. here was a perfect opportunity to learn and think, but look at the responses.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is far more of a gross oversimplification than what you're suggesting anybody in this thread has done.

A- people did think, they just thought differently than Mason. If you're suggesting that people like James, J_V, El Diablo are just unthinking 2+2 dogma machines, you don't read the forums much.

B- There is no 2+2 standard line. Every hand is situational. In this situation people looked at the evidence provided and came up with a line different that what Mason suggested. Mason's line was based on a very specific set of assumptions about his opponent that may not be correct often enough in that game. (and as it turns out, were wrong WRT this hand).

C- There's a reason I posted the "amulet says fold" link. In that thread, you demonstrated not just a difference of opinion, but a misunderstand of some basic ideas. You come in here talking down to folks, and lecturing others on lost opportunities to learn. Yet you refused to even attempt to listen to the multitude of people trying to tell you you were wrong on a much more elementary issue. At some point if you want to benefit from this forum, you'll need to accept that there exists the very likely posiblility that you're wrong. The fact that Mason is wrong here should only serve as evidence that people much smarter than you can be also be wrong.

[URMeowed]

[ QUOTE ]
This topic is absurd for online 15/30 as player with description Mason gives above online would bet on turn any Jack and any ace, some draws (which call a turn raise), some bluffs (which would fold to a raise), but very rare boat. Called a raise on turn and called a river with ace and jack. Any ace occasionally also can 3-bet turn against agressive player but maybe will just call river-raise. Safe play here online means call turn and raise river (reducing variance in case of rare cases of -boat first bet turn-). Maximizing EV play here is to raise/cap turn, bet river if checked and call if betted.

But of course, i think 80-160 live have different *basic* rules of playing and thats why online analyze inconvinient here. As well as all these Mason's thoughts are wrong for online.


[/ QUOTE ]

LAG is LAG whether it's online or live, 15/30 or 80/160 says the CAT. Meow.

[David Steele]

I can't understand your post.
In particular, what does this sentence mean?:

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone has an opinion, they are like _________ seems slightly appropriate here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying we should LEARN to call in this situation because Mason is such an expert and the other posters aren't?

Of course Mason has tought us many things here and in his books but what does that have to do with the posted hand?



D.

[mike l.]

"a vigorous counter-balance where you are often dry bluffing the ace. In my experience, this is something that very few people are willing to do."

you really do need to make it out to commerce sometime soon my friend.

[amulet]

i understood your points on standard deviation, flucations, risk adversion, or whatever term you want to use. however, i still they they are absurd. b&m and online players make personal choices about their risk tolerance. it is not based on where you play.

[amulet]

i was not suggesting that all posters are anything. there are some therrific posters. but i was making a general statement about 2+2 which is correct. as for your constant posts about my game, give it a rest. i think you of all people should not be talking about my general understanding of the game. as i continue to work on my game i take input from many. but you need to stop these repetitive shots on our difference of philosophy. as to if mason was incorrect, i am certain that he like all of us makes mistakes. but the reaction of most posters was indicative of what i perceive as a general hole at this site. yes there were terrific responses - some of which might be correct.

to reiterate, i do not want to hear about how i am incorrect in my general philosophy from you anymore, i think you need to get some professional help and shut up about that subject.

[amulet]

no david, not at all. mason may have played it incorrectly. but i think the general reaction to the hand was not one of wanting to learn to think differently. there were some terrific replys, but in my opinion most just chose not to think. my reaction is to my perseption of a overally aggressive 2+2 poster.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Cat:

When playing poker you need to adjust your strategy given who you're against and the game you're in. In the lower limit games in Las Vegas where the play on the flop does tend to be much weaker, I would be far more inclined to raise on the river. So I'm sure the same would be true at Party and many other Internet sites.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi amulet:

You wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
he has seem every type of game including the very aggressive games some poster are calling "new".

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the point that many of the posters missed. The very aggressive players in these games who also are too loose will almost always automatically check raise the flop if they have an ace (against a preflop raiser who appears very likely to bet) and they will do this regardless of their kicker. In a smaller limit, more players might be afraid of their kicker and tend to check call. It's my experience that this isn't the case at $80-$160 (but of course there are always exceptions which is what happened here).

