When do I make the move?

[HiatusOver]

20-40 game which is 4 handed right now because of people walking, must moves taking there time getting over etc...

I have Jh9h in the cut-off and open-raise, a young tight player who plays pretty decent and has most likely read some S&M makes it 3-bets. This player definitely respects my play, i have played with him 3 sessions and am 3 for 3 posting pretty big wins each time while playing mostly solid hold'em..blinds fold and we are heads up for 3 bets.

FLOP - 8h-7d-3h

I check and call

TURN (3c) 8h-7d-3h

I check and raise

RIVER Ad

I bet

Any good? thoughts and results later

[Dynasty]

What makes you think that you have to "make a move"?

When the Ace comes on the river, you'd better hope your opponent 3-bet pre-flop with KQ.

[HiatusOver]

I agree that the river bet was very thin, and the ace on the river is an awful card for me. My question is how would you play this hand? check-call, check-call, check-fold? Bet-3-bet, bet, bet? check-raise, bet, bet? I thought I needed to make a move because I knew that if I completely whiffed I would not win a showdown, but that there was a reasonable chance for me to make this player fold overcards or a small pair (4's, 5's,6's). I also thought making raises on the flop or the turn was necessary because the equity of my big draw combined with the chance of folding a stronger hand warrented these raises.

[mike l.]

the time to make your move on that board is on the flop. the turn checkraise looks really fishy. good players generally play straight forward fast on the flop and get tricky with semibluffs an flat-out bluffs on the turn and river. so your raise on the turn is hard to believe. a flop checkraise or bet/3 bet combo would put him to the test most when you bet into him on the turn. that's your best chance of getting him to fold a small pair (unlikely) or big cards (much more likely provided it's not AK or AQ).

this is a player dependent thing but also a flop texture thing. btw, it's correct to sometimes semibluff the turn and then when they dont fold right there just give up on the end when you miss. you should do this sometimes to help balance the times you bet the end when you miss. keep em guessing if theyre paying attention. your semibluff carries all sorts of unpleasant reverse implied odds when youre committed to betting that river every time--not good stuff heads up.

last thing and then ill shut up: good players who may have read s+m know that the game changes significantly 4 handed so it's in some ways become more correct to play straight forward and still fairly tight shorthanded, rather than loose aggressive turn that top card on board into a 2 in your head chip spray with gutshots s+m shorthanded style. that style is most effective against timid unaware players who think it's same as a full game and cant figure out why they keep missing the flop so often all of the sudden (it's cause theyre seeing so many more flops so much faster), not against possible winning thinking players who understand shorthanded.

[mike l.]

"I also thought making raises on the flop or the turn was necessary because the equity of my big draw"

im not going to say it was played terribly but here are a couple more things i feel compelled to add. i guess the reason im so stuck on this hand is because the way you played it used to be the standard way i played this hand: in other words, i knew no other way to play it! very expensive lessons i learned:

1. you have a big draw on the flop, not on the turn. on the flop you have twice to get there with a ton of outs. nice.
on the turn you now have just one chance to get there (adding in the small chance maybe you get a fold from your opponent). so your hand has gone down significantly in value from the flop to the turn.

2. if you find yourself feeling like you need to make a move (and moves are great if timed right and if mixed with straight forward play) against good players who caught you trying to steal and who now have position on you heads up then you have a problem with trying to do everything you can to win every pot you enter. this is a huge huge problem! it's very important to make sure you try as hard as possible to win the really big pots and even then only when you see a clear possibility to your chip investment, but on the smaller pots you want to be careful you are not just leaking chips all over the place when your chances of bluffing out a player are too thin.

