$109's.... I know he doesn't know

[bigt439]

I hate posts that haven't gone through the hand converter, but it's not working right now so this is all I got. I found this hand had a particularily interesting dynamic in that the villain was Newt_Buggs. I knew him to be a 2+2er with a good grasp of the game, but he had no idea that I was also a 2+2er. I checked with him to make sure it was okay to post this hand. I'm interested in hearing what other people think as to how I played this hand. I'll be back to try and defend my play later.

Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 6
Seat 1: nardist (3555)
Seat 2: Gingerbay (825)
Seat 3: NewtBuggs (1665)
Seat 4: acesonly69 (2105)
Seat 8: Trinit`79 (1025)
Seat 9: Me (825)
NewtBuggs posts small blind (15)
acesonly69 posts big blind (30)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Me [ As, Qc ]
Trinit`79 calls (30)
I raise (125) to 125
nardist folds.
Gingerbay folds.
NewtBuggs calls (110)
acesonly69 folds.
Trinit`79 folds.
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 7h, 4s, 2s ]
NewtBuggs bets (150)
I raise (700) to 700
I'm all-In.

[ChrisV]

Looks super standard to me. Actually, at the 200's, I often run this play knowing nothing about my opponent. Those "tester bets" are begging to be raised. As long as you do it quickly and confidently they have no reason to put you on anything but a large pocket pair.

np... wish it worked in the 11s.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
Looks super standard to me. Actually, at the 200's, I often run this play knowing nothing about my opponent. Those "tester bets" are begging to be raised. As long as you do it quickly and confidently they have no reason to put you on anything but a large pocket pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, I'm also really not a fan of that bet by Newt with any hand there.

[jon462]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Looks super standard to me. Actually, at the 200's, I often run this play knowing nothing about my opponent. Those "tester bets" are begging to be raised. As long as you do it quickly and confidently they have no reason to put you on anything but a large pocket pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, I'm also really not a fan of that bet by Newt with any hand there.

[/ QUOTE ]
you dont think its a good bet with a set?

[ChrisV]

It's good with a set against an aggressive player, but you often dont have a good enough read against a player to know if theyre aggressive. It can definitely work out well, but the standard slowplay line is a safer line.

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Looks super standard to me. Actually, at the 200's, I often run this play knowing nothing about my opponent. Those "tester bets" are begging to be raised. As long as you do it quickly and confidently they have no reason to put you on anything but a large pocket pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed, I'm also really not a fan of that bet by Newt with any hand there.

[/ QUOTE ]
you dont think its a good bet with a set?

[/ QUOTE ]

No I don't think it is a particularirly good bet against a set here, the stacks just aren't deep enough and he doesn't know the opponent well enough that I could be convinced betting out is the best option.

[45suited]

Question for you guys: Newt's a very good player, so what are you putting him on that he called this pre-flop raise with? He's well aware of the gap. I can't see him playing any weak hands here, especially since the OP has half his stack (less implied odds).

Obviously, you read Newt as just betting with air because he thinks that the OP whiffed with two broadways. But isn't Newt's most likely holding a PP? I take it that you're reading his bet as weak, since a very strong hand would try a C/R?

So anyway, there's t1160 in the pot when he's faced with the push of 550. If he's got an overpair (which I don't really think is that unlikely of a holding here), is the OP's push really such a great play?

I guess I'm just curious as to what you guys think a good player (as Newt is) is calling this pre-flop raise with that makes you think that he is so likely to fold to this push. Interesting hand.

Wait, I just noticed that it's only t550 more for Newt to call. I think that pushing here is really kind of reckless actually. I'd like to hear why I'm wrong. Newt's getting over 2:1 to call at this point.

[ChrisV]

We're putting Newt on something like 99. The thing is, when the OPer says 2+2er we're assuming there's some point to his betout here, that he's not just doing it at random. If he's intending to go commit no matter what, then why wouldn't he trap checkraise so he gets paid off vs overcards? The conclusion is that the betout is testing whether the raiser has a large pair. I'm quite certain that I've made opponents fold medium pairs in similar circumstances before.

[Newt_Buggs]

You guys should know better than to push ace high against a donk who has bet into you /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

looking back at the history of this hand I don't think that I would play it the same way. I don't know if the deviation was because I had 7 other tables blinking at me or if I had notes/reads on the OP.

[curtains]

Im putting Newt on 65 suited for straight draw and hes making a semibluff.

[ChrisV]

? That's a standard call for you preflop heads up?

[45suited]

My point here is that I do not understand the responses of those posters that have said that the OP's push is "standard". It seems to me that for the reasons that I have stated, the push is bad.

