K9s. Playalong.

[Entity]

Table has been running a bit loose, but nothing special. Usually 5 or 6 to the flop. MP2 is LAG (40/9) but can find a fold when faced with aggression. He's fairly readable and isn't all that tricky. UTG is a bit too loose and passive in general, but isn't terrible by most standards (25%VPIP, minimal PFR); I don't think he's positionally aware though. UTG+1 is very loose and selectively stupid/aggressive. The CO and Button are tight but seem to be pretty ABC and fairly bad postflop.

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[Firefly]

meh, it would suck to play along to fold pf :P. But at a table that loose you could probally find a call. CO and button being tight=less likely a raise... so sure, let's see a flop.

[Redd]

Great, it's only prelop and I'm already unsure. I'd say raise it for value because your opponents are donkish.

[bottomset]

I think raising has a decent shot of getting the button .. how tight are the blinds?

if they are tight, I'm more inclined to make the raise, in that having intiative, position and the blinds-dead money in there

seems better than in so/so position, with no iniative

if they are fairly loose, I think this is more likely a call

[Redd]

As an aside, I love these playalong posts. I always learn alot.

[Dave G.]

Calls? If the players behind you are bad postflop players then you want to encourage them to enter the pot and outplay them on the flop.

If UTG+1 bets on the flop and you decide to continue, you can raise and probably get them out. This also works if you flop a flush draw, you can just call and you'll have many people padding the pot for you.

You could raise here to try and get the players behind you out right away, but if you get a couple of callers it'll be difficult to get them out on the flop because the pot will be quite big.

[deepsquat]

I think you should just call. In late position with 2 or 3 limpers a raise will prob be good but i would play this for the flush value and try and encourage as many ppl to enter the pot as possible.

[grjr]

I can't think of a table where I would raise K9s in MP1 after 2 limpers but I would definately call.

[spoohunter]

Fold.

[KaiShin]

I'd limp in this position. We don't really want to raise this hand into a LAGgy MP2, who might 3-bet it with a large range of holdings and potentially blast out UTG, maybe UTG+1 too. I think we want a lot of callers with this hand, so I'm not raising this.

[wyoak]

i like teh limp.
K9 isn't really all that great shorthanded, donks or not. bring some players with you.
limp, get everyone else to call, and flop a straight flush. easy as pie.

[toss]

Why? With the conditions hes describing I'd limp UTG.

[Kumubou]

Limp please.

There are already two limpers, so you will not gain much from isolating. Even if there was just one limper, raising from MP1 is too early to isolate properly -- the odds of gaining position are not good.

To me, this is a marginal hand. Anything lower gets turbomucked in this position. This hand has marginal straight and high card value, but you should be able to get out easily if the flop whiffs you hard.

-K

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Why? With the conditions hes describing I'd limp UTG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good man. I think there would be some merit in raising if it weren't for the crappy LAG, but honestly, UTG is the sort that would limp with things like KQ-KJ that have me in bad shape, so I'd rather encourage more people to come into the pot and see a flop.

I think folding here would be pretty bad.

[bottomset]

I think we need a flop to play along some more

[MrWookie47]

Man, I can't read any of your threads without finding myself hitting the call and raise button more and more preflop and the fold button less and less. You're going to turn me into a 30/15 player soon. I'll vote for limp here, but I even though I've been loosening up preflop, I wouldn't be surprised if I found myself hitting the fold button had I found myself in a similar situation.

[ArturiusX]

I think I'd raise.

[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
Man, I can't read any of your threads without finding myself hitting the call and raise button more and more preflop and the fold button less and less. You're going to turn me into a 30/15 player soon. I'll vote for limp here, but I even though I've been loosening up preflop, I wouldn't be surprised if I found myself hitting the fold button had I found myself in a similar situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Make sure and avoid my threads then. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Rev. Good Will]

ewwww, and play K9s possibly shorthanded? thats gross!

[Entity]

calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[ArturiusX]

[ QUOTE ]
Man, I can't read any of your threads without finding myself hitting the call and raise button more and more preflop and the fold button less and less. You're going to turn me into a 30/15 player soon. I'll vote for limp here, but I even though I've been loosening up preflop, I wouldn't be surprised if I found myself hitting the fold button had I found myself in a similar situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll learn a ton more going 30/15 (or more reasonably, 25/15) than you ever will playing 16/8 or the like.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
ewwww, and play K9s possibly shorthanded? thats gross!

[/ QUOTE ]

K9s is fine shorthanded as long as the opponents are loose.

Rob

[Rev. Good Will]

raise, you have the second-nut flush, one overcard, and thinning the field here would be awesome

[KaiShin]

Seems this is an easy call. I don't think I'd raise in this spot, we've got to keep people in the pot, plus MP2 is still sitting behind us ready to face the field with 3 cold if we raise.

I think I might call/3-bet this should a raise come from MP2, depending on who's still around.

[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

Calls. I don't want to blow anyone out right now and I'm not real thrilled with the paired board.

[toss]

I'd raise here.

[flopwell]

even I can get this right-Raise that Flop!

[Duerig]

[ QUOTE ]
raise, you have the second-nut flush, one overcard, and thinning the field here would be awesome

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree you want to raise, but I'm pretty sure thinning the field is about the last reason to. You are actually raising for value at this point. I'd be happy as hell if everyone came along for the ride and we capped the flop.

[KaiShin]

Bleh I have to go to bed, will have to check up on this in the morning.

[ArturiusX]

[ QUOTE ]
calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

Raise. We have an overcard, a flush draw, and UTG trapped for a few bets. Our equity is 35%, we have a 20% share so lets take this pot.

[Redd]

I'm not crazy about the LAG right behind us either (can we start playing this hand with seat selection?), but with 2 already in and 5 more to act, we've got a great chance for enough cold-callers to get some value from a raise.