[HiatusOver]

Mike, all very good points, and I appreciate the reponse since I am an unknown poster (though constant addicted lurker). I only posted this hand because I think I most likely misplayed it, but I also think there is so much room for discussion on how it should be played. My thinking during the hand (probably influenced by playing a lot of 30-60 pokerstars lately) was that a raise on the flop as Clark style would be treated like nothing, but a raise on the turn would have a good chance of making a hand like AK, AQ,KJs, K10s, 55, 44, 66 (see there are tons of possiblities) lay down...I also wouldnt have minded a showdown hand to check behind, me miss my draw and the river going check, check...when he bet the turn I thought my possible 18 outs were more than enough to try to win the pot right there...as a foreshadow to the results on the river bet he thought, and thought and thought and...

[Tommy Angelo]

"My question is how would you play this hand? check-call, check-call, check-fold?"

Yes. Routinely. With all thought and effort directed toward figuring out if I'm beat if I improve. I think that applying effort toward what to do when I make a pair or better is lots better than applying effort toward slinging chips around with jack-high out of position against a preflop reraiser.

Tommy

[Michael J. Sykes]

[ QUOTE ]

2. if you find yourself feeling like you need to make a move (and moves are great if timed right and if mixed with straight forward play) against good players who caught you trying to steal and who now have position on you heads up then you have a problem with trying to do everything you can to win every pot you enter. this is a huge huge problem!

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent advice...and even more true when your opponent is not a solid/tight player. However, are you suggesting that the default play in this situation against a "typical/unknown" player should be to passively chase your flush draw and fold if you miss?

My "default" strategy would be to check-raise the flop and bet the turn. Notice that if the opponent behaves as expected, this plan costs one small bet less than either betting-reraising the flop or going for a turn check-raise. Furthermore, the opponent may also check the flop, giving you a free card and a semi-bluff opportunity on the turn.

-MJS

[Michael J. Sykes]

Hi Tommy. It seems to me that when you are unfamiliar with your opponent and do not pick up any tells (which is more likely the case when playing online), you will have no idea whether your pair is good if you made no move on the pot.

When your opponent checks the flop behind you, do you still check-call the turn and check-fold the river unimproved?

-MJS

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]
the time to make your move on that board is on the flop. the turn checkraise looks really fishy.

[/ QUOTE ]

good points, but I wonder about this. If I'm sitting in his opponent's shoes, the turn checkraise either looks like nothing, or a monster. plenty of people will call the flop with a monster and then raise the turn, no?

--turnipmonster

[Tommy Angelo]

Michael,

"When your opponent checks the flop behind you,..."

This is a delicious situation, for both sides. I am much more familiar with the other side, the reraise-preflop-and-then-check-behind side. And I think I can say with some certainty that around here, only the toughest players make this play, and against them, with me as the initial preflop raiser, their check-behind on the flop says, "Let's check it all the way down unless somebody pairs, and we'll see who started with the highest cards, and don't you dare try anything because I will call you down with ace-high." Their check-behind on the flop is an offer to de-escalate, which I will accept with most any hand I would check the flop with.

So, with the J9, if he bets after I check the turn, I would fold. The whole pot has suddenly been financially and emotionally deflated by the flop check, and I'll be glad to just let it be done with. I know this sounds kinda crazy but with little chance of collecting extra bets, and being out of position, and after a checked flop, I routinely fold flush draws and open-enders on the turn.


Tom

[mike l.]

"are you suggesting that the default play in this situation against a "typical/unknown" player should be to passively chase your flush draw and fold if you miss?"

there is no such thing as default play. at least there shouldnt be. at least in a live game there is almost always enough information (and this is not just information you have re: your opponent, if he is unknown to you it may be only information you know he has about you if has watched you play a coulpe rounds for instance) to concentrate and plot out a strategy for each hand that will maximize EV. of course figuring out can be very difficult sometimes.

as for this hand i think given what we know of this player that checkraising the flop or betting it so that we can 3 bet is the right play. the ideal thing to do is to get yourself in a situation where you can lead on the turn after having shown strength on the flop. this will put something like AK in the hardest spot and will force a good player to dump any big cards without an A.

