Monstrous pot with Aces

[thabadguy]

5-5 nl
Hero is CO with $15k with Ah As viewed as LAG.
Villain is Button with $9k also a LAG IMO.
I think we're both viewed as maniacal overbetters.
Ive caught him a few times trying to pull off a Gigantic bluff, and so has he,we played many big pots together with neither having much. For those who know the Foxwoods game, the villain is John, the attorney.
2 limpers to me, I raise to $50...my standard raise, means nothing to anybody.
Villain calls, everyone else folds
Flop is 6 2 8r
I bet $200.
He raises to $1k, which i can understand as I lead out and bet almost any flop where im the raiser. I raise to $3k. He pushes. My action?

Results in white below.
<font color="white"> I called like an idiot, he showed me a set of 6's .I caught an Ace on the river and won.
The only reason I called his push, is because He has tried big bluffs before with nothing and so have I. The way I looked at it was, "he's thinking im trying to bluff him outta this pot, so i am ahead."
</font>

[AZK]

Every post from foxwoods, it sounds like people have 10k min. at that table. Is this really standard for a friggin 5-5 NL game. Unless your 5 is short for 50.

[jtr]

I should admit to no experience at these stakes, but still: when he raises your flop bet strongly, surely we are now in way-ahead-or-way-behind mode? I agree that he could well be putting you on an auto-flop bet and seeking to punish you for it, but why re-raise him here? You're either going to lose him right there or get into serious trouble, I would have thought.

Maybe I am a wuss, but I think I would have (at most!) called down reasonable-sized bets after he raised the flop bet. Until improving on the river of course.

Just an aside: I don't know this game but I have played a little at Foxwoods. How did your opponent take this river suckout? Was there a lot of shouting? Did security need to be called?

[thabadguy]

Well thanks for telling every1 the results, but no, he did not take it badly, he was just like...i gotta go get more money.
When he comes back, he says...Maybe ull miss ur 2 outers one of these times, as a joke, to which i replied.. u hit ur two outer, and then i hit mine, sounds fair to me.

[thabadguy]

It is standard for THAT table. 3-4k is typically short stack. I think theres a capped buy in AC cuz of some NJ gaming commission regulation., but no such things at foxwoods.

[-Skeme-]

$15,000 stack for $5/$5 NL. Get the [censored] out.

[Yeti]

[ QUOTE ]
I called like an idiot, he showed me a set of 6's

[/ QUOTE ]

This is bad.

[ QUOTE ]
When he comes back, he says...Maybe ull miss ur 2 outers one of these times, as a joke, to which i replied.. u hit ur two outer, and then i hit mine, sounds fair to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is silly.

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
5-5 nl
Hero is CO with $15k with Ah As viewed as LAG.
Villain is Button with $9k also a LAG IMO.


Flop is 6 2 8r
I bet $200.
He raises to $1k, which i can understand as I lead out and bet almost any flop where im the raiser. I raise to $3k. He pushes. My action?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't go around calling a 600bb bet with just aces*, from a player who knows what he's about.

If you're going to play such huge stacks relative to the blinds, you've got to be able to get away from strong hands.

But you don't need us to tell you it was a very poor call, do you? You know it already.


*postflop

[thabadguy]

I am still not certain it was a terrible call, given my image and his image. We've played a huge pot before where I had kings and he reraised me 3 times preflop and kept betting big on an AQJ rag rag rainbow board(not in that order), and when i called his push in the end he mucked as soon I answered yes to the question "u got a pair".
He wouldnt be surprised if i was bluffing him out of the pot and tried to bluff me back.
Thats what i thought and called. We are both very capable of pulling such a move with monkey crap.Against any sane player, i dont think I would ever call this.

[creedofhubris]

[ QUOTE ]
I am still not certain it was a terrible call, given my image and his image. We've played a huge pot before where I had kings and he reraised me 3 times preflop and kept betting big on an AQJ rag rag rainbow board(not in that order), and when i called his push in the end he mucked as soon I answered yes to the question "u got a pair".
He wouldnt be surprised if i was bluffing him out of the pot and tried to bluff me back.
Thats what i thought and called. We are both very capable of pulling such a move with monkey crap.Against any sane player, i dont think I would ever call this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against any normal opponent you lose.

