T8s in front of a rock

[molawn2mo]

Party 10/20 and I have been running over the table with cards to die for and always showing down g00t

MP is sl-p
HJ is rock - weakish-passive, sort of the type that may be playing above his roll
CO is a fish buddy
blinds are average badish

Mp1 limps, I overlimp w/T /images/graemlins/spade.gif8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, CO raises, all fold to Mp1 who calls as do I

8 /images/graemlins/club.gif7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

MP1 checks, I bet, Rock raises, MP1 folds, I 3bet, Rock caps, I call

2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I ??? and why

edit to clarify: my notes on CO and blinds were made to "explain my overlimp." They folded preflop. The Rock is the raiser.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

why did you 3-bet the flop? so you can have odds to draw to your hand on the turn?

[spoohunter]

108s advantage comes from opponents that pay you off big when you hit big hands. It is a great hand to call a raise from a rock in NL, but in this particular spot preflop I would never play it. Regardless, do as you will.

On the flop, when he raises me I am going to call or fold, probably call given the size of the pot and my 2 ok back door draws. What did CO do on the flop?

[blackaces13]

You seem to be calling the CO a fish buddy at once point, and a rock at another. In the opening reads you have the HJ as the rock but he didn't see the flop as far as I can tell.

If the CO is in fact a rock, and not a fish, then I have no idea why you 3 bet the flop against an obvious overpair. I would have peeled and check/folded the turn.

I think the preflop limp is questionable as well.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
why did you 3-bet the flop? so you can have odds to draw to your hand on the turn?

[/ QUOTE ]

Naw... As I recall, I felt like it may be advisable to over-represent my hand and gauge the rock's response; my pf overlimp was a stretch, imo, truth be told.

If I were 3 betting to increase my drawing odds on the turn I would slap myself silly for being a tard!

[Chris Daddy Cool]

yeah i was just gonna say, its tough to overrepresent stregnth when you limped in preflop.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]

If the CO is in fact a rock, and not a fish, then I have no idea why you 3 bet the flop against an obvious overpair. I would have peeled and check/folded the turn.

I think the preflop limp is questionable as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rock's raise can and will be made by overs here as well as an overpair and I sort of agree with your categorization of the overlimp

[brettbrettr]

Well, the cap is disoncerting. I guess check-call the turn and check-fold the river.

[molawn2mo]

To continue...

Mp1 limps, I overlimp w/T /images/graemlins/spade.gif8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, CO raises, all fold to Mp1 who calls as do I

8 /images/graemlins/club.gif7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

MP1 checks, I bet, Rock raises, MP1 folds, I 3bet, Rock caps, I call

2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I check, Rock checks?!

6 /images/graemlins/club.gif

I?? and why

[krimson]

I would c/c, I don't see him calling with missed overs or any worse hands. I think he may bluff the river when behind if we check to him again.

[blackaces13]

If this guy really is a rock, and not just an extreme TAG, then he checked the turn because he's afraid his overpair is no good and he's looking for a cheap showdown. I would not bet this river because I don't think there is much to be gained. I think you are either behind, or are making a bet that won't get called. Obviously he's not folding a better hand either.

[molawn2mo]

To continue...

Mp1 limps, I overlimp w/T /images/graemlins/spade.gif8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif, CO raises, all fold to Mp1 who calls as do I

8 /images/graemlins/club.gif7 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

MP1 checks, I bet, Rock raises, MP1 folds, I 3bet, Rock caps, I call

2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I check, Rock checks?!

6 /images/graemlins/club.gif

I check, he checks and shows the not-unexpected AKo

Question: How well or poorly was this hand played by Hero and Villain?

It is interesting (at least to me) to note that I think villain probably felt that he played the hand well... after all he got to showdown without having to put in a bet on the turn or river. I, similarly, felt fine with extracting 4sb on the flop and then showing this hand down without having to submit myself to a nasty turn or river raise which, taken at face value, ought mean that I wad drawing to 2 outs at best.

Who made out better in the metagame aspect, here, or was it a push?

[BigEndian]

I think this hand is over-played. If I find myself doing these things, I try to have the where-with-all to sit back take a deep breath and ask myself if I need to outplay my opponents with expensive plays to beat the game.

