20-40 Commerce, 86s in a capped pot

[Michael Davis]

I'm BB with 8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. This is my first hand at the table so I have no idea what's going on and nobody knows me.

UTG limps, two more limpers, button raises, SB calls, I call. UTG now threebets and all call until the button caps, everyone calls and we go to the flop six ways.

Flop: 8 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif4 /images/graemlins/club.gif

I check, UTG bets, all call, button raises, SB folds, I threebet, three call including UTG and button.

Turn: 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I bet, all call.

River: 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I check intending to checkraise?

-Michael

[ErrantNight]

curiouser and curiouser...

ok, not really. but curious river...

i think i likey... i'm not sure if any amount of arguing will determine that either checking with the intention of raising, or betting is better... i'm inclined to do the latter.

[rmarotti]

Who? The button?

[Entity]

I think I'd like it more if it were a flushy-drawy flop that didn't hit, but I don't see this river not getting bet, so yeah, ok.

Rob

[Michael Davis]

I agree that this play is better with a twoflush on the flop.

-Michael

[rmarotti]

I'm going to take a stab at my own quesiton here and say probably UTG. Because I think this checkraise must be to extract the most and if you think UTG will bet out you can trap everyone for two. Am I close?

[Michael Davis]

Beats me. I expected someone to bet. I was going to raise either.

-Michael

[rmarotti]

Aren't you scaring people out of the pot between you and the river bettor (if it's not UTG)? I don't get this hand, apparently.

[Michael Davis]

There are only two opponents left on the river, I may have gotten it wrong in my original post. If UTG couldn't bet I figured he couldn't call either. I guess that was your first question.

-Michael

[rmarotti]

I misread the action, I thought there were 2 more in the pot. I now understand and like this plan.

[Schizo]

[ QUOTE ]
There are only two opponents left on the river, I may have gotten it wrong in my original post. If UTG couldn't bet I figured he couldn't call either. I guess that was your first question.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

You three bet the flop and they called the turn. Would they really play overcards this way? What hands would they fold to a single river bet? It's hard to see gutshots being played like this.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
There are only two opponents left on the river, I may have gotten it wrong in my original post.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, something's wrong. The flop action ends with "I threebet, three call including UTG and button." Ok, three people called the three-bet, so you have three opponents at this point. Then the entire turn action is "I bet, all call." Ok, so you still have three opponents. But you're telling us you actually only have two at the river somehow?

Anyway, did you give some considration to leading the flop? Either it will come back to you three-bet (probably by UTG and BN) and you can cap or someone raises, you three-bet and it gets capped. At worst, you get in the same three bets you do by check-reraising because your bet will virtually always get raised, but the check-reraise is sometimes going to slow people down compared to just having your foot on the gas the whole way, so it is less likely to end up getting capped on the flop. Given the preflop action with a flop like this, I'm inclined to start throwing my chips in the pot at the first opportunity to get the party started.

[Michael Davis]

Yeah, the guy who didn't raise preflop folded the turn.

-Michael

[Nick C]

I don't know Commerce (though I grew up nearby), and I've never played anything near 20/40 (so far, 5/10 is as close as it gets for me). But I'm thinking your flop check/3-bet in itself was kind of scary.

Probably Button with his preflop cap or UTG with his LRR has an overpair, and maybe both do. I guess it's reasonable to think at least one of them will figure you for something like 77 or 55 or 87 or 76 and bet the river for value.

In any event, I doubt either is calling with just overcards, and if that's all either has, maybe someone will take a stab at the pot.

I would have just bet the river, but I think I like it.

[nothumb]

This is the type of play that is just sick if it works, and not a huge loss if it doesn't, because people will think you're a nut either way.

I assume you had a gut feeling there would be a bet, situational thing. You are better than me and you were there, so I defer to you.

NT

[emil3000]

I like this a lot. I really can't see this river not getting bet, and of course you're ahead.

Nice hand.

[sthief09]

I'd fold preflop. I have no clue if that's right, but that's what I'd do.

on the river, you're trying to get tricky while representing exactly what you have, two pair. except you'll be seen as a weak-tight scared 2 pair rather than a tricky strong 2 pair. either way, it's easy to put you on 2 pair, and he'll be less likely to bet his AA in such a big pot. I don't think he bets the river often unless he's very aggressive

[Michael Davis]

Fold to the first raise preflop or to the cap for two more?

On the river, I've got two opponents. Both of them are likely to have overpairs. I agree with you that if my opponents are thinkers they cannot possibly win, and my most likely hand is a set.

