Why did I play this bad hand?

[Sir Jecht]

So, recently I started to play the "big" game at Casino Windsor... the $200min NL table, which most people sit down with $800-$4000. Anyway, I am pretty new to the whole NL thing, but after reading part of Dan Harrington's first book, I got pretty good pretty fast. At least for live play. Anyway, this was my first night playing at the 2min table, and I played a terrible hand, but I think I was justified in it. At this point in the night I turned my $200 buy-in to about $1850. This is the hand. The villian is a LOOSE player and very aggressive... he winnings come from either pushing people out of pots or getting VERY lucky with hands like 35s. He will call ANY preflop raise of about 6x BB or less with almost any two cards. Blinds are 5/10, btw.

So, he makes it's $40 to go preflop. I know this is his standard play, and I know, no matter what flops he is going to bet $50... he's just that predictable. So I figure at this point it's gonna cost me $90 to see the turn, and he has me covered, and it will be easy to get him all in if I hit the miracle. So, that being said, I am the only caller with 24o preflop. He has position on me (he is MP, I am BB)

Flop: A J 3 rainbow (pot: $85)

I check. Villian bets $50. (exactly like I said - at this point I figure $50 for a gutshot, if I hit, it's concealed, and I get his whole stack.) I call.

Turn: 5 (full rainbow board) (pot: $185)

I check. He bets $150. Now I want to get him to reraise me to get some more of his chips. I raise to $400. He reraises all-in. I call.

Final Pot: ~$3700

Obviously this was very good for me, I had the nuts, and he went all in. Of course this is a terrible hand, but I think it's justified in that I knew costs me $90 to see a turn, and if I hit I get about $1850 from him... about 80% sure of that, I'd say. He doesn't like to fold. He turned over JJ for trips, and the board didn't pair on the river. So, I was very lucky, but with those assumptions against this player, was the play really that terrible?

[flawless_victory]

how fvcking old are you? the guy berated you at the table, so you come to our board looking justification? tell him to fvck himself.
nice catch. lead the turn. bye.

[Sir Jecht]

No he didn't berate me at all, he just gave me the money. That's the kind of thing that happens at that game, it's a rediculous game, with big fish and deep stacks. I'm not looking for justification, I know it's a bad hand / bad play, I'm just wondering if my justification for playing it was wrong or not. I figure $90 is much to lose to make 18x that amount, but maybe I'm wrong in thinking that, that's why I asked.

[flawless_victory]

you played it fine.

[creedofhubris]

Preflop sucks donkey balls.

Flop, he's clearly slowplaying a monster and you have a draw to the nuts, so it's an ok call.

Turn is good.

[outdrwn]

how is a standard 50$ into 85 clearly slowplaying a monster creed?? "yeah man"

the call on the turn is questionable due to pot odds and implied odds, but hey, being results orientated I love this play, since it did just what you wanted it to, and won you a big pot.

[Sir Jecht]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop, he's clearly slowplaying a monster and you have a draw to the nuts, so it's an ok call.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, that was the whole point of me describing him before the hand. He bets $50 NO MATTER WHAT. He could have AA he could K8o... he'd bet that regardless of the flop. I watched him do it all night long.

[FoxwoodsFiend]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's justified in that I knew costs me $90 to see a turn, and if I hit I get about $1850 from him... about 80% sure of that, I'd say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your reasoning is atrocious. You assume you get $1850 from him when you hit, but villain is a maniac capable of having any 2 cards. So what makes you think he'll have such a strong hand that he'll get all of his chips in? Was he going all in every single hand? I find this hard to believe.

Generally, calling with junk is better against tight players who have trouble making tough laydowns, because the fact that they're in the hand indicates that they have a strong hand. A large percentage of the time that you play 24o against this villain you're going to fold post-flop. And a large percentage of the time you hit your miracle straight or trips and try extracting chips he'll fold his junk Q9o on a 244 board or something like that.

[eagletmr]

please stop buying in for 200 with 5T blinds

[ObnxNole]

Two Words: Implied Odds. Nice Hand, Sir.

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's justified in that I knew costs me $90 to see a turn, and if I hit I get about $1850 from him... about 80% sure of that, I'd say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your reasoning is atrocious. You assume you get $1850 from him when you hit, but villain is a maniac capable of having any 2 cards. So what makes you think he'll have such a strong hand that he'll get all of his chips in? Was he going all in every single hand? I find this hard to believe.

Generally, calling with junk is better against tight players who have trouble making tough laydowns, because the fact that they're in the hand indicates that they have a strong hand. A large percentage of the time that you play 24o against this villain you're going to fold post-flop. And a large percentage of the time you hit your miracle straight or trips and try extracting chips he'll fold his junk Q9o on a 244 board or something like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This post hits it right on the head.

All of the planets have to be aligned for this to work.

By your reasoning you are arguing that about 1 in 20 times you will flop or turn the nuts AND your opponent will have a huge hand AND he will be willing to play for his stack with that hand AND you won't get re-drawn out against.

Play that crap OOP against a loosie another 20 - 30 times and let me know how it turns out.

[Sir Jecht]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's justified in that I knew costs me $90 to see a turn, and if I hit I get about $1850 from him... about 80% sure of that, I'd say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your reasoning is atrocious. You assume you get $1850 from him when you hit, but villain is a maniac capable of having any 2 cards. So what makes you think he'll have such a strong hand that he'll get all of his chips in? Was he going all in every single hand? I find this hard to believe.

Generally, calling with junk is better against tight players who have trouble making tough laydowns, because the fact that they're in the hand indicates that they have a strong hand. A large percentage of the time that you play 24o against this villain you're going to fold post-flop. And a large percentage of the time you hit your miracle straight or trips and try extracting chips he'll fold his junk Q9o on a 244 board or something like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for the reply, this is the kind of post I was looking for. For some reason it didn't enter my mind that me hitting the hand isn't the only requirement, but that he has to have a monster hand. He would play with me for a bit of money with any two cards, but not always all-in. Mainly because I have a weak-tight reputation at the particular table with those players, because I'm more willing to fold my hand than about any other player at the table, but of course that doesn't mean I'll get him all in. Thanks for the input.

But don't be too surprised about the player... he does go all in quite a bit, it seems that money is no object to him.

[Sir Jecht]

[ QUOTE ]
Two Words: Implied Odds. Nice Hand, Sir.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I was thinking at the time, but FoxwoodsFiend and LuvDemNuts makes the point that he also must have a monster, and that's the part I failed to realize. I do have good implied odds from him, but thinking that "all in" were the implied odds was incorrect.

[TheRegulat0r]

Why did you buy into a $5/$10 game with $200?

Why 24o? waiting for and playing a hand like 22-99 for set value against a guy like this makes a lot more sense to me.