Missing the flop

[Atropos]

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ BB (6 max, 5 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Button ($36.4)
SB ($71)
BB ($55.07)
UTG ($341.9)
Hero ($211.1)

Preflop: Hero is MP with A/images/graemlins/spade.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. SB posts a blind of $0.5.
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $4</font>, Button calls $4, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>.

Flop: ($9.50) 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif, K/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $5.5</font>, Button calls $5.50.

Turn: ($20.50) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $15</font>, Button calls $26.90 (All-In), Hero folds.

Final Pot: $62.40

Sorry for preflop play, ATo sucks in NL and OOP it sucks even more. It was sheer stupidity.
What should I do at the flop/turn?? Button was very passive and often calling down top two pair/stuff. I felt he would fold if he had no flush/monster, thats why I bet the turn...

[DoubleDown]

check/fold the flop- you're OOP vs a short stack

unless you have a tight image and villain is weak (then bet harder on the flop (closer to pot) - shut down if called, fold after being played back at

[heretowin]

[ QUOTE ]
(then bet harder on the flop (closer to pot) - shut down if called, fold after being played back at

[/ QUOTE ]

After being called on the flop, check-fold the rest of the way. Although I can see your logic on the turn bet, and this play may work the majority of the time.

[FreakDaddy]

Any reads??
5 handed this play isn't sheer stupidity. If you're going to play it like this then I'd bet slightly more on the flop (2/3 pot) and if I'm called, then I shut down on the turn.

[FreakDaddy]

[ QUOTE ]
check/fold the flop- you're OOP vs a short stack

unless you have a tight image and villain is weak (then bet harder on the flop (closer to pot) - shut down if called, fold after being played back at

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually this is a great hand to play against a short stack even OOP. Ideal in fact.

[Godfather80]

Help me to understand this comment.

[FreakDaddy]

[ QUOTE ]
Help me to understand this comment.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO too many people get involved short stacked without considering the fact that they better have a strong hand to continue playing it post-flop. Sooo... you're going to force the short stack to make a decision on the turn to play for all his chips or not. That's good poker. Now at higher limits, I think this logic reverses obviously, people understand stack ratio's much better.

[stu-unger]

i really dont dislike your pre-flop play at all 5 handed if u feel u can out play the players at your table. i see myself playing the same way 6 handed and find its pretty much a coin flip in the essence that half the time you get away with it the other half u get called by medioce crap and u lose a big chunk of chips. i guess after u get called on the flop its time to shut down like everyone suggested but short handed i can't help but fire 2 shells at some pots. i dont think its a bad line, but against short stacks be prepared to middle pair call u down and win.

[Godfather80]

I can certainly see this logic in tournament play, but I am still too dense to follow how it applies to a cash game. Thank you for explaining.

[FreakDaddy]

[ QUOTE ]
I can certainly see this logic in tournament play, but I am still too dense to follow how it applies to a cash game. Thank you for explaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're correct in bringing up tournament play, because it applies more so there, but it appears, from my observation of small stakes, that playing for your stack still has psychological ramifications that force some players to let go of marginal hands.

Perhaps this will make more sense. If I'm sitting at a 100NL table and I drop to $40, why am I not re-buying?
A) I am not a good player and I only want to lose $100
B) I'm a decent player, and I have buy-in limits for the day.

I just don't see enough good players staying at a table below 50% of the buy-in. Does this make more sense? Not to say that it doesn't ever happen, but A &amp; B are the more likely scenarios in my book.