-Michael

[The-Matador]

Other than the horrendous call preflop, this is a great hand. The first call was marginal, but you simply do not have the odds to call the cap back to you preflop here.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd fold preflop. I have no clue if that's right, but that's what I'd do.


[/ QUOTE ]

Since limp-reraises aren't standard at Commerce, I think the preflop call is pretty easy -- all the limpers are going to call, so MD is getting 11:1 on this. The LRR is annoying, but once it's 2 back to him with a gigantic pot, his implied odds just went through the roof if he makes a set/straight with this 1-gapper SuitCon.

Great hand on every street. Bravissimo.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
Other than the horrendous call preflop, this is a great hand. The first call was marginal, but you simply do not have the odds to call the cap back to you preflop here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does he need immediate odds when suited connectors get most of their value from implied odds -- that is, they play very well in large multiway pots?

[The-Matador]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Other than the horrendous call preflop, this is a great hand. The first call was marginal, but you simply do not have the odds to call the cap back to you preflop here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does he need immediate odds when suited connectors get most of their value from implied odds -- that is, they play very well in large multiway pots?

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually don't even think he has the implied odds here, but I am in no mood (or condition) to do the math right now. His two pair flops are easily counterfeited by the board pairing. The chances of a flush (that wins) or a straight are very low, and if he flops a draw he will be paying through the nose for it.

I dunno, once again I haven't done the math, but it feels wrong to call the two back to him.

[Nick C]

[ QUOTE ]
Why does he need immediate odds when suited connectors get most of their value from implied odds -- that is, they play very well in large multiway pots?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Michael's preflop play is fine in this hand, but I think it is worth mentioning that implied odds go down when a lot of raises go in preflop.

[sthief09]

for the 2 more. supposedly you're getting 11-1. I didn't realize there was that much action. it'd be hard to fold getting that much. your hand sucks though

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]


I think Michael's preflop play is fine in this hand, but I think it is worth mentioning that implied odds go down when a lot of raises go in preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is correct. I misspoke.

But Matador -- I think you're being pessimistic with regards to his flush draw. 6-handed, it's pretty rare to have flush over flush showdowns, especially when only 3 of the suit are on the board. You can't calculate your odds that way: if Hero flops a 4-flush, he's going to bet as if catching one of his 9 outs gives him a sure winner.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
for the 2 more. supposedly you're getting 11-1. I didn't realize there was that much action. it'd be hard to fold getting that much. your hand sucks though

[/ QUOTE ]

You did see that he was in the BB, thus his call is discounted, right?

[The-Matador]

Yep I did, but it still feels wrong to me.

Then again, to be perfectly honest I would have made the call too here. Why? Because I like these hands in crazy-assed pots like this and it's so rare to have such a gonzo pot that I'd take a stab at it.

So in conclusion, I'm really kind of a dopey Alice here and I'd give myself what would appear to me to be very good advice and would very seldom follow it.

[Michael Davis]

If I flop a draw I may pay through the nose but I'm almost always going to be getting equity on $$ going into the pot. The times that suck for this hand are when I flop a pair, not when I flop a draw.

It's a good thing to be up against a big pocket pair in this hand, even better if I'm against two.

Sure this hand has to get through a minefield the whole way, but I don't really see any legitimate point where I should fold, and I'm having a tough time running anything reasonably in Pokerstove that doesn't give me almost 15% equity. But importantly, this hand is making money postflop, not losing it.

-Michael

[sthief09]

suited connectors have weird implied odds. first of all, a widely understood concept is implied odds when having to call 2 more bets. for some reason people seem to think (and I'm not saying you) that a big pot increases your implied odds. well, it doesn't when you have to call multiple bets.

it's also very tricky to figure out the required and received implied odds for a suited connector. with a set, it's easy, since the flop is hit or miss, just like a gut shot or a flush draw. in other words your flop equity is either 0 (fold) or 75 or 80% (which people generally "round up to" 100%). for a suited connector, the equivalent to flopping a set is flopping a nut straight. with non-nut straights, there's the potential to be counterfeited. for a flush, someone with the A automatically has 7 outs against you. with 2 pair there's counterfeit potential also. top pair is worthless. gut shots have a small equity even when you're getting odds to call. so while you have 3 streets of implied odds for a set, you only have 1 or 2 streets of implied odds for a suited connector. there's also a chance you take a hit on the flop. with a gut shot, you'll call getting 25-1 from 3 people, but you're still losing money because you're putting in chips at a rate less than your equity. so they're tricky.