[Dave G.]

I'd call here. I don't want to knock anyone out of the pot. With this many players seeing the flop I'm not too confident about my K overcard, and the 9 is obviously tainted. I'm playing for flush value here.

Edit: I'll add that I'd be sort of hoping that it gets raised behind us.

[MrWookie47]

I'm already just over 20/10, and I'm starting to feel like a dirty LAG (I kissed my money bag symbol good bye a while ago now. It's looking like I'll spend the rest of my micro career as a happy face). As a quite profitable dirty LAG, however, I think I can live with the feeling. Oh, and grjr, I've been reading your posts, too, and they aren't helping /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

On this flop, I think I'll call. With the board paired, I don't think we have an equity edge with only three callers on the flop (or if we do, it's slimmer than the 2% a flush draw has normally), so I think we call here to maximize the number of people who stay in. If the board wasn't paired, I'd be more likely to raise, but calling would still probably be better since the people behind us are tight.

Edit: I wanted to add that if a raise comes from behind us, I'd be looking to 3bet or cap, depending, especially if there are 5 or more people in the pot.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

Raises. It will likely be called in many spots and possibly you could get this flop capped four ways. That being said building the pot isn't as important as winning the pot. We want to win this pot. It will soon be large and raising to possibly clean up our K outs seems like a good idea. Even if everybody folded except UTG, and UTG+1 our raise would still have value. We might even buy a free card.

[Entity]

Everyone advocating a raise: how does having a LAG behind me change your consideratoins? What about the fact that we're 8-handed (woo!) and only have one caller of UTG's bet, which is almost always a Queen or a 5? How much equity do we lose on a paired board as well?

Rob

[ArturiusX]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm already just over 20/10, and I'm starting to feel like a dirty LAG (I kissed my money bag symbol good bye a while ago now. It's looking like I'll spend the rest of my micro career as a happy face). As a quite profitable dirty LAG, however, I think I can live with the feeling. Oh, and grjr, I've been reading your posts, too, and they aren't helping /images/graemlins/smile.gif.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm 21/11, I can't see how you can play poker any other way.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
It will likely be called in many spots

[/ QUOTE ]

Queens will call and so will 5's (actually, 5's will probably 3-bet). With the other players behind me, including a LAG who will occasionally peel but knows how to fold, will we really be called in many spots?

[MrWookie47]

The other consideration I forgot is that on a paired flop, people may be scared of trips, and the flop is less likely to have hit people, further decreasing the chances that they'll cold call. I'm liking call more and more.

[DeathDonkey]

Call. Bad relative position, don't mind overcalls, would hate to have it 3 bet right behind you. Its possible to clean up outs but you only have your King to work with anyway, so I think its a secondary concern.

"me have flush draw me raise" is bad news here.

-DeathDonkey

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It will likely be called in many spots

[/ QUOTE ]

Queens will call and so will 5's (actually, 5's will probably 3-bet). With the other players behind me, including a LAG who will occasionally peel but knows how to fold, will we really be called in many spots?

[/ QUOTE ]

People call with all kinds of crap. Any random A. A random spade. Even random pocket pairs. I'm not really worried about it though as if this pot goes to the turn 3-way my chances of winning the pot improve so it win win.

You might worry the LAg will reraise and blow out the field but this might not be that bad either. He's likely to be bluffing and getting HU with him isn't that bad. The board being paired is a factor here and degrades our equity but you have to assume your flush will beat someone who flopped trips most times. You will get BOFFO action from that player when you hit too.

[Dave G.]

[ QUOTE ]
You might worry the LAg will reraise and blow out the field but this might not be that bad either. He's likely to be bluffing and getting HU with him isn't that bad. The board being paired is a factor here and degrades our equity but you have to assume your flush will beat someone who flopped trips most times. You will get BOFFO action from that player when you hit too.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the LAG is likely to raise behind us, then wouldn't calling and then 3-betting his raise give us better value for this hand?

[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
You will get BOFFO action from that player when you hit too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, especially when he boats up on the river when the 3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif hits.

[ArturiusX]

[ QUOTE ]

"me have flush draw me raise" is bad news here.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? What if they call our raise?

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
People call with all kinds of crap. Any random A. A random spade.

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon dude. At least look at my reads before you post stuff like this. This is not the sort of table where people are calling two cold with an Ace, a single spade, etc. Even MP2, who is LAG, isn't terrible postflop and wouldn't call two cold with something like AT here.

[Redd]

[ QUOTE ]
how does having a LAG behind me change your consideratoins?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like a raise better, given the read. If we call, there's an increased chance that he'll raise it, which gives us possibly one more player in but gives the LAG control of the hand. There might be something to be said about people being more willing to call the LAG's raise, but that may be giving them too much credit.


[ QUOTE ]
What about the fact that we're 8-handed (woo!) and only have one caller of UTG's bet, which is almost always a Queen or a 5?

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but we have 8 in on the flop. If this is indicative of the field's calling standards, it seems like we should at least get 1 more out of 5 to cold-call us.

[ QUOTE ]
How much equity do we lose on a paired board as well?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm definitely not giving anyone credit for the boat yet. The 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif and Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif are already out there, so most of our outs won't cause a board pairing/tripping. We'll need to subtract 1 out on a non-spade turn for whatever the turn card is in spades, and maybe another half out for the times the spade we hit is the trip 5's kicker? I'd say we lose 1.5/9 of our 35% equity tops, so lets say it drops 5%? It still seems to be possible to raise for value.

To me, at least. But I wanted to raise the friggin' pf too.

[Redd]

[ QUOTE ]
how does having a LAG behind me change your consideratoins?


[/ QUOTE ]
One thing that I hadn't really considered is a call-3bet if we get enough people in, to trap the field with the LAG's raise. Perhaps this is a better way to go?

