I don't wanna raise... QJs UTG

[ode]

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif, J/images/graemlins/heart.gif. CO posts a blind of $2.
Hero calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP1 calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP3 calls, CO (poster) checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button raises</font>, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Hero calls, MP1 calls, MP3 calls, CO calls.

Flop: (11.50 SB) 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
Hero checks, MP1 checks, MP3 checks, CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls, MP1 folds, MP3 calls, CO calls.

Turn: (7.75 BB) 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
Hero checks, MP3 checks, CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls, MP3 calls, CO calls.

River: (11.75 BB) 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, MP3 folds, CO folds, Button calls.

Final Pot: 13.75 BB


Button is around 12% VPIP and 9% PFR...
would you take another line?

[damaniac]

Lead the flop, some of the people in the middle will call, hopefully the PFR will raise. Then you get to 3-bet. I think 3-betting is good there, at least one person should call 2 cold, which makes it about EV neutral, if more than one does, which is very very possible, you're making money. If not, maybe it'll clean up some pair outs (if you're not up against an overpair).

[Fat Nicky]

I think you played the flop the worst possible way. You need to either bet to pump this pot with your flush draw or check/raise the pre-flop raiser when he bets in LP to face the field with 2 bets protecting your overcard outs. I lean towards the check/raise route since the pot is already pretty big. There is also a slight chance that you will take down the pot UI on the turn with this play.

Comments?

[27offsooot]

bet/ 3-bet the flop.

[mtdoak]

Lead out the flop....

[ArturiusX]

Played to passivly. This pot should have been bigger.

[Mig]

you probably lost some bets too on the river, if you play passively flop/turn than bet when the flush hit... it makes it obvious that you got it and mid pair will 100% fold and not do a crying call...

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
you probably lost some bets too on the river, if you play passively flop/turn than bet when the flush hit... it makes it obvious that you got it and mid pair will 100% fold and not do a crying call...

[/ QUOTE ]

This goes both ways, I could see this river easily checking through the way the action panned out throughout the hand. I like betting here just to be on the safe side. If these players have middle pair or even top pair, there is a good possibility that they would call 1 bet, but check if given the opportunity.

[smizmiatch]

Fold preflop?
Bet out the flop, check-call the turn unless you think you can win the pot right there with a bet. Bet the river.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold preflop?


[/ QUOTE ]

nah, small suited broadways rule to limp in with UTG

[CallMeIshmael]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold preflop?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like folding the least of the 3 options.

[chesspain]

Preflop and river are fine.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop and river are fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed, what do you think is the best plan for the flop?

[sfer]

Checkraise.

[ode]

Yep.

Thought of check-raising the flop, but then noticed who was the PFR raiser and was quite sure I was against an overpair.

If I would've noticed that earlier, I would have just bet the flop...

And so the hand went.. blaah.

[jskills]

I don't mind the limp preflop. It's one of the few times I'd do it - although I'm sure there are many who disagree.

I'd lead at the flop here. Normally with a pre-flop raiser, you can easily check raise, but given his position, if it is checked to him and you check raise, you could lose everyone else.

I think the turn ans river are fine.

[thejameser]

C/R THE FLOP! MAXIMIZE THE POT W/4 SUIT ON FLOP AND A COUPLE OVERS.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
Normally with a pre-flop raiser, you can easily check raise, but given his position, if it is checked to him and you check raise, you could lose everyone else.


[/ QUOTE ]

you don't think the pot is big enough where we should protect our Q and J outs?

[smizmiatch]

Slight hijack/easy question (I hope): If you can limp with QJs from EP, does that mean you should limp preflop with any suited broadway from any position?

[purnell]

With a poster, I'm raising preflop, bet/raising the flop, and my turn and river play will depend on the action and the board.

[thejameser]

[ QUOTE ]
Slight hijack/easy question (I hope): If you can limp with QJs from EP, does that mean you should limp preflop with any suited broadway from any position?

[/ QUOTE ]

IT DEPENDS ON THE GAME MY FRIEND; I WOULD SAY THE LATER THE POSITION, DEPENDING ON OPPONENTS(I PLAY ALMOST ALL LIVE SO IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE NET) BUT LATER POSITION WITH WEAK OPPONENTS I MAY RAISE JUST TO CHANGE SPEEDS OR IF I FEEL I AM LEGITIMATELY AHEAD. THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES IN POKER, HOWEVER. SHOULD YOU LIMP EVERY TIME WITH ANY SUITED BROADWAY? DEPENDS ON THE GAME, BUT VARIANCE TO A REASONABLE DEGREE, WILL HELP.