I mean, believe it or not, you do even sometimes see the OP's play at a 22 or 33. I don't think that it's all that advanced or anything. Okay, it is meant to convince Newt that he has a big pair. But it also smells a bit of a shortstack who's desperate. I'm not saying it's an easy call for Newt, but you always have to factor into your decision the possiblity that your opponent is bluffing. So, I don't think that you're going to get an overpair (if that's what Newt has) to fold here often enough to make this the great play that it seems to be being made out to be. Newt IS getting over 2:1 to call here. And if he's on, say, a flush draw with 2 overs or an OESD as Curtains suggests, he's getting good odds too (esp when one takes into account the possibility that the OP is bluffing with overs, which again, even crosses the mind of a lower limit player).

I'm not trying to be a smart a$$, I just really don't see why this is such an advanced play when there is such a good chance that it will be picked off. The point is that Newt's bet prices him in to make a call with a lot of hands here.

[Moonsugar]

I haven't played a ton against Newt but I think you get called and lose enough here to make this move no good. He called a raise preflop and led the pot, he will rarely have just air. He's not gonna call you when behind so if you get called you are gonna be around a 3:1 dog (or worse) to lose all your chips and he has to fold 2 times for you to make what you risk here.

If you KNEW he had AK this play is awesome cause he's really not getting enough to call and you are a 7:1 dog. But, maybe he thinks you are playing overaggressive and will call with AK getting only 2:1.

Regarding Newt's bet: it is probably a leak in my game but I almost always check the uncoordinated flop here after a call from the blinds, no matter my hand. If I have a read on my opp. as being super passive I would lead though.

[schwza]

if i'm newtbuggs, my range to call there looks like:

AQ
maybe AK although i would usually reraise out of position and fold only if acesonly pushed
88-TT

do you call others? i don't think NB bet-folds any of the pair hands getting better than 2:1. i guess the math works outs - 9 AQ's, 12 AK's, 18 pairs, so i guess it's profitable if you think all of those hands are equally likely to bet out (and AK folds every time).

i'd guess a crappy overpair is more likely to lead though. i dunno....

[inyaface]

Cold call in sb to that big a raise. I'd say AK maybe AQ or a smallish more likely midish pair. The bet is pretty weak and the times that this bet is a set or big PP doesn't out weight the times you'll get a fold. Also any pair under QQ youve still got 2 lives plus backdoor nut draw. I like how you played it...and hopefully your not running 1/22 anymore. It's my turn to do that

[curtains]

I was messin around, just teasing NewtBuggs.

[45suited]

I was kind of wondering why you thought he'd call with that, thanks a lot!

I'm not good enough to catch sarcastic answers! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

So anyway, is the consensus that the OP's play was good, because I'm not really seeing it, for the reasons that I've already mentioned. Seems like a very high risk / reward when Newt was getting over 2:1 to call.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
My point here is that I do not understand the responses of those posters that have said that the OP's push is "standard". It seems to me that for the reasons that I have stated, the push is bad.

I mean, believe it or not, you do even sometimes see the OP's play at a 22 or 33. I don't think that it's all that advanced or anything. Okay, it is meant to convince Newt that he has a big pair. But it also smells a bit of a shortstack who's desperate. I'm not saying it's an easy call for Newt, but you always have to factor into your decision the possiblity that your opponent is bluffing. So, I don't think that you're going to get an overpair (if that's what Newt has) to fold here often enough to make this the great play that it seems to be being made out to be. Newt IS getting over 2:1 to call here. And if he's on, say, a flush draw with 2 overs or an OESD as Curtains suggests, he's getting good odds too (esp when one takes into account the possibility that the OP is bluffing with overs, which again, even crosses the mind of a lower limit player).

I'm not trying to be a smart a$$, I just really don't see why this is such an advanced play when there is such a good chance that it will be picked off. The point is that Newt's bet prices him in to make a call with a lot of hands here.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is so terrible about Newt calling with 2 overs? Unless it's specifically AK.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
What is so terrible about Newt calling with 2 overs? Unless it's specifically AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I understand what you're getting at. My point was that Newt probably has a PP pre-flop or very good overs such as AK or AQ I guess. What I'm saying is that I don't like the OP's flop push after Newt's bet because my thinking is that Newt has an overpair or at worst two overcards and he's getting over 2:1 to call the OP's push.

I'd love to hear how this hand turned out and what Newt's hand was.

[ilya]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is so terrible about Newt calling with 2 overs? Unless it's specifically AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I understand what you're getting at. My point was that Newt probably has a PP pre-flop or very good overs such as AK or AQ I guess. What I'm saying is that I don't like the OP's flop push after Newt's bet because my thinking is that Newt has an overpair or at worst two overcards and he's getting over 2:1 to call the OP's push.

