Big pot O8b hand

[Beavis68]

I wrote it up here (http://www.pokerforums.org/showthread.php?t=2150) please let me know what you think.

[djr]

just checkcall the river, pot is too big to fold for one bet. But too likely someone has the boat for you to bet.

[Beavis68]

the aggression was ok up until then? I know I should have check-called, but i put him on AA.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
I wrote it up here please let me know what you think.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get a green background screen with some advertising when I click on "here."

[Beavis68]

Sorry, I will repost it. That was another web forum.



Well, I was on an active table for a while today, so I tried to take advantage of it.


** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to beavis_68 in the SB [8 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif a /images/graemlins/diamond.gif ]
Three limps to me, I and raise. Four players call, one limper 3-bets, and I cap it.
** Dealing Flop ** [j /images/graemlins/club.gif 5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif] Nut flush draw, nut low runner-runner, and 4 opponents -I figure i have good pot equity.
I bet, 3 callers, the guy who 3-bet raised, I raise, one fold 3 callers.
** Dealing Turn ** [6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif] Perfect!
I bet and get two callers, the pot is at 20BB.
** Dealing River ** [5 /images/graemlins/club.gif] Frack!
I stupidly bet, and get raised - should have check-called.

East_Side333 shows [ Ac, Ks, 9s, 9h ] a full house, Nines full of fives.
beavis_68 doesn't show [ 8h, 3h, 2d, Ad ] a flush, ace high.
East_Side333 wins $22.5 from the main pot with a full house, Nines full of fives.
There was no qualifying low hand.

Any advice?

[Buzz]

Beavis - It's going to happen quite often, slightly more often than one time in every four, that when you have a flush on the turn and no cards the same rank as the board cards, the board will pair on the river.

And when that happens, there's not much you can do. It's just part of the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Any advice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. You already recognize that you should have check/called when the board paired with fives on the river.

(When the board pairs one of the flop cards on the river in a game as loose as this one, you should expect to encounter a full house more often than not).

Buzz

[chaos]

Although the pot is quite large, depending on the player you might even consider checking and folding when the board pairs on the river.

[Beavis68]

[ QUOTE ]
Beavis - It's going to happen quite often, slightly more often than one time in every four, that when you have a flush on the turn and no cards the same rank as the board cards, the board will pair on the river.

And when that happens, there's not much you can do. It's just part of the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Any advice?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. You already recognize that you should have check/called when the board paired with fives on the river.

(When the board pairs one of the flop cards on the river in a game as loose as this one, you should expect to encounter a full house more often than not).

Buzz

[/ QUOTE ]

So, was the early aggression ok?

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
So, was the early aggression ok?

[/ QUOTE ]

Beavis - Yes.

1st betting round: You can raise or not with this hand. Whether I raise or not is generally opponent dependent. I would probably not generally raise with this hand, but I might. I think whether you raise or not depends on your playing style.

2nd betting round: From 1st position (SB), I would bet this hand. The original bet is almost manditory for my style of play. When you get raised, you can re-raise or not.

3rd betting round: You have the nuts for high. The only thing that can screw you up is if the board pairs, and even when it does, nobody is guaranteed to have the full house. From your vantage point it's 32 to 12 against the board pairing.

Three of those anti-outs involve a runner-runner pair. It's least likely an opponent has a full house when the turn card pairs. It's second least likely an opponent has a full house when the lowest card on the flop pairs, as here, but I think it's still more likely than not. (The probability of encountering a full house here depends on how your opponents play, of course).

4th betting round: It is not uncommon for players to bluff when the board pairs after a flush or straight has been enabled. Even players who are not given to much bluffing might bluff here. And since this is such a common bluffing situation, I'd say you're stuck calling on the river.

I've successfully bluffed myself in this situation - not always, but when I thought a bluff might work out - I think you have to play the opponent when bluffing.

• Your bet on the 4th betting round amounted to a bluff. However, it was not a credible bluff, since you are marked by the betting to have the nut flush. If you intended your 4th round to be a bluff, in my humble opinion it was ill-advised, but not terrible.
• A second possibility is that you incorrectly thought you'd get a bet out of a chaser twice as often as you'd encounter a full house and lose two bets.
• There's a third possibility, and I think it's what best explains your bet on the 4th betting round.
I believe you went on tilt when the board paired on the river.
You can often recognize when an opponent goes on tilt, but it's very hard to know when you're on tilt yourself.
I believe you were steaming when you bet the river.
There's much more to say about it. "Tilt" could happen to any of us.

But your betting on the first three betting rounds, before you possibly went on tilt, was fine.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[Beavis68]

I could make all kinds of justifications, his odd 3-bet PF, him only calling my 3-bet on the flop, it was tilt.