[gvibes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Slight hijack/easy question (I hope): If you can limp with QJs from EP, does that mean you should limp preflop with any suited broadway from any position?

[/ QUOTE ]

IT DEPENDS ON THE GAME MY FRIEND; I WOULD SAY THE LATER THE POSITION, DEPENDING ON OPPONENTS(I PLAY ALMOST ALL LIVE SO IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE NET) BUT LATER POSITION WITH WEAK OPPONENTS I MAY RAISE JUST TO CHANGE SPEEDS OR IF I FEEL I AM LEGITIMATELY AHEAD. THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES IN POKER, HOWEVER. SHOULD YOU LIMP EVERY TIME WITH ANY SUITED BROADWAY? DEPENDS ON THE GAME, BUT VARIANCE TO A REASONABLE DEGREE, WILL HELP.

[/ QUOTE ]


WHY ARE YOU SCREAMING AT ME????????!!!!!!!!!111111?!!?!

[NickRegino]

i definately would have check/raised this flop

[meep_42]

Bet the flop.

nh.

-d

[J.R.]

no, but u shoudln't be folding them (generally speaking)

raising is awesome stuff

[NickRegino]

atually wait, i take what i said back, check raising the flop would most likely knock out those other callers in between you and the button. I probablyt would have lead out and maybe got some callers button most likely would have raised raised and you might be able to 3-bet here.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
Lead the flop, some of the people in the middle will call, hopefully the PFR will raise. Then you get to 3-bet. I think 3-betting is good there, at least one person should call 2 cold, which makes it about EV neutral, if more than one does, which is very very possible, you're making money. If not, maybe it'll clean up some pair outs (if you're not up against an overpair).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
Lead the flop,...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.


[ QUOTE ]
...some of the people in the middle will call, hopefully the PFR will raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, I hate any plan where the reasoning includes the word "hopefully."

[otnemem]

I run the ole' stop and go here. I think it's the best way to trap a lot of bets and confuse the [censored] out of people. Lead the flop, get some calls in the middle, and hopefully a raise by the original raiser. Call the raise, as will the rest of the field. I lead the turn as long as it's not an ace or king, hope to trap a few more drawing overs bets. 2-4 on Party you are GUARANTEED to get value from these people calling another bet. If there's a raise from the original raiser, I just call again. Bet out the river heart and you'll probably still get a few calls. This might be flawed logic, but from what I observe in Party 2-4, this is the most efficient way to draw maximum value from call stations.

[damaniac]

So was it just the word choice or the thinking that's a problem? I could have said "probably" or "often". I suppose the times he doesn't raise he has something like AK, in which case he may sometimes check it through against a large field (player dependent I guess), which is really bad for us. So when he doesn't raise, usually we're still happy with our plan because there's a decent chance it gets checked through. When he raises, he usually has an overpair, but we're getting more value by trapping everyone with our flush draw.

So the point is, 2+2 is more fun than studying.

[Fat Nicky]

i am not saying you are wrong, but can someone please give me a reason why betting the flop is superior than check/raising the flop?

[sthief09]

if there was a book on betting flush draws for value, this hand and this flop would be on the cover

[damaniac]

Betting obviously pumps the pot for our draw. You know this, and your question is basically whether we should protect/clean-up outs or pump the draw.

If the raiser has on overpair, he will of course oblige us and bet when checked to. If he does have an overpair, however, there's little point in cleaning up our outs since spiking a Q/J won't win us the pot (well, if he has TT/JJ then it can, but you get my point, most of his overpairs will have those cards crushed). If he doesn't, then cleaning outs is all well and good. However, I don't know how often he'll bet just overs into 4 other opponents. The flop is raggedy, though, so I'm re-evaluating this idea a bit.

I don't know if there's any sort of math we can do to determine when protection and when pumping is more profitable, but I still am afraid check-raising will be more apt to be "protecting" when we are behind an overpair and thus put ourselves in a worse situation.

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
i am not saying you are wrong, but can someone please give me a reason why betting the flop is superior than check/raising the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

Reason: Your position relative to the pre-flop raiser.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Slight hijack/easy question (I hope): If you can limp with QJs from EP, does that mean you should limp preflop with any suited broadway from any position?