[HiatusOver]

On the river I bet my J-9 high, my opponent, thought and thought and thought (by the way, what am I supposed to be doing during his thinking? Talking to a neighbor? Staring straight at my opponent? Ordering a drink? Staring into space? I know there is definitely no default answer to this, but I think it is an interesting topic). After about 10-12 seconds of thinking my opponent called, I tabled Jh9h said good call and he flipped up pocket 5's, he was visually suprised to scoop the pot.

Here was my thought process as the hand developed. I decided not to check-raise the flop although most of the time in this situation I would. My goal was to make an ace-high hand fold and I thought this guy would go to the river with ace-high if I went check-raise, bet, bet. Maybe from my online play of late I have began to see this play as a sign of weakness. Too often check-raise, bet, bet can not beat a showdown hand and I almost always will call it down online. If the turn went check-check I would have been pleased with my cheap draw, but once he bets it I think I have a good chance to make him fold a lot of hands, and I dont see him checking behind too often here with hands I think that he could lay down. I also believe that the equity of my draw (12 definate outs and 18 possible) makes my turn raise a lot "cheaper" than it actually was, and remember I was going to see this river no matter what. The ace on the river is an awful card for me and I am sure most of you see why, but I bet it anyways now getting 10-1. I wonder how this hand would have played out with different cards on the turn and river.

One last thought, I disagree with people who suggest check-call, check-call, check-fold. I have a very big draw, especially on the flop with 18 possible outs. The turn raise is very debatable and more a way to mix up my play, while trying out a new way to win a pot (I will battle with this opponent again), but putting in no action on this hand seems very wrong to me.

[HiatusOver]

"Notice that if the opponent behaves as expected, this plan costs one small bet less than either betting-reraising the flop"

When I am a favorite on the flop, which I usually will be with this flop it is "costing" me money not to get as much money in there as possible. The only reason not to get the money in on the flop is if I think I can make my opponent fold on the turn if I miss. I thought this was the case but I was probably wrong

[obi---one]

I think that was a good move. Especially if you play with this guy often. Look at the board, he called you down with a pair of fives with an ace on the board two more overcards and a paired three. From his perspective what could he beat at that point. Eventhough that play cost you two extra big bets, if you are able to make any hands over the next couple of hours you will show a handsome profit from that play. If I know someone is not capable of check raising without a big hand on the turn they will never be able to take a profit from me. Just because your play did not result in your making the hand or your opponont folding does not mean that it was not a good play, or as everyone here likes to say +ev play. This person has to call you down with sub-standard hands now. Which will more than make up for the two lost bets, not to mention everyone else that is watching will do that same

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at the board, he called you down with a pair of fives with an ace on the board two more overcards and a paired three.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're suggesting that HiatusOver's opponent played the hand poorly by making bad calls. I think the absolute opposite is true. His opponent understodd that is was very unlike that HiatusOver had much of anything on an 8,7,3,3 board on the turn. 55 is going to be good there quite a bit.

[J_V]

I think you overlooked the fact that he has a flush draw with his two overcards and a gutter.

""Let's check it all the way down unless somebody pairs, and we'll see who started with the highest cards, and don't you dare try anything because I will call you down with ace-high."

That is incredibly accurate.

[HiatusOver]

Not sure what you meant here JV, can you elaborate or clear it up for me? I am a big lurker and a fan of your style of posting and advice, how do you think this hand should be played most of the time?

[cero_z]

Hi Tommy,
He's a favorite on the flop against most of the hands he's put his opponent on, i.e., small pair, AK, AQ, A AT, (provided they're not also suited in hearts), AJ, A9. Why not show some aggression there against these probable and vulnerable-to-a-bluff hands?

[J_V]

Tommy suggested folding the turn...well I think thats unreasonable since you could/do have so many outs. I think Tommy thought that you just had a gutter and 2 overcards.

I also thought that Tommy's observation about the check/check flop scenario's was remarkably accurate. It means exactly what he says it means - "I have nothing, but don't you dare F#$% with me, cuz I'm showing this down." I aam often on both ends of this and I think the same way he thinks on this one.