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You might worry the LAg will reraise and blow out the field but this might not be that bad either. He's likely to be bluffing and getting HU with him isn't that bad. The board being paired is a factor here and degrades our equity but you have to assume your flush will beat someone who flopped trips most times. You will get BOFFO action from that player when you hit too.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the LAG is likely to raise behind us, then wouldn't calling and then 3-betting his raise give us better value for this hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a great point

The question with this situation is what has more value? The equity we pick up through folding out players with a raise or the extra bets we get whenever the LAG raises behind us. I think the potential equity increase could be worth possibly missing a few bets from players who might pay 1SB but not 2SB on the flop and if you trap them they'll pay 3SB. It certainly looks good for us either way. Even if we somehow wind up getting HU that's OK. I like our chances a lot of dragging a very big pot.

The best argument for caling IMO is that it could be better to try to build a bigger pot by waiting for the LAG to raise so we can trap everybody. That probably consistantly builds the biggest possible pots but we will win them less frequently due to the guys we carried to the turn witn us on the flop.

I think this is very close.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]


C'mon dude. At least look at my reads before you post stuff like this. This is not the sort of table where people are calling two cold with an Ace, a single spade, etc. Even MP2, who is LAG, isn't terrible postflop and wouldn't call two cold with something like AT here.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Table has been running a bit loose, but nothing special. Usually 5 or 6 to the flop. MP2 is LAG (40/9) but can find a fold when faced with aggression. He's fairly readable and isn't all that tricky. UTG is a bit too loose and passive in general, but isn't terrible by most standards (25%VPIP, minimal PFR); I don't think he's positionally aware though. UTG+1 is very loose and selectively stupid/aggressive. The CO and Button are tight but seem to be pretty ABC and fairly bad postflop.



[/ QUOTE ]

I read this dude. These guys don't sound that good to me. It's 8 men to flop for chrissakes. Is it that weird that I would assume they weren't all that good?

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]

If the LAG is likely to raise behind us, then wouldn't calling and then 3-betting his raise give us better value for this hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

I change my mind, ^that plan sounds like more money in the pot to me

[DeathDonkey]

You guys that want to build a huge pot on a paired board with the not even nut flush draw are crazy. That is all.

-DeathDonkey

[MrWookie47]

I look forward to seeing the end of this, but I gotta hit the sack. I'll play along in the morning.

[ArturiusX]

I'm converting to the call brigade.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it that weird that I would assume they weren't all that good?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I would generally think that CO and Button weren't paying attention if they didn't limp in these situations.

Once the first three of us limp, it should be much more likely that others will limp.

Rob

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
You guys that want to build a huge pot on a paired board with the not even nut flush draw are crazy. That is all.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Quoted for truth. If it means anything, DD tends to be LAGtatstic.

[Dave G.]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys that want to build a huge pot on a paired board with the not even nut flush draw are crazy. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]

The King high flush is just about as good as the nut flush, unless 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif's come on the board. It's still pretty good even then.

The paired board isn't a huge deal, full houses are rare. We can still expect to win a very good majority of the time when we complete our flush.

Besides, I like flush draws. They're exciting.

[bottomset]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You guys that want to build a huge pot on a paired board with the not even nut flush draw are crazy. That is all.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

Quoted for truth. If it means anything, DD tends to be LAGtatstic.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah him posting that was a little /images/graemlins/confused.gif .. I was thinking DD was the guy playing 20/12 before Entity made it popular on here .. and he's advocating passive play?

anyway he's right in that a call here is better than raising

i have a feeling this hands line will be

call
call
call
call

[Entity]

Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[NAU_Player]

3-bets

[Dave G.]

3-bets!

I should add my reasoning. We've got 3 opponents we can trap for another bet with a 3-bet. Our flush draw gives us more equity than the 25% we are contributing, so we can reraise for value.

[bottomset]

bitchslap MP2 for forcing out all of your callers

and call

so iguess the new line

call preflop
call flop
call flop
call turn
call river

any more and I'm thinking entity switched to weaktight overnight(I though true TAG was the level after LAG in Ray Zee's progression)

[DeathDonkey]

This one is closer in my mind. Now there may be a bit more value to pumping the draw, given that the two EP guys aren't that in love with their hands and our LAGgy friend can be on alot.

I still say call since you would love to checkraise the turn if you hit. Closer than the first call definitely. Call though I know your gonna 3 bet, you just love these goofy hands /images/graemlins/smile.gif

-DeathDonkey

[milesdyson]

I would call and check raise the field on a turn /images/graemlins/spade.gif. MP2 is aggressive and will bet his Q or 5 again, and call 3-betting is so late 90s. The only concern is whether the two callers are going to stick around. That makes the decision closer... Would they fold if MP2 capped his 5 on the flop (let's ignore the chance that they may have a flush draw)?

If you 3-bet and the turn doesn't give you the flush, you're checking and giving away your hand, allowing him to lose the least from you when you make your flush and beat him, but also allowing him to jack you when you make your flush and he fills up.

Flop 3-bet would just give you info on his hand, but not enough to stop drawing to your flush.

[spoohunter]

Fold again! Just kidding of course.

I'm just calling, all though the obvious answer is to cap it up.

To anyone who's observant, call cap screams boat or flush draw, and either way is going to put a halt to your action on the big streets. Someone could have a 5 which hurts me. I'm hopefully gonna hit, and want my opponents giving me action on the turn meaning that I can still be ahead. This means I don't want to show anything about my hand yet.

[Dave G.]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm hopefully gonna hit, and want my opponents giving me action on the turn meaning that I can still be ahead. This means I don't want to show anything about my hand yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the time we won't hit though, and on the turn we can't raise for value if we miss. The flop is our only chance to pump our draw for value.