[/ QUOTE ]

IT DEPENDS ON THE GAME MY FRIEND; I WOULD SAY THE LATER THE POSITION, DEPENDING ON OPPONENTS(I PLAY ALMOST ALL LIVE SO IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE NET) BUT LATER POSITION WITH WEAK OPPONENTS I MAY RAISE JUST TO CHANGE SPEEDS OR IF I FEEL I AM LEGITIMATELY AHEAD. THERE ARE NO ABSOLUTES IN POKER, HOWEVER. SHOULD YOU LIMP EVERY TIME WITH ANY SUITED BROADWAY? DEPENDS ON THE GAME, BUT VARIANCE TO A REASONABLE DEGREE, WILL HELP.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-11/505907/caps.jpg

[undathesea]

The only reason I can come up with is that you probably lose customers being to the left of the bettor. An overcall here keeps him pumping up the pot while a raise will help to isolate him... assuming MP3 and CO want to drop.

I still feel like the cr is the right line here. Raising drops you at worst one small bet but potentially earns you another 3... possibly more if button feels like reraising. Makes it easier to check/call the turn and pump the river when your flush comes in.

[Fat Nicky]

[ QUOTE ]
and your question is basically whether we should protect/clean-up outs or pump the draw.


[/ QUOTE ]

Also, if the pre-flop raiser has just overcards, we can take this pot down unimproved on the turn. The downside of this hope is that we need a parlay of several things to happen for this to occur.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
I run the ole' stop and go here. I think it's the best way to trap a lot of bets and confuse the [censored] out of people. Lead the flop, get some calls in the middle, and hopefully a raise by the original raiser. Call the raise, as will the rest of the field. I lead the turn as long as it's not an ace or king, hope to trap a few more drawing overs bets. 2-4 on Party you are GUARANTEED to get value from these people calling another bet. If there's a raise from the original raiser, I just call again. Bet out the river heart and you'll probably still get a few calls. This might be flawed logic, but from what I observe in Party 2-4, this is the most efficient way to draw maximum value from call stations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that leading the turn would be wrong here.

[feelixthegreek]

I there any merit to betting out on the flop, but merely calling a raise? I don't like the idea of being forced to lead the turn when I whiff on the flush draw, especially if I don't get it heads up. I could end up paying too much on the turn if rasied again. Also, I don't want to check the turn beacuae that would advertise my hand. If I merely the call the raise on the flop, though, it will merely look like I'm cowering to an overpair and not necessarily drawing to hearts.

I'm thinking out loud here, or should I say being honest about how I'd play the hand. Please tell me the ways that I am wrong.

[undathesea]

[ QUOTE ]
I run the ole' stop and go here. I think it's the best way to trap a lot of bets and confuse the [censored] out of people. Lead the flop, get some calls in the middle, and hopefully a raise by the original raiser. Call the raise, as will the rest of the field. I lead the turn as long as it's not an ace or king, hope to trap a few more drawing overs bets. 2-4 on Party you are GUARANTEED to get value from these people calling another bet. If there's a raise from the original raiser, I just call again. Bet out the river heart and you'll probably still get a few calls. This might be flawed logic, but from what I observe in Party 2-4, this is the most efficient way to draw maximum value from call stations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like everything except for leading the turn. Check/call turn. Lead out on the river.

[cold_cash]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that leading the turn would be wrong here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I aqree.

I'm torn on the flop action though. I can see reasons for both betting and check-raising. I admit I would have most likely bet right out with the hopes of stuffing more bets in.

On the other hand, the pot's pretty big and a check-raise might maximize our chances.

[cold_cash]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the idea of being forced to lead the turn when I whiff on the flush draw, especially if I don't get it heads up.

[/ QUOTE ]

So then don't. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[damaniac]

This is why being in position rules and being out of position sucks. Three-betting is generally better because as long as some of the initial callers call our 3-bet, we're getting value. This value probably offsets those times when we "give away our hand" by checking the turn. As it is, some less intelligent opponents will be confused by our 3-bet/check and check behind giving us a free card. Even when we give away our hand, we will often get paid off because, you know, it's just 1 more bet and the pot is so huge. And no, don't lead the turn UI unless you are HU and you think this particular opponent will fold a reasonable amount of the time.