About the actual hand, I think you have a duty to play this hand very hard, particularly on the flop.

When you are playing at a fairly high level, against tough players, you are gonna be in these situations where psychology becomes a factor. In this hand, you are likely to be raising light, he knows you're likely to be doing that, and you know he could be reraising light. There is no gurantee anyone has a big pair here or even AK. Whatever, all I'm trying to say is it's gone a little past ABC HFAP bullshit and now it's become quite a dogfight.

Now, since you're out of position and you got caught raising light, most of the time you're gonna miss and fold on the flop, cause you got caught out of position raising light and that's that. Some people fight these battles very hard, I don't. I guess that's a style issue.

But some of the time you are gonna connect with the flop and splash some chips.

Most of the time, when you are splashing chips, it's cuz you nailed the flop. You have very good hand and you're trying to get paid. And that's all well and good, but you can't only put chips in when you hit hard. Otherwise, there are easy countermeasures and very good players can outplay you. So when you flop the big draw, it only makes sense you go to town here as well (when if you get called the EV is not that negative and it gives cover for you only going wild with big hands). In this instance, you have an oppurtunity where you're only a small dog to an overpair and a favorite to top pair on the flop. It's a freeroll, in that your hardly giving any EV to an opponent who will call you down 100%, and you are masking your play when you have them nutted. So, that next time you flop two pair, he'll have to consider the fact that your pumping a draw (human nature will naturally, make him start calling you down too much). IMO, these big draws don't come up that often so when you have it you gotta pump it. And (at least on the flop) it's not costing you any EV to go wild.

So, me I would go to war on the flop. I'd put in six bets if he let me. And if I missed the turn I'd slow down cuz the EV loss is bigger since you only have one card to hit.

The way you didn't isn't bad, but you create a situation where you are giving greater EV than you have to (although you are less likely to get a fold out of your opponent my way). So, it's give and take, but Tommy's call, call, fold is a very bad idea. Hope that clears things up.

[J_V]

I just read you logic and it is good. I'd still say minimize overall EV loss by getting the money in on the flop even if that's slightly less likely to get him to fold.

[Tommy Angelo]

"I think Tommy thought that you just had a gutter and 2 overcards."

I saw the flush draw. (Recall that I commented on folding flush draws.)

"Tommy suggested folding the turn ... ...well I think thats unreasonable"

I agree that it would be unreasonable for me to suggest to you or anyone that you fold the turn. But nonetheless reasonable for me to fold the turn in the situation described.

Tommy

[obi---one]

I agree if you look at the board, 5's would be good in a lot of cases, however you need to take in acount the preflop action. Many players save their raises for fourth street because it is more expensive, if you three bet someone then they raise you on the turn they are usually saying that you big pair is no good. If an ace hits on the river and you still get called by 5's that is a tough call for him. AND, if he does call and win you will make your money up very quickly if you tighten up because observant players are going to see your play and should call you down with less powerful hands quickly recoupling your lost bets.

[Michael J. Sykes]

[ QUOTE ]
When I am a favorite on the flop, which I usually will be with this flop it is "costing" me money not to get as much money in there as possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were a favorite on the flop, this would favor the bet-reraise the flop strategy. When a solid opponent makes an isolation reraise against me, I expect him to have AK, AQ, or a medium to large pair. In this case, your J9s will only be favored when your opponent holds overcards that are not the same suit as your hand (30 combinations). If your opponent holds an overpair (30 combinations) or AK/AQ of hearts (2 combinations), you are a dog. There is also a possibility the reraiser could have flopped a set with 88 or 77. Against players who will reraise with some weaker hands, you are more likely to be the favorite. I am not sure whether your J9s would "usually" be the favorite on the flop against typical or unknown opponents in this situation.

-MJS

[Michael J. Sykes]

I like your psychological analysis of this situation. Upon reflection, I agree that after the flop is checked, it usually would not be wise to semi-bluff the turn. If you only had a flush draw with no gutshot or overcards, then folding on the turn could be correct or more likely a small mistake IMO (depending on the likelihood of getting paid off on the river when you hit). With extra potential outs as in this case, however, I think folding would sacrifice too much EV on the current hand.

