View Full Version : River make you puke?
live 30-60
game is loose, and passive, with one very live one (UTG+1)
SB is decent, nothing spectacular, and has been relatively quiet for the past hour or so.
Tex is UTG with 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, and limps.
UTG+1 calls, MP calls, button calls, SB completes, BB checks option.
(6 players)
Flop 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif6 /images/graemlins/club.gif
SB checks, BB checks, Tex bets, UTG+1 calls,folds around to SB who raises, BB folds, Tex calls, UTG+1 three bets, SB calls, Tex calls.
turn 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
SB checks, Tex checks, UTG+1 bets, SB raises, Tex calls, UTG+1 calls.
River
3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
SB checks, Tex checks, UTG+1 bets, SB raises, Tex folds.
Comments on all streets appreciated.
DcifrThs
10-03-2005, 01:20 PM
nope, but the turn call sure does.
ugly.
easy fold on river imo w/o a read. also on the flop after the sb c'rs i would consider a 3 bet to get UTG+1 out, make him pay, and/or protect your hand/set up a free turn card from the c'rer if you need it.
on the turn you have the 2nd nuts and guys who likely have either a straight/set/2pair/flush draw and you have 2 7s that complete the nuts...and you just call the turn c'r. real bad.
Barron
ggbman
10-03-2005, 01:44 PM
What barron said. 3 bet the turn, river seems like a fold.
amulet
10-03-2005, 01:56 PM
tough river. but i 3 bet the turn with the almost certainly the best hand and people chasing. assuming you are best on the turn, a set is 3.8 to 1 against to fill, the flush draw 4 to 1. you can get $ in as a big fav. sure sometimes you are not best, and sometimes you split, but i think the 3 bet has significant positive ev here. i fold the river.
Turning Stone Pro
10-03-2005, 02:01 PM
The flop started this mess. I don't understand how you can't 3 bet this flop. You don't want UTG+1 to muck his overcards??
You played this hand backwards. You allowed yourself to give up control to the out of position player (SB) (who, if you don't have beat, you want him to think you do), and failed to force out the fellow who has position on you. (UTG+1) (who you probably have beat, but are in danger of giving critical free cards to).
I hate it.
TSP
flawless_victory
10-03-2005, 02:03 PM
[ QUOTE ]
tough river. but i 3 bet the turn with the almost certainly the best hand and people chasing. assuming you are best on the turn, a set is 7.6 to 1 against to fill, the flush draw 4 to 1. you can get $ in as a big fav. sure sometimes you are not best, and sometimes you split, but i think the 3 bet has significant positive ev here. i fold the river.
[/ QUOTE ]i love howthe nine outer has a way better draw than the ten outer... haha.
amulet
10-03-2005, 02:15 PM
that is what happens when you dictate your posts at the office and do not proof them, it has been corrected. ty. lol.
Nightwish
10-03-2005, 02:42 PM
This was played very poorly, from start to finish.
First, I would typically raise preflop, but it's OK to limp if the table is truly loose and passive as you describe.
On the flop, you must 3-bet. You have an overpair with a draw, but the board is very dangerous. Get UTG+1 out of there or at least make him pay for his draw.
On the turn, I would bet because UTG+1's hand smells like a flush draw. He calls your flop bet when there are people still to act behind him but then 3-bets when there are just 3 of you left and he has position on everyone. He may of course have something other than a flush draw, but at this point, I'd be very worried about him checking behind on the turn. You have to bet and hope that you get to 3-bet.
But anyway, you decided to go for a check-raise and actually succeeded. What are you doing now calling two cold instead of re-raising? What, you think someone has 78? You think all 3 of you have a 7? The most likely scenario is that two of you have a 7 and the third guy is putting money in with a flush draw. Make him pay!
The river sucks, and the worst part is that you're not even sure where you stand because of your atrocious play up to this point. I guess you have to fold for 2 bets.
amulet
10-03-2005, 02:59 PM
do you think that it is helpful to call his play "atrocious" and tell him he played it poorly? people come here to share idea and to learn. why would you ever act like that?
as for raising with 77 preflop here, it is wrong, and we have discussed it before.
CardSharpCook
10-03-2005, 03:11 PM
ask him about poker coaching.
fwiw,
I think Nightwish's response is fine. Calling it very bad or atrocious - enh, that's splitting hairs.
I think Nightwish is trying to be emphatically state that his play isn't close to +ev. Your post proving that with odds can be equally eye opening to the OP (hopefully). It's not like he insulted OP personally.
my 2 cents
Nightwish
10-03-2005, 03:21 PM
[ QUOTE ]
do you think that it is helpful to call his play "atrocious" and tell him he played it poorly? people come here to share idea and to learn. why would you ever act like that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps "atrocious" was over the top, but as another response indicated, I was merely trying to emphasize how much I dislike the OP's play. As for telling him he played it poorly, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's not an insult to tell someone you think he played the hand wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
as for raising with 77 preflop here, it is wrong, and we have discussed it before.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have a link?
DcifrThs
10-03-2005, 03:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
do you think that it is helpful to call his play "atrocious" and tell him he played it poorly? people come here to share idea and to learn. why would you ever act like that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps "atrocious" was over the top, but as another response indicated, I was merely trying to emphasize how much I dislike the OP's play. As for telling him he played it poorly, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. It's not an insult to tell someone you think he played the hand wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
as for raising with 77 preflop here, it is wrong, and we have discussed it before.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have a link?
[/ QUOTE ]
77 is the cutoff and depending on game conditions.
loose passive game=limp 77 utg.
Barron
[ QUOTE ]
fwiw,
I think Nightwish's response is fine. Calling it very bad or atrocious - enh, that's splitting hairs.