So when a hand gets played and it looks like someone who fits this category might have an ace but didn't make the auto-check raise, you have to begin to consider other possibilities. Now this doesn't mean that my call on the end must be correct, but it certainly means it is more likely to be so.

Best wishes,
Mason

[greg nice]

mason

not only are you weak/tight in-game, but online as well. man up and respond to the real posters in the thread instead of picking and choosing your retorts.

[BarronVangorToth]

Mason,

Something I'm still curious about is the following:

1) What was the percentage chance did you think with your river call that your hand was best (approximate is fine)?

2) What was the chance that you thought that if you raised....

2a) You would not get called by a worse hand?

2b) You would get paid off by a worse hand?

2c) You would get reraised?

3) Was a majority of your decision to simply call based solely on that hand OR did you call more than that to let the table know that you will call with hands like AK on the AA board to sow seeds of doubt about the strength of your hands later rounds when you are simply calling?

Any further explanation would be appreciated as I understand now why you didn't raise the turn but I still haven't quite got a finger on not raising the river....

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com (http://www.BarronVangorToth.com)

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Greg:

It looks like you have exposed me. Now everyone knows that I'm easy to run over in real life just like I am at a poker table.

Best wishes,
Mason

[MarkD]

Although I am much more polite and less antagonistic I also wonder why you do not respond to such a well thought out post such as Diablo's.

I also wonder if you ever play a hand and when it's over you sit back and say to yourself, "Man, I screwed that up." But this is a secondary question.

[B Dids]

I think Mason did state that he thought he had questions about this hand.

I'll add my name to the list of people saying what Greg said (basically). It would be nice/educational if Mason whould respond to Diablo's post.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Peter:

[ QUOTE ]
I would prefer to listen to ones who beat the online games 2-3 years and played over 1 million hands than one who played 15 years off line.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just so you know, I've played poker in public cardrooms for 25 years. But you do make a good point. New players today can get a lot of experience online very quickly. And for your point about live play being different from Internet play, the discussion on these forums do cover both.

But there's one thing that I have done which almost no one else has, at least not to the degree that I have. It's the fact that over these many years I have had an incredible number of serious conversations with many highly skilled players. Much of this information found it's way into detailed notes that I use to keep and go over regularly. It also is part of the reason that our publishing company and this site is as successful as it is.

Thanks for your post and best wishes,

Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Masked Man:

I think this is probably what happened in this spot especially since I saw he had an ace-ten after the fact.

But there is another factor that influences my thinking in these spots in addition to the analysis that I have given in other posts, and it is something that I have never mentioned in print before. In private, David and I refer to it as the David Sklansky Problem since he began to experience it years before I became known. It's the simple fact that many players, once they recognize either of us, will adjust their play from how they normally play. Specifically they tend to play tighter, try to be a little more tricky, and will try to bluff us more than they would someone else.

Our counter strategy is to simply call them down more and not raise. So here I am against an unknown player (to me) but someone who obviously has played poker before....

Best wishes,
Mason

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Masked Man:

[/ QUOTE ]

This thread gets better and better.

[1800GAMBLER]

SO do you now agree not raising the river is a bad play?

[droidboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
MM is an expert Hold 'em player, and he has made his living gambling and writing the books that most of the posters read to learn about aggressive play

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a very good feline Hold'em player and I have made a living playing poker for many years. Although I haven't written any books on poker, no one but cats could understand all the meowing.

But what do I know, I'm just a cat. Meow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've played with the cat. I've played with Mason. The cat is better than Mason. The cat isn't the best in the world, but the cat is very good, if not a bit too tight.

- Andrew

www.pokerstove.com (http://www.pokerstove.com)

[mike l.]

"So here I am against an unknown player (to me) but someone who obviously has played poker before...."

book sales are better than ever and youre more well known than ever, BUT

most players have no idea who you are and no nothing of your books. and that includes at the higher limits.

