thta's why they call it gambling.....

[bobneptune]

a hand against a maniac in ac :

$300 max buy in 1-2 nl game @ ac. maniac is utg and has been mercilessly been running over the table with a stack of about $900. i'm on the button with AsKs, the first decent hand if seen in two trips around the table since i sat down.

utg limps, 3 other limpers to me. i raise to $15 ($10-$15 being standard for this table) on the button. blinds fold, utg calls, one fold and 2 calls. 4 see the flop with a $71 pot.

flop comes : Ah 6s 7s

check, check, raise to $30 to me. i have tptk with a draw to the nuts. i bet the pot ($100) looking to close out straight draws. my thoughts are if one of the limpers has a pr of 6's or 7's, i'm not happy and i'm behind, but i have outs to the nut flush . if they have 2 pr, its a coin flip and if they are on a draw, i have them crushed. they could have also limped with a weaker ace. i have a good chance to be in the lead anyway, and top pair with a nut flush draw is a great hand to make a lot of money with. anyway i can't lay it down and i bet to win the pot right there.

maniac utg thinks for about 5 seconds and pushes. fold , fold to me. i have about $ 200 left.

i think of the hands that have me crushed namely AA, 66 or 77. i can't believe he limped with AA. being the maniac is a maniac, i don't think he would have played 66 or 77 this way.

i make him as a bully trying to run me off the pot and put him on a draw and with the 2-1 i'm getting, i call.

he flips over 4c5c.... turn is a blank and of course, the river brings the miracle 3d.

had one of the other limpers pushed, i would have put them on a set and laid the hand down, but i could see the maniac doing this with a draw.

comments on my line ???

[PGarlic]

I checked the odds on this one, and you have 4c5c drawing slim. He'd actually have a better chance if you had top set. I think you played it fine,I would've beat the villian to the pot with a call. I think there's even a case for just a call on the flop. You have the button, You most likely have the best made hand, and if there are any other flush draws out there that hit, you get all their chips.

[creedofhubris]

You only have $200 left, and you're calling a $500 pot, giving you 2.5:1 odds, and you might be way ahead or freerolling AKo. This hand is unfoldable, even if villain is supertight.

[jrforman]

I agree with just calling the flop. Your letting too many hands off easy, without giving them a chance to make a mistake and your not going to push off any player that has a set and has you beat at this point. Call and bet the turn hard or reraise all-in...

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
This hand is unfoldable

[/ QUOTE ]

[Malachii]

Must've been a shitty car ride home. My condolences.

[edge]

Without the flush draw, you can think about it. With the nut flush draw, there isn't a hand that you're behind, factoring in the pot odds.

[ZeeJustin]

I have tons of comments/questions for you.

1) I don't understand, where does the name gambling come from?

2) You have the terms bet and raise mixed up. On the flop, there was a bet of $30 (not a raise), and you raised to $100.

3) You did NOT raise (or bet) the pot. A pot raise would have been a raise to $160 (30+70+30+30).

4) I think a call on the flop would be better. The call is much better when you are beat (draw cheaply) and still fine if you have the best hand (no one can be drawing that live against your hand, and you also want to keep others in and possibly stack someone when you make the nuts that would have otherwise folded.

5) As others have said, you have an EASY call after his all-in. Folding wouldn't just be bad, it would be terrible.

6) I think 1/2 NL should be posted in the small stakes forum.

[wslee00]

[ QUOTE ]

3) You did NOT raise (or bet) the pot. A pot raise would have been a raise to $160 (30+70+30+30).


[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain again how the pot was $160 and not $100? After the maniac's $30 bet, the pot was only $100.

In terms of the raise against the maniac, I think it was good. You want to be the aggressor here with tptk and nut flush draw. The two people that checked in front of you were probably going to fold anyway. I think the maniac going all-in was the best thing that could have happened to you - 1/3 of his stack was yours. You just got unlucky with that river...

[bobneptune]

1) I don't understand, where does the name gambling come from?

>>>BN

hello zj,

the etymology of the word gambling is from middle english word gamel meaning 'to play'.

if you are asking how gambling relates to the title of my post, i've probably earned 90% of every dollar i've ever made through some kind of gambling ; whether its owning, training or betting on horses or advantage play in black jack, and more recently moving toward poker. when i get a situation in gambling where i look to be a significant favorite, i get money in and it blows up on me, i always say to my friends with a smile, "that's why they call it gambling." its never a sure thing.

i posted this hand because i was interested on other possible/better lines to take. your comment about calling the flop certainly has merit and i thank all that replied.

3) You did NOT raise (or bet) the pot. A pot raise would have been a raise to $160 (30+70+30+30).

>>>>BN

let me try again, as maybe i wasn't perfectly clear with my 'phrasology'. pre flop there was $71 in the pot.

after the flop, there were 2 checks , then a $30 bet. that made a $101 total. action to me, i bet $100. how is that properly described ?

6) I think 1/2 NL should be posted in the small stakes forum.

>>>>BN

i'm happy to comply with all conventions. what would they be ?

this was a hand with a ~ $500 pot and while i know there are certainly much much bigger hands, that's not completely insignificant.

whatever the conventions, i'm glad to comply. again, thanks to all that replied.

[piki]

good posting

[gomberg]

[ QUOTE ]
let me try again, as maybe i wasn't perfectly clear with my 'phrasology'. pre flop there was $71 in the pot.

after the flop, there were 2 checks , then a $30 bet. that made a $101 total. action to me, i bet $100. how is that properly described ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising the pot means that you actually call the $30 - then raise what's in there, laying your opponent 2-1 odds. So for you to raise the pot, you would have to raise to about $160. Think about the odds you lay your opponent (if you bet pot - you lay 2:1, half pot - 3:1, 3rd pot - 4:1, and so on....)

[wslee00]

[ QUOTE ]

Raising the pot means that you actually call the $30 - then raise what's in there, laying your opponent 2-1 odds. So for you to raise the pot, you would have to raise to about $160. Think about the odds you lay your opponent (if you bet pot - you lay 2:1, half pot - 3:1, 3rd pot - 4:1, and so on....)

[/ QUOTE ]

if he calls the $30, then there would be only $130 in the pot, so a pot level raise would be 130 not 160... or am I missing something here...

[jhall23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Raising the pot means that you actually call the $30 - then raise what's in there, laying your opponent 2-1 odds. So for you to raise the pot, you would have to raise to about $160. Think about the odds you lay your opponent (if you bet pot - you lay 2:1, half pot - 3:1, 3rd pot - 4:1, and so on....)

[/ QUOTE ]

if he calls the $30, then there would be only $130 in the pot, so a pot level raise would be 130 not 160... or am I missing something here...

[/ QUOTE ]

Calling makes the pot 130. So a pot sized raise is 130 more or 160 total.

[Leptyne]

I play the hand just the way you did. My math is not good enough to know what my odds are against three players on a draw but I know they are greatly improved if I'm heads up. This is also my way of informing the other players that they will face another pot sized bet on the turn.

Maniacs pull this kind of stuff because they're maniacs. Not a problem since you were going to push the turn anyway. I hate it when plays like that win. Whatever happened to Truth, Justice, and The American Way?