8542ss hand (fun / brag post)

[joewatch]

Anybody play this differently? Probably everybody! Fold the flop, make a full pot check-raise on the turn, right? What if you were Villain? Would you have called the river?

PokerStars Pot-Limit Omaha High, $1.00 BB (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Hero ($100)
UTG ($62)
UTG+1 ($78.75)
MP1 ($28.50)
MP2 ($30.90)
MP3 ($51.80)
CO ($153.05)
Button ($50.30)
SB ($98)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 2/images/graemlins/club.gif, 8/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 5/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls $1, UTG+1 calls $1, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP3 calls $1, CO calls $1, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, Hero checks.

Flop: ($5.50) A/images/graemlins/club.gif, 6/images/graemlins/club.gif, 8/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets $5.25</font>, MP3 folds, CO folds, Hero calls $5.25, UTG folds.

Turn: ($16) 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG+1 bets $15.25</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $30.5</font>, UTG+1 calls $15.25.

River: ($77) 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $40</font>, after long dramatic pause, UTG+1 calls $40.

Final Pot: $157

Results in white below: <font color="#FFFFFF">

Villain mucked [3c 9s 5d Kc]

The 4th nut flush!
Outcome: Hero wins $157. </font>

[hockeyf]

When he bets the turn, you know he has the nutflush, and should push the pot, not miniraise him, you should double up on this hand.

PS. Dont wanna comment the flop call, nice catch.

[joewatch]

Don't you think somebody might minraise here with a Q high flush? Or semibluff a set with the board showing 3 cards to a str8 flush? I think that if Villain were check-raised full pot, he might lay it down (although I have yet to see someone lay down an A high flush. Ever.)

[KJ o]

[ QUOTE ]
When he bets the turn, you know he has the nutflush, and should push the pot, not miniraise him, you should double up on this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero won $76.5 of the $78.5 villain had. Good enough for me.

[ QUOTE ]
(although I have yet to see someone lay down an A high flush. Ever.)

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you ever "see" someone lay down an A high flush unless it's you?

[DRKEVDC]

I would have bet the turn, there is now way that he puts you on the str. flush and most likely raises allowing you to come over the top of him.

How is this the 4th nut flush? Are you including straight flushes in this?

[joewatch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(although I have yet to see someone lay down an A high flush. Ever.)

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you ever "see" someone lay down an A high flush unless it's you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Either that person says "I layed down the A-high flush", or it is obvious from the betting pattern. (eg unraised pot, bet, raise, reraise, re-reraise, fold).

[joewatch]

[ QUOTE ]
I would have bet the turn, there is now way that he puts you on the str. flush and most likely raises allowing you to come over the top of him.

How is this the 4th nut flush? Are you including straight flushes in this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, nut flush is the high str8 flush. I had the 3rd nut flush. (although in this case, I knew it was 2nd nut.)

[mgsimpleton]

since i enjoy being a nit, a flush is different than a straight flush. he had the nut flush.

and you had the 2nd nut straight flush. it is not the 3rd nuts when you have the 5c in your hand, it is the 2nd nuts. if the low straight flush is possible then the medium 5c9c is not and thus the low straight flush will always be the 2nd nut straight flush.

man that was fun.

[joewatch]

[ QUOTE ]
since i enjoy being a nit, a flush is different than a straight flush. he had the nut flush.

and you had the 2nd nut straight flush. it is not the 3rd nuts when you have the 5c in your hand, it is the 2nd nuts. if the low straight flush is possible then the medium 5c9c is not and thus the low straight flush will always be the 2nd nut straight flush.

man that was fun.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for clarifying. I had no idea. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Orpheus]

With all due respect: yes, you'd "see" the A-flush laydown if one of those things happened, but you said you've never seen them happen, so we're talking the realm of imagination here.

I've laid down an A-flush to an SF, haven't you? Sometimes a given villain re-raises a certain way, and you know you're beat. Would you then tell the table your read and that you are capable of laying down an A-flush?

Maybe there's a metagame reason to declare, but I consider that info too valuable. I don't want to encourage sharp players to represent straight flushes, trying to bluff me out of my nuts. Those decisions can be tough enough. I don't want more of them: I might start dismissing possible SFs more, and plausible representations of a SF tend to be delicate calls for potentially huge pots. At least for me

It's not always obvious from the betting, either. The last time I laid down an A-fl, I was acting after a big raise and re-raise, knew I was beat, and laid down quickly. Neither opponent knew I was laying down a suited ace, instead of a suited king or queen, or a missed flop.

I completely agree: it's rare that an A-flush is laid down, and that's money in your pocket when you have a SF -- but I think anyone who *can* lay it down probably won't advertise it, and a failed semibluff or K-fl (surely you've "seen" THOSE happen) can fold exactly the same way as an A-fl, unless the position and personalities line up in a way that makes it obvious -- and those situations are a fraction of your already rare SFs (Well, *I* don't get them nearly often enough. I dunno about you.)

How do I know I'm not folding too much? Easy: even most players who won't declare an A-fl fold will show a SF!

[DRKEVDC]

[ QUOTE ]
I've laid down an A-flush to an SF, haven't you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have lost to a straight flush only a few times when holding the A high. The interesting thing in all of those hands was I was all in in each instance. Guys were raising with straight flush draws and hitting them. There is no way that I can laydown to a straight flush draw. Is there?

Getting to showing, I think it is a mistake. I commented a couple of times when I would laydown the nut flush when the board pairs. That is way too much info to give as suddenly people realize that you actually know how to play and your action dries up.

[Orpheus]

Hey, I'm not suggesting laying down to a draw.I'm not sure I could deal with the large (bad fold)/(solid beat) ratio suggested by the hard numbers in some cases. Sometimes you gotta take the beats to save your sanity!

I'm talking about the times when your best read, intuition or logic tells you that you are drawing dead. They aren't common, but the OP suggested that they are NEVER properly played. The tables are fishy but not *that* fishy.

My point is that "never" is a strong word, and "never saw" equals "zero data" --a poor basis for judgement. If we don't see the actual cards, we only "see" (and may overvalue) our conclusions. Maybe he sees "truth". I can't.

Maybe I'm biased. Six months ago, I was a sucker for any SF. I simply couldn't give them credit. It wasn't a huge hole, but it was a leeak. Since then, I've done much better -maybe short term luck?- at spotting real SFs while still rivering the overwhelmng majority of my winning flushes on possible SF boards (I still don't do quite well as against possible FHs -- hints are most welcome!)

I said it in the spirit of discussion, not contention. I respect the OP enough to believe he'd lay down an A-fl if the cues were there, and that therefore he wasn't really suggesting that we arrogantly assume our opponents could never do the same.

Then again, maybe my style used to feed more/bigger pots to the SF threats than most people do. Maybe good players saw I'd call most all-in SFs. I may not declare my hand, but if I stay in, it can blab the whole story itself.