I'd love to hear how this hand turned out and what Newt's hand was.

[/ QUOTE ]

My point was just that you seemed to be worried about Newt calling with overs when many of those overs are either splitting with or behind OP's hand.

I wouldn't be that worried about Newt liking the pot odds too much as if he calls and loses he's down to about 700. It's an awkward stack size and what's more it's a very unpleasant prospect psychologically for someone's who's already nearly doubled up to go from way above starting stack to way below starting stack on what seems to be a marginal situation.

In short I think the difference between big's and Newt's stacks is great for this sort of play.

[45suited]

But I think that Newt's most likely holding (by far) is a PP, not just two overcards. I mean, the OP has half his stack and put in a healthy raise pre-flop. Why would Newt call with a hand such as KQ or AJ? I wouldn't...

So, I'm guessing that Newt has a PP and he's not folding to the push getting over 2:1. That's my point.

I'm not being argumentative, but take a look at the stack sizes and the size of OP's raise. What unpaired overs do you really see Newt calling with pre-flop here? Not many, IMO. But I'm here to learn... So I guess my bottom line is that I don't like the OP's push. Do you?

[ilya]

Check my edit 45. I don't have a strong opinion about the play right now.
I agree Newt's prolly not calling with too many overs preflop. OTOH I do think the play will mostly make him fold AK. It helps that OP has the As.

[bigt439]

Alright, this hand seems to have generated some interesting discussion so I'll go ahead and add my thoughts to see what people think. As a diclaimer, I'd like to say that I'm not in love with this play or anything, and I'm not sure I'd do it again, but I might, just looking for feedback.

I don't always raise pf in this situation, but in the CO+1 with a limper already in there it looked like a decent spot to buy the button, or take the blinds. Newt calling out of the blinds obviously looked strong to a point, because he's calling a healthy raise out of position, but it seemed to give away information about his hand. Would you cold call in the SB with a UTG limp with KK or AA? I think you could make an argument for doing this, but it wouldn't be my default line and I doubt it would be Newt's. I'd pop it with QQ too, and maybe JJ if the planets are aligned. At this point I think I put him on a mid pp, say 99-JJ or AK or AQ.

When he bets out t150, I take this for extreme weakness. There is absolutely no reason for him to bet out a good hand here. If he has decided to play this pot then he is committing himself to going to the felt, and as such he should seek the best way to get the money in. I believe a check raise is by far the best way to do this. It almost always gets a bet from missed overs and it gives me really good odds with something like JJ. Probably to the point that I couldn't fold.

I saw no point in him betting out a set for the reasons already touched on and I thought this was a clever bet, from a good player, into a ragged board. If I had overs I probably couldn't play and he could fold easily if I came over the top if he had nothing. The size of the bet also looked weak to me.

I thought there was a chance he folds a hand like 99 or TT as well (although not huge), but obviously I did this because I thought he had missed. I also had outs if called as I believed to have 2 overs to him (I'm not putting him on AA or KK, and probably not QQ), and a back door flush draw. Me having the As also virtually eliminates him betting a flush draw with something like AKs.

I think it came down to his line looking weak, and my line looking strong that I thought I could make this work. I'll tell you later if it did.

Pretty [censored] to edit out your own screenname.
Sometimes you just know you're beat and you have to lay it down. Poker is about everything else but the cards.

[curtains]

Why does anyone give a [censored] whether or not you edit out your own screenname? Who cares? I will do it if I am posting and cant use the converter and I dont think theres anything wrong with it.

I guess that's why I am playing the big game and your not.

[curtains]

lol

[Apathy]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess that's why I am playing the big game and your not.

[/ QUOTE ]

What happened did the Phil Ivey gimiick account get banned?

[bigt439]

I wasn't going to bump this thread to post the results, but since it already got bumped I'll throw them in. He had QQ and called. Like he said earlier though, he doesn't usually play the hand this way, so his line was deceiving. Thanks for the input.

[45suited]

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't going to bump this thread to post the results, but since it already got bumped I'll throw them in. He had QQ and called. Like he said earlier though, he doesn't usually play the hand this way, so his line was deceiving. Thanks for the input.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very interesting post. I suspected an overpair, but not as strong as QQ.

If your move was really as standard for the higher limits as people were saying it is, I'm surprised that betting weakly into pre-flop raisers like Newt did is not more popular.

I wonder how well someone could do just making the obvious moves (betting with the best hand) and letting the other guys outthink themselves. I really am curious about this, since, when looking at the hand (what Newt could have been calling with pre-flop given the size of the raise and the disparity in chip stacks), it seemed obvious that he must have had a PP.