[droidboy]

[ QUOTE ]
But there is another factor that influences my thinking
...

David and I refer to it as the David Sklansky Problem since he began to experience it years before I became known. It's the simple fact that many players, once they recognize either of us, will adjust their play from how they normally play.


[/ QUOTE ]

The first mathematical result of the David Sklansky Problem is that nothing Mason or David says with respect to strategy will apply to anyone's game until they become famous.

The corollary of which is that practically no one should take their advice.

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

- Andrew

www.pokerstove.com (http://www.pokerstove.com)

[droidboy]

[ QUOTE ]
SO do you now agree not raising the river is a bad play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, you probably want to raise the turn. That way, if he three bets you and you are in fact behind, you still have outs to draw to. On the river, calling a three bet will cost you a lot more money. You should only smooth call the turn if you are dealing with an escape artist who will pay you off on the river. But even then, you should probably be raising since there are likely more hands he will pay you off with than hands he will escape with.

- Andrew

www.pokerstove.com (http://www.pokerstove.com)

[mmcd]

Whoa there, you mean to tell me Mason Malmuth isn't the best limit holdem player in the world????!!!! /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]

The first mathematical result of the David Sklansky Problem is that nothing Mason or David says with respect to strategy will apply to anyone's game until they become famous.

The corollary of which is that practically no one should take their advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got a friend of mine to buy SSHE. Less than a 6 months ago he did not even know what beats what in poker. When telling me of all the new stuff he learned from it, he refers to SSHE as "that Sklansky book". I guess it may be a while before the David Sklansky Problem becomes the Ed Miller Problem.

[URMeowed]

[ QUOTE ]
I've played with the cat. I've played with Mason. The cat is better than Mason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I should finish my book "Cat Poker for Advanced Felines" and submit it to Twoplustwo.

[ QUOTE ]
The cat isn't the best in the world, but the cat is very good, if not a bit too tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cats are still evolving. I concede I am far from the best in the world, only that I am the best poker playing cat in the world. I've tinkered with the "too tight" style a bit lately while also making sure I'm not giving too much edge meowing around.

BTW Andrew, I had a feeling I've played with you a lot. Now are you going to make me work to figure out who you are or are you gonna be nice to the kitty and just let me know? Shoot me an email at urmeowed@aol.com if you wish to share. Cats are naturally curious, ya know. Meow.

P.S. Buy my book if it comes out. It will help your cat play better poker if you own one.

[Switch]

Good safe bet....no flush draws.....the small straight could beat you......the only way to raise on this is if you have read the opponent for some time and you feel he/she doesn't have the straight......my guess is your opponent had the straight.

Best regards Switch

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

It use to be a time, only a couple of years ago, where virtually every player in the games I played in knew who I was. But I agree that's certainly not the case anymore. But I also suspect that we have sold far more books than you realize.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi 1800:

I think I've said very clearly that I think the decision on the river is close. I also think I said that after the hand was over I thought that I had misplayed it and that's part of the reason for posting it. However, after reading all the posts and carefully going over all the reasoning for the hand, it looks to me like my call is slightly better than a raise. But if you change the parameters just a little, and in most games they would change at least this much, then a raise becomes the better play.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Tim:

Given Ed's talent, we think he will become very famous in this field. So in time he will deal with it as well.

Best wishes,
mason

[mike l.]

"But I also suspect that we have sold far more books than you realize."

no i have some idea. i have a pretty good understanding of what it takes to have the amazon sales rank you have for your titles since i work part time selling books on there. you guys have sold tons and tons of books.

but there's a big difference between how many people buy your books and how many actually read them. and then another big difference between those who read them and those who apply them to their game. fortunately that final number is still very very small.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

You are correct. But as you move up in limit, a higher percentage of players are very aware who we are. This is especially true in Las Vegas.

Best wishes,
Mason

[mike l.]