[sublime]

easy limp preflop

the first flop smooth call is nice because you dont want to blow out anybody behind you due to the fact that you dont have much to protect. well you do i suppose (K) but the pros of letting in some loose calls outweigh that i believe.

the come back arounder (new term i just invented) on the flop is trickier but i see a 3-bet. ofc your flush draw loses some equity, but the reraise is still the way to go due to the predictabilty of your opponents. these other two guys called two once, so they will do it again if the lag caps. i also like the flop raise after smooth calling BECAUSE it gives the LAG a chance to cap. if he caps he is betting the turn no matter what falls, setting you up for a sweet check raise.

im tired, so this thought process may suck

[thesharpie]

I say call the flop instead of 3 betting, because if MP2 caps it might knock out one or two of the others, and you want more than 2 others involved when value raising with the second nut flush on a paired flop, IMO.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate going against the tide but nobody has convinced me that this line is correct.

When hero is to act he has a choice between raising and calling. The concensus is that calling is better but I'm not sure why. Are you guys hoping the LAG will raise like he did so we are gauranteed 4-way action? Are we really convinced that if we raise all five players yet to act will positively fold unless they have a hand that buries our flush draw? Are we worried that a raise and reraise by the LAG will get us HU with the LAG? Is getting this pot 3-way on the turn that bad? Are we that sure that the UTG bet means he has a 5? I think our K outs might play here.

If the LAG hates his hand and doesn't raise do we really want to give someone holding the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif a cheap look at the turn? Anybody holding a pocket pair might peel one off and our flush card runs into a boat. What about KJ or KT don't we wnt them to fold too? There are 5 players left to act and two more who already have $$ in the pot. I'd rather have 4 players see the turn for 8SB than perhaps 6 see it for 6SB. In this example the LAG held true to form and helped us out and raised for us. Personally if I'm in the hand I'm psyched he raised and all the others folded. If that was our plan all along I can respect calling but still don't love it.

If this hand had not been raised by the LAG are we really feeling that good about our call if 6 players see the turn? Unlike DD I don't mind seeing money go into the pot on this flop. The K high flush will be good enough to win this pot a great deal of the time even with a paired board. When our flush comes in it will be good way more often than it will lose to a boat therefore trips will pay us off much more often than we will pay off a boat. With at least three players putting money in the pot and the strong likelihood that our flush will be good against a thinner field a raise the first time through almost seems like a no brainer. Also letting the LAG bet for us isn't great because if we make our flush on the turn we won't know if he raised for a free card or for protection. Going for the C/R might not work.

Oh well I'm probably wrong because everybody seems to like caling so much but I'm not seeing it.

I reraise at this point. I'm seriously doubting the LAG has anything that buries our flush draw and our equity makes money for us if they all come along (which they will since they've already put two in. If we just call I don't think we can trust the LAG to bet he turn when the flush card hits so we can't C/R and we might not get great action if we "wake up". I want more money to go in here when we still like our equity edge.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

Call. If I raise now, I'll spoil my ideal check-raising position if I hit.

Also, since I missed the start of this, I limp pre-flop; any other action strikes me as being really weird.

On the flop, my first reaction was to just call so as not to blow people out of the pot; upon further reflection, I thought raising might be a good idea to maybe buy a couple of outs; on additional reflection, I decided calling is probably the best play but it's close. The combination of the paired board and the bettor almost on my immediate right make this a relatively rare instance in which I'm not pumping with a flush draw and an overcard. The paired board is problematic, and not just because of the boat potential (which is rare). There aren't many ways for a Q55 board to hit your opponents, so you'll be getting fewer callers than usual if you pump.

[btspider]

i'm late, but call PF and call the flop.

the second time you act on the flop, i'd call.. but its much closer. it sets up the turn check-raise which should succeed when we catch enough if i'm reading the read correctly.

[btspider]

to some extent, you might be giving hero's hand too much equity. think about how many outs 5x or Qx have against our hand. if they don't have these hands, then they may have a bigger flush draw (or a flush draw taking away some of our outs).

[RaiNz]

I limp here with the lag still to act behind me. I think a fold here would awful.

[PokerProdigy]

Seems like a bad spot for king-nine suited because of MP2 acting behind you.

[KaiShin]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]
I said way back on page one that I'd probably call/3-bet a raise from MP2, but this is a lot closer since there were no CC'ers in between MP2 and UTG. Still I think a 3-bet is good here, if MP2 caps it at this point I'd feel OK if UTG and UTG+1 drop out, since I'll be heads up against a likely 2-pair or trips with a strong draw. Obviously I'd rather have them in, I'm pretty confident that UTG+1 will at least stay.

I am concerned about removing our check/raise possibilities for the turn though. If we 3-bet, and everyone calls, are we leading a turn blank? Doubtful.

[MrWookie47]

That's a 3bet for value right there.

[KingOtter]

Definitely 3-bet here. Now you're talking value.

I was a bit surprised by all the 'raise' calls on the flop, actually. Yes, there were a lot of people who saw the flop, but paired flops tend to scare people when there is naked aggression, in my limited experience. Sure, a lot of people would call a single bet, but not two bets, or more.

KO

[RaiNz]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

The LAG did what was expected of him. I like a 3bet here although its pretty close.

[Entity]

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, MP2 calls, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls.

Turn: (10 BB) K/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
UTG checks, UTG+1 checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, MP2 folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 folds.

River: (12 BB) T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG calls.

Final Pot: 14 BB

[KaiShin]

So UTG have KQ, or QJ?

[jrz1972]

Not much to say about the turn and river.

If I had just called the flop (my line), I would bet out on the turn rather than check-raise, but I'm assuming that's also uncontroversial.

[@bsolute_luck]

well i've enjoyed reading/learning how everyone would play this hand. the turn card IMHO is great. UTG, i would think, thinks you're on a flush draw (which you were), and is calling with a pair of Queens.

from there i think the hand plays easily.

