couple questions...

[paperchamp]

1. Fold the turn?

2. Ignoring whether or not I should have folded the turn, was my call on the river okay?

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ BB (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

MP3 ($25)
CO ($48.75)
Button ($61.15)
Hero ($64.4)
BB ($14.25)
UTG ($65.06)
UTG+1 ($31.88)
UTG+2 ($28.5)
MP1 ($55.8)
MP2 ($151.02)

Preflop: Hero is SB with T/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. MP3 posts a blind of $0.5. Hero posts a blind of $0.25.
UTG calls $0.50, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG+2 calls $0.50, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises to $2</font>, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Hero (poster) calls $1.75, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG calls $1.50, UTG+2 folds.

Flop: ($7.50) 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $5</font>, UTG calls $5, MP2 folds.

Turn: ($17.50) 3/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $10</font>, <font color="#CC3333">UTG raises to $20</font>, Hero calls $10.

River: ($57.50) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets $17</font>, Hero calls $17.

Final Pot: $91.50

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">
Hero has Tc Td (two pair, tens and twos).
UTG has 9h 9c (full house, nines full of twos).
Outcome: UTG wins $91.50. </font>

[-Skeme-]

I doubt I fold the river. I get stubborn, though. Depends on the opponent, really.

[xorbie]

I think checking this turn is good, unless you think he's calling your flop bet with just overcards. It lets him try to bluff you with weaker hands (if he called to bluff or something), and lets him think you have very little in case he has a good hand, so he might bet it smaller to ensure you call.

[paperchamp]

Anyone else?

[-Skeme-]

I don't really like checking the turn. At this point I would say you're ahead and giving a free card can't be good. I think you'll get a fold on the turn more often than not. There's 16 overcards that you don't like. If he has you crushed, he'll let you know. If he calls, fine. Check-call a smallish bet on the river. Maybe more depending on read. Maybe fold depending on read. I don't know, but I'd rather bet the turn and check the river. Just my .02.

[FreakDaddy]

1) Yes, yes and yes
2) Bet vs pot size is enough to be profitable in most situations, but be wary of an opponent who mini-raises the turn and THEN gives you correct pot odds to call. Those things considered it's a fold.

P.S. don't post results.

[DavidC]

Helps to know a little about the villain.

You're probably screwwed once he comes alive on the turn. He was probably trying to get the raiser to raise you with an overpair. He probably has a set, as the only drawing hand that he could realistically pull to would be 87, and that's tough, given that the PFR may raise the flop.

He shows a lot of strength by calling, unless he's a bad player.

His river bet is really really low. Interesting eye-opener for me in regards to action at the NLHE $100 level. I normally play the NLHE $25 on party.

I haven't looked at the results yet, but I figure you're up against a set. This is based on the action (strength on the flop and selling on the turn and river) and the probability that people post hands they lose. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
I think checking this turn is good, unless you think he's calling your flop bet with just overcards. It lets him try to bluff you with weaker hands (if he called to bluff or something), and lets him think you have very little in case he has a good hand, so he might bet it smaller to ensure you call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a good plan.

If he bets the turn, what bet size are you calling? After that, if he bets the river, what bet size are you calling?

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]

P.S. don't post results.

[/ QUOTE ]

[paperchamp]

Sorry, thought posting results in white was good enough, will not post results in future posts.

[kurto]

Hey, I like the results.

Matter of fact, people should be wanting to know because there's two important things on any post-
What is the correct play based on pot odds
and determining reads (and how that changes your play)

One way to determine a read: practice.

So everytime we read a hand, and the narrator gives us a description of the villain, we can all attempt to make reads. And if we're wrong, we should work through the hand again from the villains point of view. That's how we learn to read better.

Regarding this hand, I though villain on a set.

Its useful to determine if your reads are spot on.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey, I like the results.

Matter of fact, people should be wanting to know because there's two important things on any post-
What is the correct play based on pot odds
and determining reads (and how that changes your play)


[/ QUOTE ]

When determining your correct play based on pot odds, you do so with your equity against a given range of hands, depending on what type of hands you put him on. Not based on his actual hand.

You use the information in a showdown for thinking in future hands. These should be included at the top of future posts for hands against the same opponent.

However, one thing (and as far as I can tell, only one thing) is worth giving the results:

Learning about what a typical opponent at a given level with given PT stats will do (over a sufficiently large sample size).

People can get this same experience by playing a lot of hands and watching showdowns.

[ QUOTE ]

One way to determine a read: practice.

So everytime we read a hand, and the narrator gives us a description of the villain, we can all attempt to make reads. And if we're wrong, we should work through the hand again from the villains point of view. That's how we learn to read better.



[/ QUOTE ]

Good idea, but posting results after a day or so would be a better idea than putting it in the original post.

Sometimes, when analysing the villain's play, I will post the hand from his perspective, blanking out my own cards and putting him as the hero. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[paperchamp]

[ QUOTE ]
Sometimes, when analysing the villain's play, I will post the hand from his perspective, blanking out my own cards and putting him as the hero. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, I like that idea. Might use that in the future.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
Learning about what a typical opponent at a given level with given PT stats will do (over a sufficiently large sample size).

People can get this same experience by playing a lot of hands and watching showdowns.


[/ QUOTE ]

For the most part, I agree. Except that a lot of key hands, we don't get to see the showdown. I think the more hands you can see (as you say, at different levels), the more you know. (to quote NBC)

On another note, I also think its fun. I find the whole thing interesting. The debate about how a hand should play, the reads AND the results.

regarding the 'range of hands'... I think where there's often the biggest disagreements on these forums is the debate about exactly which range of hands people would play a certain way. Seeing the results gives us a semi-regular data field to draw from.

Mostly, I just think its fun! /images/graemlins/smile.gif I'm not big on delayed gratification. Once I've heard the problem and thought it through, I'm just curious to know how it turned out. Not seeing the results is like telling a story (which, any good poker hand IS a story) and not hearing how it ends.

This is selfish of me, but I want the results just to satisfy my curiousity. The whited out results seems to satisfy everyone.

Note: I always make my analysis before I look at the results. I think as long as people think through the problem BEFORE they look at the results, then they can avoid the mistake of being results oriented.

[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
Sometimes, when analysing the villain's play, I will post the hand from his perspective, blanking out my own cards and putting him as the hero.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could have fun with that. That is, if you post hands by the fishiest player who sucks out on someone, and pretend it was you.

Like post a hand where you (the villain) call a raise with 8J suited, the board flops AK4 with one of your suit... you call a pot sized bet on the flop. Then you get runner runner 8s and win with a set of 8s against the other guys AK.

Then ask for comments. It would probably be very different feedback then you normally get.

[FreakDaddy]

Good analysis David. I mean the part about people posting hands that they lose. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sometimes, when analysing the villain's play, I will post the hand from his perspective, blanking out my own cards and putting him as the hero.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could have fun with that. That is, if you post hands by the fishiest player who sucks out on someone, and pretend it was you.

Like post a hand where you (the villain) call a raise with 8J suited, the board flops AK4 with one of your suit... you call a pot sized bet on the flop. Then you get runner runner 8s and win with a set of 8s against the other guys AK.

Then ask for comments. It would probably be very different feedback then you normally get.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget to show results and insult villain for not going all in when he had the edge. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[TheWorstPlayer]

When UTG calls IN FRONT of the preflop raiser, I'm done with this hand. The only thing you can beat is TPTK and he doesn't have that.