-MJS

[Michael J. Sykes]

I forgot (or did not notice) that you said in your original post that the game had become 4-handed. In this light, I am inclined to agree that you would usually be favored on the flop in this situation.

-MJS

[J_V]

What? This isn't gonna fly here Tommy. You can't just dismiss the laws of math here with a little tomatoe tamato routine.

[HiatusOver]

How can he suggest a fold on the turn getting 6/1 before you factor in river money if you hit?

[CrackerZack]

Tommy exists in a black hole where laws of math don't apply. Would anyone else fold? probably not. Would he do it now and do it again? probably.

[Dreamer]

This kind of voodoo advice makes you question the advice some people give.
Why even play suited cards if you wont take advantage of the odds they offer.
Now if somebody was playing from a small bankroll and wanted to decrease variance I could understand.
If that was the case they would not play J9s in the first place.

[glen]

The cards are suited, yes, but in a heads-up situation versus a preflop 3 bet out of position after check-calling the flop, many opponents will not fold enough to make this semi-bluff check-raise worth making. The fact that there are now two hearts on the board make it even less likely that the move would work. One can both undervalue and overvalue suited cards in a specific situation, even though, on balance, they are better. Your post seems to ignore this.

[Dreamer]

Your post totally ignores the math.

There is 6 sb in the pot and you can check and call costing you one sb bet.
I am not counting catching a J or 9 as outs
The flop was 8h-7d-3h meaning a 10 is also great card.

This is not even close, the fact he has a big pair means he is more likely to pay off your straight,flush or 2 pair.

The advice to check and fold is terrible in this situation.

[glen]

I'm guilty of responding to a fragment of a post, and rereading the original post, and I thought tommy was criticizing the check-raise. . . in any case, I agree it's insane to fold here. I was just saying how some people use things like picked up draws and tend to overplay their hands. Once the flop goes check-call, I think you have to check-call the turn against most reasonably intelligent opponents. When you said "Why even play suited cards if you wont take advantage of the odds they offer?" the major value of a hand being suited comes from semi-bluffing opportunities, which, in this hand, was just used at a bad time, imo. Also, i don't see how you could understand if someone would fold in order to decrease variance if they were playing on a small bankroll. If one can't make correct pot odds decisions becuase they're worried about their bankroll, they simply shouldn't be playing. . .

[Tommy Angelo]

"How can he suggest a fold on the turn getting 6/1 before you factor in river money if you hit?"

I have to do this slowly because I'm old.

We each put in three small bets before the flop. That's six. Plus 1.5 SB's from the blinds. We're up to 7.5 total. And the situation I said I'd said I'd fold in is if the flop got checked, and I checked the turn. So now he bets the turn, adding two more SB's to pot, bringing it up to 9.5 SB's in it, which converts to 4.75 big bets, which means I'm getting 4.75/1 pot odds to call on the turn, not 6/1, a difference of 25%, plenty enough to tip the scales of a math-based decision, no?

I'm not saying tip the scales correctly. I'm just saying, folding isn't automatically outrageously stupid, as it would be if the pot odds really were 6/1 as you said.

Stop. I need more coffee.


Tommy

[Robk]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying tip the scales correctly. I'm just saying, folding isn't automatically outrageously stupid, as it would be if the pot odds really were 6/1 as you said.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well against an overpair you've got 12 outs. So he's got 32. That means getting 4.75:1 folding still qualifies as "automatically outrageously stupid", even ignoring the river action.

[Tommy Angelo]

"Well against an overpair you've got 12 outs. So he's got 32. That means getting 4.75:1 folding still qualifies as "automatically outrageously stupid."

But not as stupid as getting 6/1. And not as stupid as realizing just now that this is the same thread I bowed out of months ago when I realized I was all mixed up, as I am again, as I am doing again.