[Entity]

I think that calling the flop intending to checkraise a friendly turn card would have been OK as well. I'm not sure if I pull it off, even given LAG's tendencies, often enough for it to show more profit than getting my money in on the flop though.

Rob

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
So UTG have KQ, or QJ?

[/ QUOTE ]

He went donkish with Q3s. His VPIP was relatively stable over the hour or so we played together, and he hadn't been showing down crap, so I'm thinking some sort of temporary tilt may have induced his play.

Rob

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
to some extent, you might be giving hero's hand too much equity. think about how many outs 5x or Qx have against our hand. if they don't have these hands, then they may have a bigger flush draw (or a flush draw taking away some of our outs).

[/ QUOTE ]
If they have 5x our K outs are no good but we have more outs than they do for a higher hand.
We have even more outs aginst Qx as our K's will play if we can clean up those outs.

If we are facing someone with an A-high flush draw we're pretty screwed but might win if we spike our K. I also want to make someone holding A/images/graemlins/spade.gif incorrect to call by raising.

All in all our equity must be at least 30% here even against those holdings. If we are up against two players with Qx, a guy holding 5x and a couple pocket pairs we don't have much equity. That seems unlikely and a raise will drive out the pocket pairs where calling might not. If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it that weird that I would assume they weren't all that good?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I would generally think that CO and Button weren't paying attention if they didn't limp in these situations.

Once the first three of us limp, it should be much more likely that others will limp.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm the passive guy around here. It's funny that I seem to be the only one who likes the flop raise. LOL!

You give these guys too much credit. Put this hand in middle-high stakes and I would agree with you. In micros the hallmark of tables that have 5-6 seeing every flop is that players go too far with weak holdings. When you have 8 seeing a flop players will make up any old excuse to see the turn. Backdoor flush draw and an overcard? Call. Pocket pair. Call. I'm not saying it's right but it happens all the time. Most of them are confused like fish getting clubbed on a pier.

This given hand makes my argument look pretty weak given that they all did fold when faced with 2 cold but that really seemed surprising to me.

Two quotes that always ring in my head...

"People like to call. I like to let them."

"Betting is underrated."

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If we just call and he has 2's he's folding not raising and our K's and flush draws aren't protected from the potential threats that we drive out with a raise. If he calls and three other guys call as a result and we're seeing the turn 7-way many of our outs, including flush outs, might be dirty.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is it that weird that I would assume they weren't all that good?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I would generally think that CO and Button weren't paying attention if they didn't limp in these situations.

Once the first three of us limp, it should be much more likely that others will limp.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm the passive guy around here. It's funny that I seem to be the only one who likes the flop raise. LOL!

You give these guys too much credit. Put this hand in middle-high stakes and I would agree with you. In micros the hallmark of tables that have 5-6 seeing every flop is that players go too far with weak holdings. When you have 8 seeing a flop players will make up any old excuse to see the turn. Backdoor flush draw and an overcard? Call. Pocket pair. Call. I'm not saying it's right but it happens all the time. Most of them are confused like fish getting clubbed on a pier.

This given hand makes my argument look pretty weak given that they all did fold when faced with 2 cold but that really seemed surprising to me.

Two quotes that always ring in my head...

"People like to call. I like to let them."

"Betting is underrated."

[/ QUOTE ]

Droolie,

The guys following the LAG were tight-passive and bad, but they folded easily. There's a reasonable chance they'd fold for one bet on this flop. There are very few holdings they'd call two bets on this flop with.

The LAG was (as you see on the turn), capable of finding a fold when faced with aggression.

My whole goal in this hand was to extract dead money from UTG+1 and the LAG, if possible (I didn't figure any of the others were super likely to continue in the hand), while getting UTG to stick around with his TP-type hand.

I didn't raise the flop because I didn't want to fold out people behind me.

Rob

[btspider]

(first flop call i assume we're talking about)
i'm not calling the flop hoping for a raise behind (i don't mind it of course). i'm calling the flop because a 3-bet behind or folds + an UTG 3-bet may kill our value raise.

[ QUOTE ]
We have even more outs aginst Qx as our K's will play if we can clean up those outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

there is little K clean-up that needs to be done. Kx (non-AK) would only split with us, so we could only clean up 1 out worth by folding them. that's more or less negligible relative to the value issue.

[ QUOTE ]
If they have 5x our K outs are no good but we have more outs than they do for a higher hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously 5x doesn't need outs when they have the best hand... however 5x does eliminate several of our outs and has a boatload of redraw outs even if we catch on the turn. those redraws on UTG"s representation of Qx or 5x are fairly significant. he isn't folding, so he gets two chances at a 4-out draw to make us drawing dead. 5x has 7-outs and then 10-outs respectively to boat up. these are significant. the non-nut flush draw puts more doubt in our hand. we're also somewhat OOP and a loose player left to act, so our free card potential is questionable. its just the combination of these that make the first flop call reasonable. a raise is not bad, but i don't think its the best option.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If we just call and he has 2's he's folding not raising and our K's and flush draws aren't protected from the potential threats that we drive out with a raise. If he calls and three other guys call as a result and we're seeing the turn 7-way many of our outs, including flush outs, might be dirty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok -- so the threats I'm trying to get out are:

KJ/KTs and hands including the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. KJ and KT aren't going to be peeling often on this flop, and they don't hurt me much when they do, as I'm chopping with all of them except KQ/AK. Since the guys behind me are fairly predictable, no one is going to have A/images/graemlins/spade.gif with another high card -- so it's reasonably unlikely that they call one bet on this flop, though they might peel closing the action. That said, the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif isn't much of a threat, as the backdoor flush is going to hit less than 3% of the time here, so by calling I'm losing around 3% of the value of the pot -- I think I increase my equity more by encouraging any loose calls, if they are out there. The potential of it going raise-3bet-fold-fold-call-fold (folding UTG+1's dead money) really sucks for me here too.