It sounds like you're playing mind games with this guy, and if every hand you play agaisnt him is that read-dependent then you just need to trust your read and not our advice; we don't know this dude, and you do.

[thabadguy]

Does anyone other than me think that this sorta play is extremely profitable, although it is most definitely extremely high variance?

[thabadguy]

Also would any1 else call this against a hyper maniac LAG?

[arod15]

Its definitly not an extremely profitable play. If your read suggested he was Bluffing than i agree with the call, i mean its hard to see a set. But long hall when people shoot bullets at you less LAGS a little more pas sives its an automatic fold. Im not saying your right or wrong only you can answer that. The questiin is when he reraised you did you REALLY believe you were ahead or were you HOPING it was a bluff. THe board can make anyone look brilliant. But you have to answer the question yourself and only you truly know if you were sort of hopong or picked up something, also if you did pick up something you need to practice your reading ability and see where you went wrong, also you need to understand you got lucky and thats rare. One final note looks like im going to Foxwoods sounds like a ton of action...

[thabadguy]

I was hoping he was bluffing, and you are absolutely correct, I need to practice my reading skills.
But I still wanna know if any1 who has called a massive bluff with naked kings and won against such a player, would play this hand like i did.

[aggie]

I definitely would not charactorize John the Lawyer as a hyper maniac LAG...He is definitely one of the best players in this game. And i don't think there is any chance you have him beat when he moves all in. John almost certainly has top two or a set.

there is a big difference between a hand that he keeps betting, you think long and hard, and call....And then he continues to bluff (i remeber this hand with the KK by the way...Nice calls!)....

Anyway, if you are aggressive, john will stop bluffing. When he bets 1k and you raise to 3k john is not going in without a very big hand (even against you)....Why not just call the 1k if you feel you are ahead? Let him keep bluffing.

Just my $0.02.....i could be wrong

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]
One final note looks like im going to Foxwoods sounds like a ton of action...

[/ QUOTE ]

The game varies anywhere from very good to very bad....There is almost always a lot of money on the table. I would definitely reccomend the weekend.

[arod15]

I live and die by my reads. If i think i have you beat or thaink i can make you fold ill go all in so yest i would do it.

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]
But I still wanna know if any1 who has called a massive bluff with naked kings and won against such a player, would play this hand like i did.

[/ QUOTE ]

If i was 100% sure John was bluffing on the flop, i would call the 1K and let him continue bluffing. The naked kings hand was a much different situation and it was for quite a bit less money (i think he bet like 2k on the river).

[thabadguy]

[ QUOTE ]
I live and die by my reads. If i think i have you beat or thaink i can make you fold ill go all in so yest i would do it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I concur.

[thabadguy]

You're right, calling was probably the better play. Woulda been interesting when the ace hit on the river.

[jtr]

[ QUOTE ]
Well thanks for telling every1 the results...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, stupid of me. Glad you got some good feedback regardless.

[radioheadfan]

Given your history with this player, I like the flop reraise, and I like the call of his push. Hope you have a bankroll of at least $600K if you're gonna play against this guy like this.

And nice suckout. How much did you tip the dealer?

[aggie]

[ QUOTE ]
Given your history with this player, I like the flop reraise, and I like the call of his push.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respect your opinion....but why?

[kagame]

how can you contradict aggie's well thought out analysis with no supporting arguments?

if hes bluffing, allow him to continue

once you reraise huge he knows youre strong, arent thinking about folding and are trying to protect your hand, and thus will not be bluffing you most of the time

you cant just say "you have history together"

[radioheadfan]

OK. So villian is very capable of making moves against hero. Hero is in his eyes on a very wide range here preflop. So he's calling hero with a wide range as well given his position. So we've established a wide range of hands for both players.

Flop comes down with three small cards. Hero makes what looks like a standard continuation bet. Villian raises in position to take down the pot, b/c he knows villian missed that flop a good percentage of the time. Now hero has a hand, so he has a couple of options, call or raise. The optimal move all depends on what hero thinks villian has. So we'll set up a couple of cases.

Let's suppose villian is on a pure bluff. Assuming this is the case, then are we sure he's gonna keep bluffing at it when we call? By calling villian has to give hero credit for a hand, or at the very least an OESD. If villian is very capable of firing multiple barrels with air, then calling here is correct when hero judges villian to be on complete air. When villian will not fire again on pure air, after seeing resistance from hero, he may shut down, and we may give him a chance to hit a gutshot or OESD straight draw which we'll have to payoff on the turn and or river since there's no way for hero to give him credit for a monster - given his propensity to bluff.

