different bet size practice > misread > beat

[MarkGrandy]

I have crashed many times because my bet size gives misread to my opponent.
Lets say I have AK, he has KQ. Flop comes 6 8 K.
(I didnt make as big preflop raise as he would make with AK,
so he cant imagine I could have AK.)
He bets 1/3 of his stack, I wonder if he flopped 6 or 8 trips, but think he would rather go all in with trips and I call. Turn is Q, he go all in, I cant imagine how Q could improve his hand, I call and lose.
My point:
" Sometimes it would be Your advantage if Your opponent could see Your cards "
comments please !?

[-Oz-]

I guess I really don't understand your thinking in this example. You raise preflop and get called by a hand you dominate. You get a good flop and only call his small bet. Why? He then sucks out to a 3 outer and you get committed to the hand anyway? If you feared a set on the flop, why don't you fear it when he commits to the hand on the turn?

Bottom line: you didn't punish your opponent when you were ahead and got your chips in the middle when you were behind. This is exactly the opposite of what you should be trying to do as a skilled player.

-Oz-

[mts]

sorry but this is a stupid post

[MarkGrandy]

if I'd have raised his 1/3 stack bet, he would have called,
of course I would had +EV, but still get beaten !

I think my worst mistake was because I didnt make big enough
pre-flop raise(to convince him that I have AK)

[yvesaint]

[ QUOTE ]
if I'd have raised his 1/3 stack bet, he would have called,
of course I would had +EV, but still get beaten !

I think my worst mistake was because I didnt make big enough
pre-flop raise(to convince him that I have AK)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is stupid, he called you with a hand you crush, you get the perfect flop v. that, and you say you don't want to raise because you 'still would've been beaten'?? Talk about results-oriented!!

[-Oz-]

[ QUOTE ]
if I'd have raised his 1/3 stack bet, he would have called,
of course I would had +EV, but still get beaten !

I think my worst mistake was because I didnt make big enough
pre-flop raise(to convince him that I have AK)

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps. Why don't you give us some numbers (blinds, stack sizes, bet sizes, etc) and let us do a real analysis? Then we can whack you with the Club of Results Oriented Thinking. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

-Oz-

Does convincing him you have AK make a difference here? Once the flop hit, you should have pushed more. With the superior hand, don't you want him to call? In the long run, I will take my chances with AK here and hope that my opponent doesn't catch one of his 3 outs. If he was convinced you had AK, wouldn't he fold, and you would only make a marginal gain on this hand? Trust me, I am one of the unluckiest people with having other people's miracle cards spring up on the turn and river, but you still have to raise it after the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
Then we can whack you with the Club of Results Oriented Thinking. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

-Oz-

[/ QUOTE ]

Nicely put!

[DVC Calif]

[ QUOTE ]
...I wonder if he flopped 6 or 8 trips, but think he would rather go all in with trips...

[/ QUOTE ]

and

[ QUOTE ]
...My point:
" Sometimes it would be Your advantage if Your opponent could see Your cards "...

[/ QUOTE ]

Funniest thing I've read all day (and that includes OOT hiliarity).

1) Why would anyone push a set OOP on a harmless board?

2) You can demonstrate a strong hand by letting your chips speak. You lost because you allowed Villain to take control of the pot.

[fnurt]

He lost because a queen came out, not because he let the guy take control of the pot!!! Oy this thread makes my head hurt.

If you could see your opponents cards and know he had KQ, is anybody here pushing on the flop? I should hope no one feels compelled to pick up a small pot for fear of a 3-outer. The only reason to push the flop is for fear of a big draw, and on a board like this, I will call the flop and hope he bets off the rest of his chips on the turn.

Consider the far more likely scenario where a queen doesn't fall on the turn, and you end up winning all his chips. You'd feel a little better about inducing him to misread your hand, right? Just because you take a bad beat, you can't lapse into thinking "I need to show him my cards so I can win a teeny tiny pot."

You can't control what cards come out. All you can do to play winning poker is to make correct decisions, and induce your opponent to make incorrect decisions. Now, sometimes when he makes an incorrect decision he will get lucky and win anyway, but that's just poker. If your opponents are constantly drawing to 2 and 3 outs, you're going to make a lot of money in the long term.

[DVC Calif]

[ QUOTE ]
..All you can do to play winning poker is to make correct decisions, and induce your opponent to make incorrect decisions...

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. But was slowplaying AK preflop and on the flop correct? TPTK is not the nuts and I personally prefer to play it faster. I think that sometimes we outplay ourselves by being so clever.

What if Hero had AA? Who makes the same slow play as Hero?

[ QUOTE ]

My point:
" Sometimes it would be Your advantage if Your opponent could see Your cards "


[/ QUOTE ]

I dont see any situation in which you're involved and showing your opponent your cards is a good idea....

Fundamental Theorem of Poker anyone?

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
..All you can do to play winning poker is to make correct decisions, and induce your opponent to make incorrect decisions...

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. But was slowplaying AK preflop and on the flop correct? TPTK is not the nuts and I personally prefer to play it faster. I think that sometimes we outplay ourselves by being so clever.

What if Hero had AA? Who makes the same slow play as Hero?


[/ QUOTE ]

He said he raised preflop. As for saying TPTK is not the nuts heads-up, don't you think you're setting the bar a little high? TPTK on the flop against a single opponent is a very good holding.