Rob

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If we just call and he has 2's he's folding not raising and our K's and flush draws aren't protected from the potential threats that we drive out with a raise. If he calls and three other guys call as a result and we're seeing the turn 7-way many of our outs, including flush outs, might be dirty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok -- so the threats I'm trying to get out are:

KJ/KTs and hands including the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. KJ and KT aren't going to be peeling often on this flop, and they don't hurt me much when they do, as I'm chopping with all of them except KQ/AK. Since the guys behind me are fairly predictable, no one is going to have A/images/graemlins/spade.gif with another high card -- so it's reasonably unlikely that they call one bet on this flop, though they might peel closing the action. That said, the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif isn't much of a threat, as the backdoor flush is going to hit less than 3% of the time here, so by calling I'm losing around 3% of the value of the pot -- I think I increase my equity more by encouraging any loose calls, if they are out there. The potential of it going raise-3bet-fold-fold-call-fold (folding UTG+1's dead money) really sucks for me here too.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget pocket pairs and Kxs with hearts and someone with combination backdoor flush and str8 draws that will drag the pot when our K hits. Your worst case scenario of this hand getting HU doesn't seem that bad to me because it's very likley we win when we hit any of our outs. My worst case scenario (when we just call and let in a bunch of marginal callers) has us losing the pot even if we hit which will be quite expensive for us.

I'm not saying raising is defintitely correct but I think it's much closer given than you guys do.


At least we can agree on three-betting.

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If we just call and he has 2's he's folding not raising and our K's and flush draws aren't protected from the potential threats that we drive out with a raise. If he calls and three other guys call as a result and we're seeing the turn 7-way many of our outs, including flush outs, might be dirty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok -- so the threats I'm trying to get out are:

KJ/KTs and hands including the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. KJ and KT aren't going to be peeling often on this flop, and they don't hurt me much when they do, as I'm chopping with all of them except KQ/AK. Since the guys behind me are fairly predictable, no one is going to have A/images/graemlins/spade.gif with another high card -- so it's reasonably unlikely that they call one bet on this flop, though they might peel closing the action. That said, the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif isn't much of a threat, as the backdoor flush is going to hit less than 3% of the time here, so by calling I'm losing around 3% of the value of the pot -- I think I increase my equity more by encouraging any loose calls, if they are out there. The potential of it going raise-3bet-fold-fold-call-fold (folding UTG+1's dead money) really sucks for me here too.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget pocket pairs and Kxs with hearts and someone with combination backdoor flush and str8 draws that will drag the pot when our K hits. Your worst case scenario of this hand getting HU doesn't seem that bad to me because it's very likley we win when we hit any of our outs. My worst case scenario (when we just call and let in a bunch of marginal callers) has us losing the pot even if we hit which will be quite expensive for us.

I'm not saying raising is defintitely correct but I think it's much closer given than you guys do.


At least we can agree on three-betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe you want pocket pairs to fold here. Their equity in this pot is really slim. The only backdoor flush draw I'm scared of is the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif and there aren't many combinations of that hand out there, since it's usually raised preflop (basically AJ and AT are all that I can see out there, and they're usually folding for one on this flop anyway, let alone two or three).

There aren't any backdoor straight considerations I need to worry about, since they'll have to hit runner-runner perfect without hitting a spade, so they aren't even a consideration worth worrying about here.

The hands you're worried about calling either won't call one bet very often or are so relatively inconsequential in this hand that I really don't need to worry about them much here. I'd rather a 2-outer call here than a 2-outer fold.

[Entity]

Can you list the hands you're really concerned about my opponents calling with here? I have a vague notion that you want to "protect" King-high, which I don't think is appropriate here, but I'd like to run the math out, assuming my opponents will sometimes fold for one, sometimes call one, sometimes call two, etc.

FWIW, K/images/graemlins/heart.gifX/images/graemlins/heart.gif isn't calling on this flop unless it's from a LAG. I don't see why you're so insistent that the players I call tight-passive and bad are actually going to call lots of bets here with hopeless holdings.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the LAG limped with ducks and folded the flop instead of raising we might well lose this pot when our K hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you advocating raising to fold out a hand like 22 on this flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If we just call and he has 2's he's folding not raising and our K's and flush draws aren't protected from the potential threats that we drive out with a raise. If he calls and three other guys call as a result and we're seeing the turn 7-way many of our outs, including flush outs, might be dirty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok -- so the threats I'm trying to get out are:

KJ/KTs and hands including the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif. KJ and KT aren't going to be peeling often on this flop, and they don't hurt me much when they do, as I'm chopping with all of them except KQ/AK. Since the guys behind me are fairly predictable, no one is going to have A/images/graemlins/spade.gif with another high card -- so it's reasonably unlikely that they call one bet on this flop, though they might peel closing the action. That said, the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif isn't much of a threat, as the backdoor flush is going to hit less than 3% of the time here, so by calling I'm losing around 3% of the value of the pot -- I think I increase my equity more by encouraging any loose calls, if they are out there. The potential of it going raise-3bet-fold-fold-call-fold (folding UTG+1's dead money) really sucks for me here too.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget pocket pairs and Kxs with hearts and someone with combination backdoor flush and str8 draws that will drag the pot when our K hits. Your worst case scenario of this hand getting HU doesn't seem that bad to me because it's very likley we win when we hit any of our outs. My worst case scenario (when we just call and let in a bunch of marginal callers) has us losing the pot even if we hit which will be quite expensive for us.

I'm not saying raising is defintitely correct but I think it's much closer given than you guys do.


At least we can agree on three-betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe you want pocket pairs to fold here. Their equity in this pot is really slim. The only backdoor flush draw I'm scared of is the A/images/graemlins/spade.gif and there aren't many combinations of that hand out there, since it's usually raised preflop (basically AJ and AT are all that I can see out there, and they're usually folding for one on this flop anyway, let alone two or three).