Now say villian has something, but it's behind hero. Say he has a pair w/ backdoor straight possibilities, something like T8s, maybe even with a backdoor flush draw. Now when villian hits two pair on the turn or some weird backdoor draw on the river, hero HAS to pay off a pretty big bet when he plays it passively by calling the flop raise. Since he showed no aggression besides for the PF raise and flop continuation bet, villian is just as likely to bluffing as he is to be betting a hand better than hero on the turn or river.

So the point I'm trying to make is that when hero smooth calls the flop, he's going to have to pay off villian when he catches something to beat hero. I'm arguing that these bets will be much larger when villian has hero beat than when villian is on pure air. And hero will have no choice other than to call these oversized bets when behind b/c villian is very capable of making big bluffs and betting weak hands.

We also have to consider the texture of the board. 682r flop has two OESD straight draws the villian could have. Now when a 4, 5, 9 or T falls on the turn, it could look really innocent, but villian will smoke us when he hits that draw (the money is too damn deep to let him take a look at a cheap turn when he has either of these OESDs).

When villian is simply paired up somewhere on the board, we have no way to tell when he trips it up or his two pairs. We have to pay that off. Again, given his bluff frequency, it's hard to tell the bluffs from the hands that beat us in the absense of physical tells.

Hero is out of position. So when he calls the flop bet, I assume we plan to check the turn. When villian doesn't improve on the turn giving him a free card on the river is a disaster with the money this deep, him having between 5 and 8 outs, and hero not being able to tell which cards beat him.

So given the flop bet and raise, I think hero has to charge villian further to continue on, since hero suspects he is ahead. So how could villian interpret hero's raise? He could very well believe that hero is putting him on a steal and restealing, if that's the case, his play is to push. Or could believe that hero has a strong hand he is ahead of and try to get him all in. Against a player who is a known bluffer/rebluffer, hero is in a tough situation after villian pushes. Depending on hero's read I think he could call or fold.

But smooth-calling and letting villian dictate the action (checking behind on turn or not) and dictating the bet sizes with these huge stacks is a big mistake since I believe a good player would bet more when ahead then when behind, and if hero smooth calls the flop he pretty much has to call any reasonable bet this guy makes on the turn and river.

Also, isn't hero giving away more or less the same information by calling the flop raise than by reraising? (Either way he's saying he has something and won't go away easily)

This is a very complicated hand. With hero being out of position, with a good but vulernerable hand, against a guy who is very capable of big bluffs, with VERY deep money, when we don't know what cards we don't want to see on the turn or river. There are no easy answers here, but I am decidedly AGAINST smooth calling the flop and checking to villian on the turn. I'm not sure what the best line may be, but hopefully I've made clear why I don't like this line.

[technologic]

1800 bb in on the flop with one pair.

nuff said.

[creedofhubris]

Is this profitable?

On the flop, you had an EV of .089.

Leaving aside the shenanigans that get you to your 3K bet, which may or may not be justified, let's just look at the next bet, where he goes all-in for 6000 more. This is where it is clear to me and most of the other posters that you are beat and need to fold. Anyway, you are asked to put in $6000 to win $12000.

Your EV for the final pot is .089 (18000) = $1602.

So on average you lose about $4400 making that call.

Profitable? No!

[radioheadfan]

[ QUOTE ]
1800 bb in on the flop with one pair.

nuff said.

[/ QUOTE ]

These sorts of replies are unacceptable.

As an aside, hero can certainly find a fold after villian's push, I do see a call being correct here some fraction of the time though given this opponent and their history.

I want to restate one firm belief about the hand: hero needs to reraise on the flop. Given that villian pushed after hero's reraise, he can certainly find a fold, and perhaps it should be advocated - but it is certainly not as clear cut as "I refuse to play big pots with one pair" if you want to optimize your EV in a poker game. But I think the hero's reraise is essential on the flop.

This was aggie's suggestion and is the most interesting part of the hand. Whether hero makes the big call on the flop or not has alot to do with his feeling and physical read of villian. We cannot do that for him.

And who the hell said there was anything wrong with playing a 1800BB pot with one pair? Typically, yes, you're getting killed when you do this, but there may be a right time for anything at a no limit table.

