Flushing in NLHE

[jen]

I was more or less a spectator in this hand. I'm not sure what the correct play should have been and relayed this hand to a player whose game I respect and two 2+2ers after the fact who gave me differing opinions.

10-10-20. 40-to-go. We were five-handed. UTG+2 (MP) is a really loose-aggressive player. He knows how to play and plays the player. I'm guessing that he doesn't beat the game in the long run because he's too loose and too aggressive. Button is extremely loose and slightly weak. He was playing a bit tighter at the time because he happened to be ahead that night, but I don't think he beats the game either.

MP opened for $60. Button called. I called in the SB. BB called.

Flop: [K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif]

Check-check-check-bet $100. Folded to MP who check-raised, making it $400 to go. Button called.

Turn: [K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif] 3 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

MP bet $1k. He had $2k behind. Button (who had MP covered) thought a long time and said to me, "That was the card that I wanted." He showed me the T-high flush and mucked.

Did Button play correctly?

[crockpot]

there is no way to know the correct answer to this question unless you were there. just saying the player is too loose and too aggressive is not enough information to go on. i would be looking for any possible tells from him, as well as whether he seemed to be on tilt or overplaying hands lately.

what i do know is that button's flop call is idiotic. he is not getting the odds to draw at a flush unless he will get MP to keep betting into him, and he folds when this happens. why did he call?

by the way, i prefer an all-in to a call here. what does everyone else think?

[jen]

MP had played a large number of his hands for the past 45 minutes that he had sat down, check-raising or just raising big with them. He was winning a lot at the time (sat down with $1k - had about $3.5k at the time the hand went down), often getting players to fold on 4th street with large bets. He is, however, *not* a maniac and knows how to play post-flop.

I was told that he had gotten stuck in an earlier session before I got there and that this was not his first buy-in -- hard to imagine that he was on tilt though as he was up $2.5k in such a short time. He's someone that cares about the $$$ (not independently wealthy) but still plays too loosely and aggressively. His strength is that he reads people really well.

[crockpot]

well, if the button is going to call the flop, it has to be with the intention of playing the hand if he makes his flush. calling a huge raise getting improper odds, hitting his hand, and folding to further betting, is incredibly bad poker. what the hell was he hoping would happen, that MP would suddenly stop betting but call the button's bets when he was way behind after the turn?

i personally believe button should have just folded on the flop against an aggressive and tricky opponent, when the bet was that big. even with the nut flush draw i would consider folding here. of course, i never play for these kind of stakes, so take it with a grain of salt.

[tdomeski]

I agree but I too don't play with these kind of stakes so I really can't tell you. . .but to be on an expensive draw then hitting seems to me like you would have to push your chips in right there. . .

[Bolivia]

So the button semi bluffs the flop, only to get check raised (at which point he puts his opponent on at least top pair, like anyone would when they get check raised on the flop). Calling the flop to see the turn isn't so bad as long as he's doing it to see if an opportunity card hits where he can blow his opponent off his hand (he does have enough money, good reading skills, and position). He then re-evaluates his hand on the turn when the flush hits and his opponent bets to put him all in . So far nothing that wrong, unless it's clear that his opponent is the type of player who won't lay hands down and doesn't mind hitting the felt with top pair.

During his re-evaluation it is clear two things happened, a.) he realized that it is very possible that his opponent check-raised the flop on a semi-bluff with a flush draw, and b.) he asked himself (as every NL player should on every street before making any action) "Am I willing to go all in with this hand??. The answer is clearly NO in this situation. I agree with him, I'll let others go bust on a 10 high flush for 2k (or whatever it was). You take a 400 hit and move on to wait for a "no-decision" hand against a fish in the game.

Always try and be the aggressor in a hand, if you're not there's a reason and you're probably beat.

BTW, playing the player and playing with constant, and relentless but delicate aggression ("delicate" meaning you are capable of reading/knowing when your opponent has a hand and know to stop pumping money in) are the ONLY way to beat highstakes NL for real money. Otherwise you're there trying to squeeze out money waiting for real hands (making you an easy read and an easy target). Take a look at the best players in that game and watch how they play, and how often they walk away with serious money (and how often they salivate like Pavlovian dogs when someone comments on "hurting the squeezer", they're favorite past-time).

Be careful in that game though up there in South San Fran., there are a number of world class NoLimit players who can and do play with the best, and it's great (for them) cuz they're well hidden in the game. We'll keep they're names anonymous for the sake of protecting they're action.