"You are correct. But as you move up in limit, a higher percentage of players are very aware who we are. This is especially true in Las Vegas."

fair enough. but fyi i play a fair amount of 80 and sometimes higher at commerce and i would be willing to make a nice bet that on any given day no more than 2 players at the main game would know who you were if you walked in and sat down. and in the evening i would take under 1.5 actually.

anyhow what's happening here is we the posters want you to say, if not in this hand to talk about, then in a future one, "youre right guys ive thought about it and i think i misplayed this hand. i thought i was right at first but having read all your arguments and explanations i now see that i was in error. great job posters." that would build more confidence in you as grand poobah or whatever. plus it's something we suspect sklansky would never do so it'd make you more cool.

[andyfox]

Apparently, Greg Nice isn't.

[andyfox]

This comes pretty close:

"I think I've said very clearly that I think the decision on the river is close. I also think I said that after the hand was over I thought that I had misplayed it and that's part of the reason for posting it. However, after reading all the posts and carefully going over all the reasoning for the hand, it looks to me like my call is slightly better than a raise. But if you change the parameters just a little, and in most games they would change at least this much, then a raise becomes the better play."

[elysium]

hi mason

i haven't read the threads to your post, or the results if you've posted the results yet, but i know that you're hem line is being measured by the skirt crowd for an accurate, fashionable weak/ tight fitting. and no, no mason. they won't allow you enough material to keep your knees covered. you'll have to walk away from the table crunched down like that if the back seat tailors have their way. holding your skirt down with one hand, lollypop in the other. but never worry dear, i'll save you.

people, in case you don't know it by now, half the card room is there because they want to beat mason. when the BB bets, mason knows that the BB expects his bet to be called. on the turn, it looks like a good time for mason to raise into the BB, but mason knows that the BB must have mason on AK or better 3 times more often than he would put mason on some other hand. mason therefore correctly reasons that odds are that he (mason) is trailing. mason ninny knits the hand to the river and risks knitting the skirt he will later be forced to don rather than risking a good portion of his session's bankroll. when the whole world is there specifically to beat only you, this is how to play it. mason knows he's up against 2 pair and then a boat. now this same opponent will bet into many of yous out there with what you all may have as some of his possible holdings, but he won't bet into mason like that. mason knows that his opponent is very likely putting mason squarely on AK or better, and yet bets into mason anyway. whatever read mason had that may have given mason the lead in the hand is now relegated by mason into the background, and mason instead must consider his opponent's action. yes, usually an opponent would have to show a little more than a simple bet before we get rid of our read. but this is no simple bet. mason's opponent is clearly making a frightfully strong bet into a malmuth AK. mason crumples up his read and begins ninny knitting. his critics; go f' yourselves. that's a freaking boat you numbskull railbirds. can't you see that?

[elysium]

hi mason

i have read a few of the threads and results. i would have like to have read your response to shaundeeb before i responded. if this opponent is as you described in your reply, then you have a value raise and should be charging him the max. against a more good/ tricky or solid type opponent, you played it fine.

please try to include important opponent knowledge aspects of the hand when the exclusion of the opponent's type may cause one to assume a typical malmuth type opponent. here, i erroneously assumed a solid or good tricky type opponent. you need to charge these aggressives mason.

[Turning Stone Pro]

Do you always have to suck up to folks like Diablo? It would be nice if you had an original idea or point at least once every several months.

And get that damn bird off your shoulder.

TSP

[amulet]

you already had said that. but it was kind of you to reiterate it, especially after all the kind happy guests your site has. i guess they could not or would not read it when you wrote it earlier.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

I agree that at Commerce 1.5 is probably the correct number.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Danielih]

Mason-

This is a very good point. There are actually other instances of the DSP that do not involve famous players but I cannot go into it for obvious reasons....A player cant give up all your secrets can he?

I saw you walking out of the Bellagio today and I wonder if you were playing 80. Tonights 80 game featured at least a few players who would bet any pair on the river without blinking an eye.

[Erik W]

If I had JJ or AJ or 22 I'd CR the turn or the river since the agression of Mason and his probably betting Turn.

That he did not cr makes me think he has a worse hand than Mason (probably Ax) and I'd then raise the river.