There aren't any backdoor straight considerations I need to worry about, since they'll have to hit runner-runner perfect without hitting a spade, so they aren't even a consideration worth worrying about here.

The hands you're worried about calling either won't call one bet very often or are so relatively inconsequential in this hand that I really don't need to worry about them much here. I'd rather a 2-outer call here than a 2-outer fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think disregrading the combined threat that 5 potential overcallers pose is not such a good idea.

It's the schooling effect of having a bunch of these guys in that I don't like. If they only have to call 1SB who knows what they might be willing to peel one off with? Think about this particular hand. What if amongst the rabble one of them decided to peel one off with a backdoor heart draw? You hit your K/images/graemlins/heart.gif but then will have to face a redraw.


I think their is a lot of merit to maximizing our chances of winning given the fact that we will still get great action when someone has 5x and we hit our flush. All I'm saying here is that the more combined equity the marginal holders have the less our chances of winning the pot are. That combined with the pot staying small when the LAG folds is unappealing to me. If we get a couple overcalls and save a SB is that really better from an equity standpoint than making the first two guys put in a couple extra bets and winding up with the same pot going into the turn? With the extra SB we are buying equity and building the pot. Not only will we not necesarily get more money in the pot by going for overcalls but the all of thye overcallers who would have folded for 2SB might still have live draws against our K or flush.

I also like the fact that if we raise the LAG might fold and we can take a free card if need be.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
Can you list the hands you're really concerned about my opponents calling with here? I have a vague notion that you want to "protect" King-high, which I don't think is appropriate here, but I'd like to run the math out, assuming my opponents will sometimes fold for one, sometimes call one, sometimes call two, etc.

FWIW, K/images/graemlins/heart.gifX/images/graemlins/heart.gif isn't calling on this flop unless it's from a LAG. I don't see why you're so insistent that the players I call tight-passive and bad are actually going to call lots of bets here with hopeless holdings.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have stated that I think you give this table too much credit for knowing when to fold. Given your read of the table is different from mine we're sure to disagree with the list of holding that will peel one off for the turn. That being said here are the hands I want to fold based on the idea that if a bunch of them came along our equity goes down. I will try to only include reasonable limping hands though as we know from UTG they aren't all reasonable at this table so this range could include more hands...(If I knew just one of these hands would call I would agree with you that we want them to call.)

4/images/graemlins/heart.gif3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifT/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif, any pocket pair, A/images/graemlins/spade.gifxo, TJ, KJ, KQ, KT, AT, AJ, AK, Qx weak kicker(very unlikely they'll fold but...)

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you list the hands you're really concerned about my opponents calling with here? I have a vague notion that you want to "protect" King-high, which I don't think is appropriate here, but I'd like to run the math out, assuming my opponents will sometimes fold for one, sometimes call one, sometimes call two, etc.

FWIW, K/images/graemlins/heart.gifX/images/graemlins/heart.gif isn't calling on this flop unless it's from a LAG. I don't see why you're so insistent that the players I call tight-passive and bad are actually going to call lots of bets here with hopeless holdings.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have stated that I think you give this table too much credit for knowing when to fold. Given your read of the table is different from mine we're sure to disagree with the list of holding that will peel one off for the turn. That being said here are the hands I want to fold based on the idea that if a bunch of them came along our equity goes down. I will try to only include reasonable limping hands though as we know from UTG they aren't all reasonable at this table so this range could include more hands...(If I knew just one of these hands would call I would agree with you that we want them to call.)

4/images/graemlins/heart.gif3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifT/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif, any pocket pair, A/images/graemlins/spade.gifxo, TJ, KJ, KQ, KT, AT, AJ, AK, Qx weak kicker(very unlikely they'll fold but...)

[/ QUOTE ]

If all of those hands call (and like I said, they are unlikely to), it lowers my equity by 10%, but increases the amount of money that goes into the pot substantially.

I understand the schooling effect that you're referring to, but on this specific flop, even the combination of all of these hands (exluding hands that are incredibly unlikely like AK, A/images/graemlins/spade.gifXo, etc.), I don't see them having enough of an effect that I want to face them with two (or very often, three) bets, especially when that may cause other negative effects like losing UTG+1.

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can you list the hands you're really concerned about my opponents calling with here? I have a vague notion that you want to "protect" King-high, which I don't think is appropriate here, but I'd like to run the math out, assuming my opponents will sometimes fold for one, sometimes call one, sometimes call two, etc.

FWIW, K/images/graemlins/heart.gifX/images/graemlins/heart.gif isn't calling on this flop unless it's from a LAG. I don't see why you're so insistent that the players I call tight-passive and bad are actually going to call lots of bets here with hopeless holdings.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have stated that I think you give this table too much credit for knowing when to fold. Given your read of the table is different from mine we're sure to disagree with the list of holding that will peel one off for the turn. That being said here are the hands I want to fold based on the idea that if a bunch of them came along our equity goes down. I will try to only include reasonable limping hands though as we know from UTG they aren't all reasonable at this table so this range could include more hands...(If I knew just one of these hands would call I would agree with you that we want them to call.)

4/images/graemlins/heart.gif3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifT/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gifJ/images/graemlins/heart.gif, any pocket pair, A/images/graemlins/spade.gifxo, TJ, KJ, KQ, KT, AT, AJ, AK, Qx weak kicker(very unlikely they'll fold but...)

[/ QUOTE ]

If all of those hands call (and like I said, they are unlikely to), it lowers my equity by 10%, but increases the amount of money that goes into the pot substantially.

[/ QUOTE ]
This I have to disagree with. My basic premise is that you are very likely to go to the turn with 8 additional SB if you raise based on the idea that at least 1 in 5 will call your raise. You may go to the turn with many more. If you only call and get a few overcalls you will probably bring 6SB additional to turn with you at most.