[otnemem]

I don't like three-betting preflop because you run the risk of driving out callers between you and the original raiser. I know it's not likely on Party 2-4, but if someone called there with a weak pair, they might think better and muck. Then you lose value if your draw comes through. I think my thinking on flush draws is way off, because I don't mind wasting a few bets if I miss. I'm more concerned with setting up the biggest possible paydirt if it connects.

[chief444]

I can give you a reason why I like a check/raise.

Lets say on average with the check/raise you win the pot ~ 8% more (equivalent to "cleaning up" 1-1.5 outs). It will probably increase you're chance of showing down the best hand by 5-6% or so I'm estimating but it will also give you a chance to win unimproved on the turn at times. We'll assume the pot size stays the same (since you'll likely lose callers but each player including yourself is putting in more bets) and if you play this for the flush draw only your equity is ~ 40% (about the equivalent of 10-11 outs including a few for the overs and not quite a full 9 for the flush).

Expectation not check/raising: .40*7.75BB = 3.1 BB's
Expectation check/raising: .48*7.75 = 3.72 BB's

3.72-3.1 = .62 BB's &gt; 1 SB extra you just paid.

If you still get a bunch of coldcallers that's not necesarily bad.

Now say if you bet out and it gets raised and you end up getting in a few extra SB's in there. We'll still say the 40% equity is good although it probably isn't really when you get raised but maybe close and I ignored the chance of a 3-bet for when we check/raise so we'll leave the 40 alone here:

Expectation bet to pump draw: .40*9.25 = 3.7 BB's

Rough assumptions but it looks to me like betting is close to check/raising and I think either is better than the line hero took but I think if anything's underestimated in my quick math here it's the chance of winning the pot unimproved with no showdown by check/raising.

[feelixthegreek]

For the record, I address the checking option in the very next sentence. Give me some credit.

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Rough assumptions but it looks to me like betting is close to check/raising and I think either is better than the line hero took

[/ QUOTE ]
This is the crux of the hand. There are two valid ways to play this hand, neither of which the OP took. Without spending much time on your math, I would be surprised if it's not pretty accurate and the EV between C/R and betting out is about equal.

So really it comes down to personal style: Are you more comfortable c/ring and trying to win the pot UI with outs if people stay in, or would you rather build a pot and hope you make your draw?

[cold_cash]

[ QUOTE ]
For the record, I address the checking option in the very next sentence. Give me some credit.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got it.

All I'm saying is that the pot's big and I have a lot of opponents. I'm not too concerned with deception.

Also, most of those opponents won't have a clue/care what you have no matter how you play it.

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
Slight hijack/easy question (I hope): If you can limp with QJs from EP, does that mean you should limp preflop with any suited broadway from any position?

[/ QUOTE ]

Personally, I prefer open raising with KQs and KJs from any position. In early postion, QJs is a limp for me usually.

[jskills]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Normally with a pre-flop raiser, you can easily check raise, but given his position, if it is checked to him and you check raise, you could lose everyone else.


[/ QUOTE ]

you don't think the pot is big enough where we should protect our Q and J outs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting thought. Obviously, I hadn't considered that. Given the preflop raiser, our Q or J outs could be non-outs though (vs. AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AQ, and AJ) - we're really looking at AK or a pocket pair TT on down to be happy about Q or J outs right?

I guess when the 4 flush hits on the flop, I'd like to see as many people putting as much money in the pot as possible, because I'm seeing the flush as the best way to win. Am I flawed in my thinking here?

[Bob T.]

I think possibly is a better word than hopefully, probably or maybe in this context.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I think possibly is a better word than hopefully, probably or maybe in this context.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think "likely" is the most accurate.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]

However, I hate any plan where the reasoning includes the word "hopefully."

[/ QUOTE ]

I just got bet into on the flop after raising AA on the button. I am going to raise, because "hopefully" I have the best hand.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

However, I hate any plan where the reasoning includes the word "hopefully."

[/ QUOTE ]

I just got bet into on the flop after raising AA on the button. I am going to raise, because "hopefully" I have the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

What I should have said is "I hate any plan where the reasoning includes the word 'hopefully' in regards to the potential actions of another player."

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
So really it comes down to personal style: Are you more comfortable c/ring and trying to win the pot UI with outs if people stay in, or would you rather build a pot and hope you make your draw?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it comes down to the size of the pot. I want to maximize my chances of winning a 6.5 BB pot. If everyone limped I would prefer to bet into the field and pump away.