Tough Hand, wasn't sure whether to make call on Riv?

[obisponator]

I really felt like this guy hit his flush, so i folded even though a lot of people might say i should have called... Some input would be nice

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t15 (10 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

MP3 (t1020)
CO (t685)
Button (t475)
SB (t785)
Hero (t800)
UTG (t755)
UTG+1 (t1295)
UTG+2 (t800)
MP1 (t715)
MP2 (t670)

Preflop: Hero is BB with K/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG+2 calls t15, MP1 calls t15, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP3 calls t15, CO calls t15, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (t87.50) 5/images/graemlins/club.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(6 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, UTG+2 checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 bets t30</font>, MP3 calls t30, CO calls t30, SB folds, Hero calls t30, UTG+2 folds.

Turn: (t207.50) 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP1 bets t50</font>, MP3 folds, CO calls t50, Hero calls t50.

River: (t357.50) 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets t150</font>, MP1 folds, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises to t300</font>, Hero folds.

Final Pot: t807.50

[Rosencrantz1]

To your original question:

You have to call 150 into a 800 pot; you're getting just better than 5:1 on your money.

There are 9 clubs out and he has to have two of them (or a 4-7) to beat you.

I think this is pretty clearly a call.

In other news:

I think you played way too passively this entire hand. I understand why you're scared of K-better x after the flop, but by check-calling, you get zero useful information about his hand.

You need to make a probe bet on the flop, as little as 1/2 pot (or about 40) should do it here.

Even worse, IMO, on the turn. You have top pair and a solid OESD; you've got to lead out here, probably a pot-sized bet (or maybe you could get away for 3/4)

You've let him see cards super-cheap every street and you need to protect your hand (which may very well be the best) against draws.

[bluefeet]

Ug. My nemesis, TPxK out of a blind. So many in on the flop, I just assume be provided the opportunity to fold to a pot sized bet - but T30? Call. You picked up the open-ender on the turn. Being last to act with still an extremely passive bet/call, there could be an argument for a large reraise here. A gamble IMO, but you probably could have taken it from these two apparent drawers (adding the fact you still held TP w/ OESD, you could still improve yourself). But...continuing to just call here is not the worst thing.

River: You got your straight. But that's probably the bad news. I would check and look him up with a bet resembling no more than the bet you made. Any more and I'd just give it up and be happy I only invested T95 in the hand.

The problem with your leading out at all IMO is that you have very little to gain - and a ton (or at least T150) to lose. He stuck around this long like you for a reason. Flush, nut-straight, your straight, TPdecentK, etc. Unlikely any of these hands are going to fold to your T150. Likewise, it's quite possible that you are in fact dead. Your small bet only encourages a reraise regardless of his holdings. If he had anything short of the flush, it's conceiveable he would check it down with you.

To answer your question regarding THIS hand........I fold, and kick myself for betting the river.

Next time: semi-bluff the turn....check/call-fold the river

[jon_1van]

[ QUOTE ]
Next time: semi-bluff the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]

The problem with your leading out at all IMO is that you have very little to gain - and a ton (or at least T150) to lose. He stuck around this long like you for a reason. Flush, nut-straight, your straight, TPdecentK, etc. Unlikely any of these hands are going to fold to your T150. Likewise, it's quite possible that you are in fact dead. Your small bet only encourages a reraise regardless of his holdings. If he had anything short of the flush, it's conceiveable he would check it down with you.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I do disagree with this. We're not interested in him folding necessarily; we just want info. Our checking is saying "hey, this missed us" and his betting after our check really tells us very little. We need to put the pressure on him to define his hand. Yeah, if we bet out on the flop he may raise it, and then perhaps we will fold. But if we just check-call we're learning way too little.

[sofere]

Yuck!

Call me weak tight, but I think this is a fold on the flop. The more I think about it, the more clearer it is IMO.

Your getting 6:1 with what would be a 4-way pot and one person left to act. What are you hoping for on the turn or river? You have TPxK with no draw on a draw heavy board. The only good thing that can happen is it goes check-check all the way to the river.