[ QUOTE ]

I understand the schooling effect that you're referring to, but on this specific flop, even the combination of all of these hands (exluding hands that are incredibly unlikely like AK, A/images/graemlins/spade.gifXo, etc.), I don't see them having enough of an effect that I want to face them with two (or very often, three) bets, especially when that may cause other negative effects like losing UTG+1.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why are we so worried about getting money form UTG+1 on the turn when he probably folds the turn UI anyways? Our best chance of getting money off of him is now when he's already commited to seeing the turn.

[GrunchCan]

[ QUOTE ]
Reads: I think MP2 would raise a Queen but would only cap with a 5 or better (Q5, 55).

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, MP2 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (8 SB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 5/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(8 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises</font>, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls, UTG+1 calls, Hero...

[/ QUOTE ]

PF: call, although I shamedly admit that I have been known to raise this here. Makes for great pots when they hit, like here.

Flop 1: call. I want as many opponents as possible. Whoever said something like "we have a flush draw and so I want everyone to fold" is missing something really really important in holdem.

Flop come-back-rounder: Call. UTG and UTG+1 seem to be the ones paying the equity on this pot, because they are either slightly ahead with trips or 2 pair, or way behind to the LAGs trips. In any case, unless the turn or river come a /images/graemlins/spade.gif and one of the UTGs go bonkers, I'm not worried about losing to them. I'm worried mostly about making them stop paying thier equity deficet by making them fold.

The LAG is another matter. From the OP's description, it sounds like he is a decent, albiet ABCish postflop player who happens to be just a little loose preflop. Nothing wrong with that - this guy is no donk. It seems like there are really only a few hands he is 2-betting here: a slightly ahead hand (like trips or 2 pair) or a flush draw. The question is, would he 2-bet a flush draw that's not to the nuts?

His ABCish nature tells me probably not. Entity has said nothing (AFAIK) to the effect that he is a postflop maniac. Indeed, he seems fairly solid postflop.

Therefore I call the back-rounder b/c I don't want to deal with getting capped by the LAG. 3-betting would not improve my position, it would not improve my equity, and it would not define my hand. Seems to serve no purpose at all.

[gopnik]

If the table was tighter i would fold, but with 5-6 people to the flop, I call.

[gopnik]

I's call hopping some LAG behind me will raise. If not, I am still ok.

[Entity]

Droolie,

I really think you're underestimating your opponents. When I say "tight-passive," I'm saying they're 14/6 guys who don't bet or raise much postflop.

Rob

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]
Droolie,

I really think you're underestimating your opponents. When I say "tight-passive," I'm saying they're 14/6 guys who don't bet or raise much postflop.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]


Be fair man. Does that sound like the table in your original description? The one that had 5-6 players seeing the flop and had 8 players seeing this flop? I believe you if you say most of the table was actually tight passive but you only called two players tight in the original description. There's been no mention of SB and BB so far and they are two of the guys who might tag along. From what you wrote (up until you called me out for not paying attention to your read) it seems reasonable to believe this table is quite typical of a party orgy.

[ QUOTE ]
Table has been running a bit loose, but nothing special. Usually 5 or 6 to the flop. MP2 is LAG (40/9) but can find a fold when faced with aggression. He's fairly readable and isn't all that tricky. UTG is a bit too loose and passive in general, but isn't terrible by most standards (25%VPIP, minimal PFR); I don't think he's positionally aware though. UTG+1 is very loose and selectively stupid/aggressive. The CO and Button are tight but seem to be pretty ABC and fairly bad postflop.


[/ QUOTE ]

[Entity]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Droolie,

I really think you're underestimating your opponents. When I say "tight-passive," I'm saying they're 14/6 guys who don't bet or raise much postflop.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]


Be fair man. Does that sound like the table in your original description? The one that had 5-6 players seeing the flop and had 8 players seeing this flop? I believe you if you say most of the table was actually tight passive but you only called two players tight in the original description. There's been no mention of SB and BB so far and they are two of the guys who might tag along. From what you wrote (up until you called me out for not paying attention to your read) it seems reasonable to believe this table is quite typical of a party orgy.

[ QUOTE ]
Table has been running a bit loose, but nothing special. Usually 5 or 6 to the flop. MP2 is LAG (40/9) but can find a fold when faced with aggression. He's fairly readable and isn't all that tricky. UTG is a bit too loose and passive in general, but isn't terrible by most standards (25%VPIP, minimal PFR); I don't think he's positionally aware though. UTG+1 is very loose and selectively stupid/aggressive. The CO and Button are tight but seem to be pretty ABC and fairly bad postflop.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, to be fair, I didn't describe it exactly. I did say it's been running "a bit" loose, and described two players who are playing lots of hands, and when coupled with the blinds (since we aren't seeing a lot of raised pots), it isn't hard for one or two late position players to tag along, making it 5 or 6 ways to the flop. I consider that a "bit" loose, but nothing special. 5 or 6 limpers + the blinds is something special.

All that said, I don't think anyone who didn't stand out to me will be calling two cold often on this flop. UTG+1 might, UTG would (since he bet, he's got a pair often here), and the LAG might, but might not. He's not a terrible player, just a little too loose and a little too aggressive. He certainly can find a fold, like I described in my post.

Rob

[droolie]

Coolio.

After all this discussion wouldn't you love to know what all the donks folded on the flop? (not that it would affect our opinion on how they hand should be played but...you know).

[droolie]

[ QUOTE ]

Flop 1: call. I want as many opponents as possible. Whoever said something like "we have a flush draw and so I want everyone to fold" is missing something really really important in holdem.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure who said that but I advocated for a raise stating that if I got folds that would make me happy. The theory being the pot will wind up being just as big if not bigger and we'll have a better chance of winning it against less competition.