Flopped trip Aces-- Too aggressive? [Archive]

View Full Version : Flopped trip Aces-- Too aggressive?

Nak

03-31-2005, 12:47 AM

I think that I may have been a little crazy here, especially since I had no low. How aggressive should I be here? This was the standard game.

Nak

Ultimate Bet 0.50/1 Omaha/8 (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Nak is MP3 with 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif, A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG calls, 1 fold, MP1 calls, 1 fold, Nak calls, CO calls, Button calls, 1 fold, BB checks.

Flop: (6.50 SB) A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif (6 players)
BB checks, UTG bets, MP1 calls, Nak raises, CO calls, Button folds, BB calls, UTG 3-bets, MP1 calls, Nak calls, CO calls, BB calls.

Turn: (10.75 BB) J/images/graemlins/club.gif (5 players)
BB checks, UTG bets, MP1 calls, Nak raises, CO calls, BB folds, UTG calls, MP1 calls.

River: (18.75 BB) 6/images/graemlins/club.gif (4 players)
UTG bets, MP1 folds, Nak calls, CO folds.

Final Pot: 20.75 BB

slavic

03-31-2005, 01:20 AM

Looks pretty good to me. You got lots of money in with the best of it, and it's a shame Mr' 23 didn't help you on the turn with a 3 bet though he was probably worried about getting quartered.

gergery

03-31-2005, 12:29 PM

I'd have called the flop and raised a safe turn card.

Not sure why you want to raise on the flop when you can only win half the pot at best, and any spade, 2,3,4,6,8 can make someone a better high.

--Greg

03-31-2005, 04:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd have called the flop and raised a safe turn card.

Not sure why you want to raise on the flop when you can only win half the pot at best, and any spade, 2,3,4,6,8 can make someone a better high.

--Greg

[/ QUOTE ]

I would disagree with this only if he was not locked in for at best 1/2 the pot.

GooperMC

03-31-2005, 08:56 PM

I also would have called the flop and raised with a good turn. You are only playing for 1/2 the pot and your grip on that 1/2 is tenuous; any spade or any low card takes away your nuts. If you are going to only play for ½ the pot you want as many people in the pot as you can. Pull in people on the flop then push the turn if a good card hits.

Ray Zee

03-31-2005, 11:34 PM

think about what beats you here. half the deck on 4th street puts you having to pair on the river to win half the pot. if they dont get you there, the river does. this isnt a good hand with this flop. i might not fold it but wouldnt push it at all. this isnt holdem. the only thing you have going is, its small stakes and opponents may have little.

Buzz

04-01-2005, 12:54 AM

Nak - If you raised because you thought your set of aces would end up the nuts, then you have much to learn. However, if you raised to intimidate your opponents, then I very much like the aggressive way you played this hand.

Notice there is a straight possible on the river, but someone would need to be holding 98XX, 84XX, or 43XX on the river to make the straight.

One of your opponents almost surely was dealt one of those card combinations. But you put on enough heat to probably cause whoever could have made a straight on the river to fold before then. Thus if you won half of this pot, playing aggressively with your flopped set of aces probably was the key to your victory.

After the flop, I'd put UTG on the nut low here, 23XX, possibly with low backup, and/or possibly with some chance at high, such as a non-nut set or a spade draw. Hard to say exactly which.

The jack of clubs on the turn and the subsequent betting doesn't make matters any clearer.

(Obviously you don't want to see UTG show down 234X. But if so, you can't foresee when you raise that UTG will end up with the exact perfect cards to win both the high and the low. I think it's more likely your raise will knock out an opponent without the nut low who, if you made it easy enough by just calling, might luck out and make a straight to beat you on the river).

BB folded after you raised the turn. Could be that BB held 98XX, 84XX, or 43XX. If so, and if UTG didn't end up making a straight, by playing it aggressively, as you did, you turned a loss into a victory.

And that would be the reason for playing aggressively here. Although it's true that by making the pot bigger, you would win more if the board paired, it also costs you more to make the pot bigger, and since you're almost surely only going for half the pot, you simply don't have favorable fresh money odds to raise.

Thus it is purely the intimidation factor that makes raising worthwhile - but that intimidation factor does make raising your best line of play.

If it didn't work out well for you this time (if UTG made a straight), do not despair. Another time your line of play will work out for you - and it will work out often enough to make your aggressive play worth while.

And there's still the chance the board will pair on the river. (But that possibility is not the reason you should raise).

Just my opinion.

Buzz

NJchick

04-01-2005, 01:33 PM

I agree with Ray's assessment. You're hand does not have much value here and you are susceptible to even getting scooped by an already made low - or at least run down by the other draws. Why play it aggressive? The best you are going to get is 1/2 at most.

gergery

04-01-2005, 05:08 PM

I agree that raising is a profitable play. But I think calling to take advantage of a bigger edge on the turn is a _more_ profitable play.

I fiddled with some #s and you have a very small edge EV-wise on the flop. By not raising I figure it costs you something like 0.2BBs in expectation.

But keeping the pot smaller and waiting for a favorable turn card, you force an opponent calling there to make a bigger mistake. A flush draw calling 2 bets cold in the large pot makes a 0.4BB mistake in expectation, but calling in the smaller pot is a 0.8BB mistake in expectation. Net +0.2 by calling then raising the turn. It also gives your hand greater deception value, potentially getting even more benefit.

Just my 2 cents,
Greg