The above quote is dispicable in a forum which seeks to talk about the strategy behind a hand.

"Hmm, let me just state something that I've heard over and over again - don't play a big pot with one pair - it must be true in every situation!" Wrong.

[radioheadfan]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this profitable?

On the flop, you had an EV of .089.

Leaving aside the shenanigans that get you to your 3K bet, which may or may not be justified, let's just look at the next bet, where he goes all-in for 6000 more. This is where it is clear to me and most of the other posters that you are beat and need to fold. Anyway, you are asked to put in $6000 to win $12000.

Your EV for the final pot is .089 (18000) = $1602.

So on average you lose about $4400 making that call.

Profitable? No!

[/ QUOTE ]

A fold to the villian's flop push is clearly reasonable. There may be a time to call here, but I can certainly live with folding every single time here with a pair of aces.

I think the more interesting part of the hand is hero's plan of action after he gets raised on the flop. I personally agree that the best play in the spot is to reraise to about 3K like he did.

Isn't the flop action after villian raises hero the most interesting part?

The all in call is certainly interesting but hero's plan of action after he gets raised to 1K is unambiguously more interesting and difficult in my opinion.

[ggbman]

Sorry man but this is disgusting. The flop is 168 rainbow, he's not pushing a draw! He also limped and didnt re-raise so he doesnt have a big pair. Muck to the big flop raise.

[radioheadfan]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry man but this is disgusting. The flop is 168 rainbow, he's not pushing a draw! He also limped and didnt re-raise so he doesnt have a big pair. Muck to the big flop raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

He can't be pushing a draw? He can't have a big pair b/c he didn't reraise preflop? He can't be bluff-raising the flop?

Wow. You have alot to learn.

[technologic]

[ QUOTE ]

The above quote is dispicable in a forum which seeks to talk about the strategy behind a hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm sorry. against people who are sane, or don't like losing massive quantities of money, and sober this is a terrible play.

it's clear that hero didn't have a distinct plan behind his second reraise to 3k. he called because he just "instinctively thought villain was on a bluff."

how is it clear cut that hero should raise this hand?

if villain has KK/QQ etc. then calling down would be a better strategy. villain will certainly rethink his position when he is raised to 3 thousand. almost no hands will give action when you're ahead, cause villain has GOT to credit hero for a monster hand. if villain does not credit hero for such a hand, then there will definitely be better spots where hero will have a bushwacking hand to destroy villain with. i understand that this is not a tournament, but there is just not enough information in this hand to just chip spew like this.

when you're overbetting the pot, you better have either have monster or absolute garbage. hero first bets 200, into 100 pot, then villain raises to 1000, making the bet 800 into a 500 pot. by overbetting like this, hero will have no idea what he's getting into while the pot grows exponentially.

it is a TERRIBLE idea to get into a huge pot with someone who is willing to back their stack with a wide range of hands when you don't have a monster yourself. when you overbet, you generally want to have either garbage, so you don't get committed with huge stacks.

if villain is on a bluff, he's risking 8 thousand to win around 4 thousand. this seems a TAD bit ridiculous. there is no reason hero should call after this move.

getting all in on one pair hands is bad strategy usually even with 100x bb stacks. with 1800x bb, only rarely, with x-ray vision seeing through their cards, or if i see my villain foaming at the mouth, will my stack be in there.

[thabadguy]

I do, and $25.

[The Ocho]

good grief. did you really call?

[Rotating Rabbit]

Okay, please tell me the line villian would have to have taken for you to fold?

If the answer is as I suspect, fold preflop. Stubborn + Aces + 3000bb (!!!) = -EV

Next time you get AA, fold preflop, just to practice folding it.

(I'm only half joking)

[Marnixvdb]

I dont like your reraise much either, but at least it gave you information that you were most likely beat.

The pot is so small on the flop and still he backs his hand with his stack after you 3bet him. What he is putting at stake with his push is huge in relation to what was there to win on the table when he first raised. I find it hard to see him doing this on a pure bluff often.

If he is a good LAG AND capable of making a (semi-)bluff in that spot, he will do it rarely, making a case for a call very thin imo.

Marnix

[BobboFitos]

its really not that tough to fold an overpair postflop.

online it's a click away.

live it's a short rotation of your wrist.