3-betting the flop is just bad in my opinion - weak player or no. You're just charging yourself when they won't fold often enough for the given price against the pot for the play.

The river is now a compounded errors problem. You can feel reasonably certain you're beat, but your mistake on the flop now provides a pot that lays you 8-1 on your call if he bets. No way is leading the river good poker imo.

- Jim

[BigEndian]

I think you need to work on your player descriptions.

- Jim

[krimson]

Technically speaking, villian's play is not horrid here (although i'm not sure that it's optimal).

From villian's point of view. He raises the flop to get rid of MP1 from the hand, after getting 3-bet he probably figures you for a 7 or 8, but he caps to represent an overpair. Because of this you check the turn to him and he can check behind and get a "free" shot at hitting his AK on the river. It misses and he checks behind on the river u/i.

His play worked, but I think he also loses a lot when he's behind something bigger that continues betting into him.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
3-betting the flop is just bad in my opinion - weak player or no. You're just charging yourself when they won't fold often enough for the given price against the pot for the play.

The river is now a compounded errors problem. You can feel reasonably certain you're beat, but your mistake on the flop now provides a pot that lays you 8-1 on your call if he bets. No way is leading the river good poker imo.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]

3 betting the flop was in a sense somewhat of a desparation play costing me as well as a play that might very well confuse the Rock. I believe that he made a error by capping. By capping he "let me off the hook," allowing me to check the turn without admitting weakness. As played, he then blundered, imo, by checking behind on the turn (he could just as easily flipped his cards up at me revealing his AK). I am just shy of having odds to call a turn bet and would not have.

The river is, as you say, unbetable but is check callable.

Against a rock, the last thing you want to do with your powerhouse pair of 8s is call/reraise his raise.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you need to work on your player descriptions.

- Jim

[/ QUOTE ]


Jim:

his stats were rockish using the default setting in pt and i still believe him to be weakish; his turn check behind confirmed this. his river check is good, reflecting reasonableness because I instacall a river bet.

what is confusing about my description?

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
Against a rock, the last thing you want to do with your powerhouse pair of 8s is call/reraise his raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please give me your approach, then.

[BigEndian]

In my opinion, I would never qualify someone as weak passive if they were capable of raising overcards.

This player wasn't looking to bluff you off your hand btw, they tried to raise for a free card and to knock out the other player. When you 3-bet, they capped for a free card.

This isn't a player I would try to go after at the table unless I identified other weak spots in their game.

- Jim

[blackaces13]

[ QUOTE ]
what is confusing about my description?

[/ QUOTE ]

As someone who was confused/misled by the characterization myself I think the problem is that the term "rock" means weak tight to me, even though that is presumptuous of me since all that the word really means is that the guy hardly ever plays any hands, and doesn't necessarily define how he plays post flop.

Since I imagine a lot of people assume that a rock is a weak tight player, the flop cap with unimproved overcards and a BD flush draw is not a play that a "rock", as I generically view them, would make in 1000 years.

Apparently your opponent in this hand was a very tight player who played the few hands that he played aggressively on the flop even when he missed. In my world rocks aren't aggro and they don't cap AK UI on the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against a rock, the last thing you want to do with your powerhouse pair of 8s is call/reraise his raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please give me your approach, then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against a rock, I fold to a flop-raise, even on a harmless board.

[here comes the flames]

[brettbrettr]

Yesterday we were weak tight for playing top pair worst kicker carefully. Today you're folding top pair.

[ QUOTE ]
Yesterday we were weak tight for playing top pair worst kicker carefully. Today you're folding top pair.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think a pair of 8's against a rock that raises on the flop is, or is going to stay, top pair?

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
You think a pair of 8's against a rock that raises on the flop is, or is going to stay, top pair?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not the right question. Not at all.

The question you should be asking yourself is if I don't have the best hand do I have the odds to improve? If I improve will my hand be best? These are better questions.

Also, a bit of advice, flop raises tend to mean *much* less than you think. There's a post somewhere by Nate tha Great about flop raises. I'd link it but I have no idea where it is. Perhaps one of our illustrious friends can link it for you.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Against a rock, the last thing you want to do with your powerhouse pair of 8s is call/reraise his raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please give me your approach, then.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against a rock, I fold to a flop-raise, even on a harmless board.