If the river gives you two pair, it could have also easily made someone's straight. If its a club, there's a good chance someone is out there with a flush draw. If a King hits, you still have no kicker and will be afraid of a better king. All calling does is leave you with very difficult decisions on the turn and river (and thats IF you hit your card...otherwise its just a waste of 30 chips)

Now the turn, your getting a little over 6:1 on an 8 outer (slightly better than 6:1) to hit a hand where 1 of those outs will complete the flush. And I still don't like just having TPNK.

The river...betting gets you no where because worse hands probably won't call (any pair, 2 pair, set will be scared of the straight and flush draws that just hit) and your in a position to lose a good deal of chips. I would check/call (folding to a bet over T150-200).

[sofere]

I'm gonna quote Lorinda 3:16 on this one...
"Do you need this pot?"

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]
Yuck!

Call me weak tight, but I think this is a fold on the flop. The more I think about it, the more clearer it is IMO.



[/ QUOTE ]

You're weak-tight ;-)

No, seriously though. The PF betting was limped around and we saw the flop for free. What are these 6 folks limping with? I can tell you that chances are no one is sitting with a good pair and they sure as hell don't ALL have a king. More likely, with all those limps (and given our reads at the table) we're looking at unpaired high cards (AQ, AJ, QJ even) and maybe some mid-to-low pairs/suited connectors from late MP/LP.

Are we scared of a K-better kicker? Absolutely. But checking on the flop is really hurting us information-wise. If we bet out about 1/3-1/2 of the pot it's only costing us 40 and our decision making gets a lot easier: now if we're raised, we can fold (someone is telling us they have a king and better kicker, trips, 2pair, so on). If we just get called we're getting to see the turn pretty cheaply and we can re-evaluate.

You have to remember that with a flop like this there is a chance it missed everyone. There is of course a good chance we are beaten already, but for a small bet we'll get a lot of information. If we check and get a small bet after us, what then? Is that person betting because they have a hand that beats us or because they saw the table was weak?

Quick point: Had there been any action PF, I would have folded this in a heartbeat.

[bluefeet]

My "The problem with your leading out at all IMO is that you have very little to gain - and a ton (or at least T150) to lose. " comment was regarding the river. "at all..." was in regards to 'any amount'.

Yeah, I thought about leading out on the flop. I do understand that it could be useful in gathering information. The problem 6-handed is, I do know of an amount that would give you the information you need/want -- folds and/or raises. If you have no intention of calling a raiser (which I assume he wouldn't), then you're proposing a best case scenario where everyone folds (not happening), or you were simply called, by MANY perhaps. Now what? He picks up the OESD on the turn....push? Granted given the nature of this particular hand development it would have taken down the pot. What if he doesn't...assume check/fold now? Maintain your assertion?Trying to take the lead with a marginal hand, in a family pot like this is asking for trouble IMO. I'm looking for the cheapest way toward hand improvement or an exit opportunity when the pricing dictates.

[bluefeet]

[ QUOTE ]
Call me weak tight, but I think this is a fold on the flop. The more I think about it, the more clearer it is IMO.


[/ QUOTE ]

...for the record, I would much rather choose this line over leading out on the flop here. It might even be slightly better than my OP proposal.

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]

My "The problem with your leading out at all IMO is that you have very little to gain - and a ton (or at least T150) to lose. " comment was regarding the river. "at all..." was in regards to 'any amount'.

Yeah, I thought about leading out on the flop. I do understand that it could be useful in gathering information. The problem 6-handed is, I do know of an amount that would give you the information you need/want -- folds and/or raises. If you have no intention of calling a raiser (which I assume he wouldn't), then you're proposing a best case scenario where everyone folds (not happening), or you were simply called, by MANY perhaps. Now what? He picks up the OESD on the turn....push? Granted given the nature of this particular hand development it would have taken down the pot. What if he doesn't...assume check/fold now? Maintain your assertion?Trying to take the lead with a marginal hand, in a family pot like this is asking for trouble IMO. I'm looking for the cheapest way toward hand improvement or an exit opportunity when the pricing dictates.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I understand what you're saying, but I think the point is that the cheapest way to play this is to lead out on the flop, given how cheap the lead-out is.