I think Nightwish is trying to be emphatically state that his play isn't close to +ev. Your post proving that with odds can be equally eye opening to the OP (hopefully). It's not like he insulted OP personally.
my 2 cents
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with this statement, If I play a hand wrong or give wrong advice, I will respect someone more if they just tell me I suck as long as they tell me why also. Nightwishes post is perfect. Worry about hurting someones feelings is -EV in my opinion as this may hurt the communication process by not conveying strongly enough about how the hero played a particular hand. Either way, the hero played this hand poorly and now he knows, and now he will be a better player, and thats what this site is all about.
amulet
10-03-2005, 03:38 PM
i can not find the link i want. i will try later when i have more time. the link below is somewhat similar.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3532904&page=&view=&s b=5&o=
Nightwish
10-03-2005, 03:38 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
as for raising with 77 preflop here, it is wrong, and we have discussed it before.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have a link?
[/ QUOTE ]
77 is the cutoff and depending on game conditions.
loose passive game=limp 77 utg.
[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps I should elaborate on my preflop comments. In a typical game (by "typical" I mean the 30/60 game that I am most familiar with, i.e. the Party 30/60), I would raise 77 UTG. And as I mentioned in my first post, if the game were truly loose passive as the OP described, limping with 77 would be fine.
Nightwish
10-03-2005, 03:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
i can not find the link i want. i will try later when i have more time. the link below is somewhat similar.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=3532904&page=&view=&s b=5&o=
[/ QUOTE ]
I suspected you were going to bring this one up. The presence of the limper makes a huge difference, so the similarity to which you allude is only passing.
atrocious is a stong word.
i think folding the flop would have been atrocious.
i knew that the SB was strong, for sure, and as far as UTG+1 is concerned, he seemed to be very happy with his hand.
SB showed 7,8 the nut straight.
UTG+1 showed 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, a flush
[ QUOTE ]
fwiw,
I think Nightwish's response is fine. Calling it very bad or atrocious - enh, that's splitting hairs.
I think Nightwish is trying to be emphatically state that his play isn't close to +ev. Your post proving that with odds can be equally eye opening to the OP (hopefully). It's not like he insulted OP personally.
my 2 cents
[/ QUOTE ]
This too is how I interpretted Nightwish's post. I didn't even flinch in reading it, seemed pretty straight forward but then again I prefer the harsh, up-front 'tell it how it is' approach vs sugar coating responses...seems to 'stick' better that way.
Emperor
10-03-2005, 06:30 PM
Obviously everyone has forgotten why OP deserves harsh responses.. Go look at his other posts... He is playing 30/60 live and would be lucky to beat the party 2/4 skill wise... Yet he continues to claim if you have a 50BB downswing you must really suck at poker... This guy is on his newbie upswing and refuses to take the hammering as constructive because he is, in his mind, God's gift to poker.
amulet
10-03-2005, 06:56 PM
nothing to suspect. not sure why your responses are so "unusal." as i said i could only find that one. i will look for the earlier one.
i agree that they are different. however, in both cases a preflop raise with 77 is incorrect.
amulet
10-03-2005, 07:01 PM
that was a subtle post.
i think since we all love poker, and are all sharing info, and suggestions, that we could try to be considerate and heplful in our responses. however, i seem to be in the minority. so if you want to attack, enjoy i guess......
Emperor
10-03-2005, 07:26 PM
Have you read his other posts?
Did you notice I am member #1996? Oh btw this my NEW member name.. I have been here a LONG time. As you can see by my post count I usually keep my thoughts to myself. However Tex has attacked me and others trying to help him in the past, and its ridiculous to coddle someone so belligerant and obnoxious.
etizzle
10-03-2005, 08:24 PM
he IS gods gift to poker
CardSharpCook
10-03-2005, 09:05 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously everyone has forgotten why OP deserves harsh responses.. Go look at his other posts... He is playing 30/60 live and would be lucky to beat the party 2/4 skill wise... Yet he continues to claim if you have a 50BB downswing you must really suck at poker... This guy is on his newbie upswing and refuses to take the hammering as constructive because he is, in his mind, God's gift to poker.
[/ QUOTE ]
hey, I just like jumping on bandwagons. The bandwagon of the thread seemed to be calling Nightwish (nightwish is a pretty good poster, btw) a jerk for calling Tx's play attrocious. But believe me, Emp, I am still opening up any TxRedman thread to see what he's gonna say next. This one didn't disappoint.
Lestat
10-03-2005, 09:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
he IS gods gift to poker
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank God!
i never claimed a 50BB downswing made you a horrible player.
i never ever claimed to be gods gift to poker, either.
if you're going to be rude, at least be factual in your comments.
but seriosuly, i must not bother you that much, seeing how you take time to reply to and read my posts.
also, when did i "attack" you?
i believe the only member on this forum i have ever exchanged verbal jabs with was that james character.
either way, even if i played a hand stone cold perfect, i can always count on some biased know it all moron so tell me why i miplayed fourth street so bad, that it was "atrocious".
\
Emperor
10-04-2005, 04:13 PM
Ok I went and found each one of your obnoxious posts. Hopefully you are reading it in flat mode so you can see the responses of your coforumers, as they each and everyone encourage you to die a slow and painful death and to please stop posting.
Tex's Obnoxious posts (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/dosearch.php?Cat=&Forum=All_Forums&Name=45194&Sear chpage=0&Limit=25&)
You really must be bored.
Seriously, terribly, bored.
Don't you have a 1-2NL game to be playing or something?
Thanks for reminding me of some of those posts, i forgot just how funny some of them were.
It bothers you that I post here.....I think i'll NEVER stop.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.