[here comes the flames]

[/ QUOTE ]

what brett said...

But more importantly... I do not want to bait you. I am using you to bring up a concept that is very interesting to me and has been the nucleus of the last 3 threads that I have begun and a concept that turned up in King Yao's book , page 273-275, "Mistake #7, Not Using the Option of Calling and Checking."

This last of my 3 threads is perhaps a bastardization, at best, and a misunderstanding, at worst, of this concept.

FWIW, the concept as presented in this section of the book is not one to which this forum, as a rule, pays attention to. This may be due to the forum's weighting going toward multitabling and this concept is very read dependent. I don't know. But what I do know/feel is that for my game, at least, it is an invaluable concept. As to whether or not I apply it correctly, that is, of course, open to debate.

I'm looking at the section in Yao's book that you referenced. Check-call is good, he says, when against a LAG or a calling station.

[ QUOTE ]


The question you should be asking yourself is if I don't have the best hand do I have the odds to improve? If I improve will my hand be best? These are better questions.

[/ QUOTE ]

OP is trying to navigate a small ship in a storm. He's not improving to anything by the turn - maybe two pair or trips, but the odds are very much not in his favor. Against a rock, he needs to just bail. There is a 50% chance that an overcard will come on the turn and and 50% chance it will come on the river. OP needs to think about his plan on likely cards on subsequent streets. It's going to get messy. Just get out now.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, a bit of advice, flop raises tend to mean *much* less than you think. There's a post somewhere by Nate tha Great about flop raises. I'd link it but I have no idea where it is. Perhaps one of our illustrious friends can link it for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on opponent.

[molawn2mo]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm looking at the section in Yao's book that you referenced. Check-call is good, he says, when against a LAG or a calling station.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is beyond me how you can read this section in the book and come up with the 1 sentence that you did. This section is highly complex and requires 2nd and 3rd level thinking, thinking that I am certain is not the norm for you (I say this without trying be denegrating though in reality, how is it not denegrating).

My best personal advice to you as it relates to playing poker, that is if you like money, is to try and grow beyond the simplistic 1st level of analysis to which you seem to be stuck.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm looking at the section in Yao's book that you referenced. Check-call is good, he says, when against a LAG or a calling station.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is beyond me how you can read this section in the book and come up with the 1 sentence that you did. This section is highly complex and requires 2nd and 3rd level thinking, thinking that I am certain is not the norm for you (I say this without trying be denegrating though in reality, how is it not denegrating).

My best personal advice to you as it relates to playing poker, that is if you like money, is to try and grow beyond the simplistic 1st level of analysis to which you seem to be stuck.

[/ QUOTE ]

The section you cited says what I told you it says. 1st, 2d, 3rd, 100th level thinking - I recited what the book says. And Yao's advice makes sense in Section #7: check call against LAGs and calling stations.

No need to be so negative and personal, man. Let's stay on topic and leave me out of this.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
He's not improving to anything by the turn - maybe two pair or trips, but the odds are very much not in his favor.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the pot odds? You do realize that the odds of improving are never enough to consider, right?

As for your overcard comments, your opponent does not hold every overcard in the deck so 50% (how'd you come up with this # by the way?) is not the % that you're beat.


[ QUOTE ]
It's going to get messy. Just get out now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard decisions are not a reason to fold.

[ QUOTE ]

Depends on opponent.

[/ QUOTE ]

So why do you put so much stock in his flop raise?

[molawn2mo]

I have not the strength to argue with you. You win!

I did not see you quote the following (and if I owe King Yao a royalty I'll pay it),

"... if you opponent has little, your check may win an extra bet if he bluffs the river; whereas if you bet ____
he will fold." or

"If your opponent is way ahead of you, then your check has given you a chance to catch up..." or

"You are likely to get checkraised..." or

"Checking should be part of your arsenal, used as a stealth weapon against solid players who can steal if they see weakness."

edit to reflect the above quotes are more relevant to my prior 2 threads with some applicability to this one.