[The-Matador]

Yeah I just ran some stove numbers and you are quite correct.

[WillMagic]

A horrendous preflop call? Are you kidding? You could call it debatable, I guess, though I think it is clearly a call, but horrendous? 11-1 odds with a suited one-gapper is never horrendous, it's standard.

Matador....you really need to work on not being so authoritative. It's hurting your learning process. Part of becoming a better player is trying to understand other people's play rather than just reacting and moving on.

Will

[sthief09]

poker stove couldn't possibly answer this question, given the way this hand plays postflop. most of your money with 86s is made on the turn and river. a lot of your preflop equity comes from turning and rivering trips, two pair, a flush, or a straight. if you can't get there then you don't win. I'm not saying he should fold. I'm just saying poker stove is not the right way to look at this. unfortunately, I don't know what is. I think you just have to guesstimate based on pot odds. I hate using pot odds preflop but if he's getting 11-1, which I was told he is, that's a strong argument to call.

[Michael Davis]

"top pair is worthless."

This isn't true. Even in this situation where top pair is obviously not good it gives me enough to continue in the hand.

-Michael

[The-Matador]

[ QUOTE ]
A horrendous preflop call? Are you kidding? You could call it debatable, I guess, though I think it is clearly a call, but horrendous? 11-1 odds with a suited one-gapper is never horrendous, it's standard.

Matador....you really need to work on not being so authoritative. It's hurting your learning process. Part of becoming a better player is trying to understand other people's play rather than just reacting and moving on.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the pedagogical lesson, but I've already noted that it wasn't horrendous.

[sthief09]

what difference does the BB make here

[WillMagic]

Noted...i fired this off and then read your other responses. The point about you being overly authoritative still stands, though.

Will

[The-Matador]

[ QUOTE ]
Noted...i fired this off and then read your other responses. The point about you being overly authoritative still stands, though.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

That's great. It's really nice that you're taking such an interest in my development as a player.

[WillMagic]

Sarcasm will hinder your progress as well.

Will

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
what difference does the BB make here

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes all the difference. On his initial call, he was getting 11:1 because he was in the BB. Had he not posted anything, he'd be getting 10:2, and I'll fold 86s to those odds.

The difference between MD raking in this monster pot vs. folding preflop and watching all that money slide to another player is this big blind.

[The-Matador]

[ QUOTE ]
Sarcasm will hinder your progress as well.

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks again man, I can tell you've really got my back.

[sthief09]

I'm strictly talking about the second call here. I like the first call. hands like 86s make B&M poker fun, and are profitable.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm strictly talking about the second call here. I like the first call. hands like 86s make B&M poker fun, and are profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah. Well, I was strictly talking about the first call when I mentioned the BB. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Yes. 86s IS a fun little hand, especially against big overpairs. Sometimes I will make a thin/loose preflop call just to have a little fun. Hell, B&M poker is less profitable than online play anyway -- we're paying for entertainment, so why not enjoy it and gambool a bit.

[sthief09]

gets more pills ASAP. people are going to give you a hard time, and you need to learn to accept that. you probably deserve it. anyone worth your time has already gotten past the whole cinnamonwind, sophia, lansing stuff.

[The-Matador]

[ QUOTE ]
gets more pills ASAP. people are going to give you a hard time, and you need to learn to accept that. you probably deserve it. anyone worth your time has already gotten past the whole cinnamonwind, sophia, lansing stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody here is worth my time.











Dammit! *covers mouth with fist*

[spydog]

I like a turn CR better than a river CR. Anyone who bets the river with an overpair is just as likely to bet the turn. Maybe you thought you would get raised on the turn and could 3-bet????

[chesspain]

Your check-3bet/bet on the flop and turn looks like two-pair or a set. It further looks like at least two of your opponents have overpairs. Since anyone with a showable hand may just be relieved to get to showdown cheaply, I'ld bet the river, and collect a couple of crying calls. In fact, if you check, you might only collect two bets total at best by checkraising, so by betting at least you don't risk it being checked through.

[bobbyi]

Ok. What about the rest of my post? How do you feel about betting the flop rather than checking? I really feel that checking was the worse option here.

[Klepton]

[ QUOTE ]
On the river, I've got two opponents. Both of them are likely to have overpairs.

[/ QUOTE ]

not at Commerce.

button definitely has a big pair, UTG could have any 2 cards

i like your play, as a check raise would really piss off the button, but i feel you'll get the same amount of bets by just betting out