The lead out really is saying "I hit the pair of kings"; I don't think we're tying to hide our hand very much here (and that is fine). Anyone who raises is saying "Ok, I see you hit your Kings and I'm guess I've got a better kicker (or 2p or trips or whatever)" The problem with the check is that it's saying "I've missed...you?" which will encourage a much wider range of hands (include some we beat) to take a stab at it.

Then we're in much harder decision-making territory: Do we call a min-bet when the action comes back around? I haven't asked the MP player to define his hand at all, so he really could be betting with a lot of stuff that we beat. The goal is to set ourselves up for an easy (and cheap decision).

The way the OP played the hand he lost a lot more than the 40 it would have cost him to lead out.

[sofere]

[ QUOTE ]
More likely, with all those limps (and given our reads at the table) we're looking at unpaired high cards (AQ, AJ, QJ even) and maybe some mid-to-low pairs/suited connectors from late MP/LP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it interesting that you don't include K8+ here which are often limped at the lower levels (KQ, KJs especially)

Secondly, you have stated that a small bet gets you a lot of information, then you cite a fairly simple question: [ QUOTE ]
If we check and get a small bet after us, what then? Is that person betting because they have a hand that beats us or because they saw the table was weak?

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you fail to answer this question. What did the information tell you? Would you call? Push? Fold? If you call, what do you do when you're first to act on the turn?

Furthermore, 75% of the time pushing into 5 people in a draw heavy board, your going to get at least 1 or 2 callers. What do you do on the turn then? Where you called by K7, a flush or straight draw? A set or two pair that are stupidly slow playing? 72o that feels like outplaying someone?

IMO, the only info you get with a small bet into this many people is that if everyone folds, you probably had the best hand. Otherwise, you've made a meaningless pot meaningful with a crappy hand and semi-tough to get away from.

[adanthar]

With six limpers, I always check here, but I'll call a 4 way t30 bet OOP looking for a 4. You almost have the implied odds just to spike it alone.

You then have to call the turn, but I'll always check this river and probably fold to the CO (edit: if he value bets) because he has a flush like 99.4% of the time (and splits with me the rest.)

[bluefeet]

I can buy that. But with a couple flop callers say...

1) what do you do with the improvement on the turn?

2) if the answer to #1 is bet again, or check/call....what do you do with the straight now on the river? bet, check-call, or check-fold?

If #1 follows my original suggested check/raise-push option, could it not be equally or more adventagious to have played the flop passively...with a having NOW 'hit your straight' presentation?

[Rosencrantz1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
More likely, with all those limps (and given our reads at the table) we're looking at unpaired high cards (AQ, AJ, QJ even) and maybe some mid-to-low pairs/suited connectors from late MP/LP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it interesting that you don't include K8+ here which are often limped at the lower levels (KQ, KJs especially)

Secondly, you have stated that a small bet gets you a lot of information, then you cite a fairly simple question: [ QUOTE ]
If we check and get a small bet after us, what then? Is that person betting because they have a hand that beats us or because they saw the table was weak?

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you fail to answer this question. What did the information tell you? Would you call? Push? Fold? If you call, what do you do when you're first to act on the turn?


[/ QUOTE ]

If I lead out on the flop and it's called around, fine. Let's see what the turn brings. If I bet and it's raised back to me on the flop I fold.

With the turn that came, I'd lead out again. If it's raised back to me, I would look at the pot odds since I've now got the OESD. I need better than standard odds since there is some chance that my hitting the straight could also give the villain a flush.

I guess my point is that unless we're pushing villain to show some aggression, I'm hesitant to just assume we're beaten with his tiny bets and us having played passively on every street.