Tommy

[mike l.]

"But not as stupid as getting 6/1. And not as stupid as realizing just now that this is the same thread I bowed out of months ago when I realized I was all mixed up, as I am again, as I am doing again."

sheeit, all i know is i went back and reread my post and i appear to have posted something quite right and smart, the nut solution to the whole situation. so at what point in the past few months did my brain turn to mush and i completely forgot how to play this game??

sheeit.

[HiatusOver]

I have to admit Mike that I thought this same thing when I revisited this thread! Your contributions to this thread were huge and they are all stuff I still think about. As for what has happened since then...Ocean's 11, 8-16, That STUPID race for dollars promotion which you wanted to drop down limits for, calling raises with 75 suited and not dismissing it as wrong, and then finally the dealer comment. I have played a lot of O'11 20-40 and I think it is easily one of the softest I have ever experienced...why dont you just sit in that game whenever you want to play poker and crush it for 50 dollars/hour?

[MRBAA]

Tommy Angelo is pretty funny, writes decently and obviously plays well. Yet his comments/advice are often clearly wrong. From those who sit with and respect him (I know Ulysses is one) how does he win in spite of being so eccentric?

[Vehn]

Doesn't it occur to anyone else that tommy writes this stuff just to get a reaction?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Yet his comments/advice are often clearly wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

But wrong is so subjective in this game...

[ QUOTE ]
From those who sit with and respect him (I know Ulysses is one) how does he win in spite of being so eccentric?

[/ QUOTE ]

Tommy usually starts with better cards, often has a better idea of what the other guy's cards are than the other guy has of his, and is playing with position a lot more than the other guy. Those more than makes up for a "bad" fold every now and again. And then there's that whole emotional control thing. I'll let others elaborate.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
What? This isn't gonna fly here Tommy. You can't just dismiss the laws of math here with a little tomatoe tamato routine.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was a good line, JV, but it took you five months to come up with it?

[Dreamer]

Draws by their nature have very high variance.
Playing J9s is obviously a drawing hand which may cost a lot of money.
Yes the EV is there but you may be running bad and miss the next 15 flushdraws, its possible even if unlikely.
Hitting a nine high or jack high flop is full iof variance.
Obviously much less varinace playing big pairs and AK or AQ as if a K or Q hits the flop you will probably be ahead and can bet strongly.

As an example if you have a small bankroll and are in a crazy raising game on the button you may throw away certain hands that you have the odds to call.
You sacrifice EV for variance.
Yes, its wrong and bad poker, I would never play any game without the correct bankroll but people do it all the time.

[Dreamer]

Looks like he f**cked up and admited to it in this thread.
No big deal, we all make mistakes, me more than most.

A lot of people look to tommy for advice so he should label these jokes accordingly.

[glen]

"Glad you reconsidered."

fwiw, I didn't reconsider, I just stated that I never disagreed with the idea that Tommy was wrong, and, as we learned today, he didn't either.

"Playing J9s is obviously a drawing hand which may cost a lot of money."

When you openraise J9s is the co, it is not a drawing hand. the drawing part of the hand adds value, but you don't expect it's value here from making flushes and straights as much as making a pair, stealing the blinds, or using position to win the hand.

"Yes, its wrong and bad poker, I would never play any game without the correct bankroll but people do it all the time."

I'm guessing at some point you will, like many of us, and it's not the worst idea, as long as you don't sacrifice EV for variance. . . /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Dreamer]

I'm guessing at some point you will, like many of us, and it's not the worst idea, as long as you don't sacrifice EV for variance. .

(1) It will never happen, I would not play any advantage game be it poker, blackjack or others without the correct bankroll
Your guess is incorrect just like the fold.

(2)Its a terrible idea to not sacrifice EV for varinace if you have a very small bankroll.
If I have a bankroll of $100 and play 100 lotto tickets I might have an EV of $150 if the jackpot is large enough.
Should I sacrifice EV for variance?