River Explosion

[Ed Miller]

30-60 game at the Bellagio. Hero is a friend of mine and a strong player. I wasn't playing in the game, so I don't have much detail about the table texture. Button was described to me as "aggressive."

Hero has 8 /images/graemlins/club.gif2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif in the BB. EP, MP, and the button limp. The small blind completes. Hero checks.

Flop is 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif2 /images/graemlins/club.gif. Small blind checks, hero checks, and it is checked around.

Turn is the 5 /images/graemlins/heart.gif. Small blind checks, hero checks, and it is checked around.

River is the 7 /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Small blind checks, hero bets, EP raises (reacting to the river card in a way that suggests that it helped his hand), MP folds, and button 3-bets. Small blind folds. What is your action?

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
Hero is a friend of mine and a strong player

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why did he allow flopped trips to be check around twice?

I think he has to fold and played terribly.

Peace,
Joe Tall

[Ed Miller]

Then why did he allow flopped trips to be check around twice?

I think he has to fold and played terribly.

I don't understand why you evaulate the hand this way. I for one would play my hand this way sometimes, especially in the Bellagio 30-60. In that game, people rarely leave money to rot in the middle of the table, so to speak. I was shocked when he told me that five players, including an aggressive button, checked a 6522 board in a Bellagio 30-60 game.

Why do you think he should fold?

[CrackerZack]

Ask him why he doesn't bet the turn. Dynasty, why didn't you bet the turn? Flashbacks to checking AA twice? I think I call it and go for the overcall. Helping his hand probably means some crap like A7 or distantly 76 but that should be betting the turn. Button is aggressive so could have any crappy pair. 77 shouldn't be a concern because if you have 77, and by some miracle its an overpair, and you let the turn get checked, you should be forced to go play craps for an hour with your 7. If you think mister 7 will call 2 cold, a raise isn't terrible, but I like the call/overcall as it risks less.

[PokerBabe(aka)]

My "action" is to get a job after playing this hand so poorly. What is the advantage of checking the turn? No, wait...what is the advantage of checking the flop? With so many opponents in the hand, I would bet out 100% of the time here. Having failed to bet the flop, I am mystified as to why your pal didn't bet the turn. What trap is he trying to set now that a second heart comes on board and he gives yet another draw a shot at beating him on the river?

Can't wait to hear others' views on this one.

LGPG,

Babe /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
I for one would play my hand this way sometimes, especially in the Bellagio 30-60.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? I see no reason to check the turn.

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think he should fold?

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that I re-read the post, I would over-call. I was caught up in the check-arounds and maybe I was thinking he should punish himself and fold.

Hope it warm there, it starting suck up East here.

Peace,
JT

[mikelow]

Granted our "hero" shouldn't fold. He should call and look at a straight. The hand was played poorly. I'm not a fan of slowplaying. Too often you give free cards, and you're not getting this hand out on the turn.

[Ed Miller]

Why? I see no reason to check the turn.

Because if you never check good hands twice then when you do check the turn, your opponents will be all too happy to bet you off your overcards/gutshots/etc. that you'd like to see a river card with.

[Ed Miller]

Too often you give free cards, and you're not getting this hand out on the turn.

Huh?

[Ed Miller]

Dynasty, why didn't you bet the turn?

Hero wasn't Dynasty. Dynasty can post his own damn hands.

[stripsqueez]

the argument that there are aggressive players to follow therefore checking is ok is a bit fallacious as that makes betting out a better option too - there can be no doubt that the result of what he did looks bad - i would agree that looking bad from time to time is to be expected from even the best players

you would think that the raiser needs a straight - the 3 bet from an aggressive player is not my primary concern, but of-course you need to be at the table to make a good choice

calling the reraise is something like 4 to 1 - is he a 20% chance of being in front ? - who knows - i know how sick i would feel if i played the hand this way, called the 3 bet, and lost...

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Tyler Durden]

Wow it sounds like the average beginner could make an assload in the 30-60 game if hands are played in this manner.

What does hero hope to accomplish by checking twice? Okay I understand the point that's already been made, important to check good hands twice but how about you just get a lot of money in the pot when you have the best hand. This hand is not strong enough for slowplaying.

A five way flop and he flopped trips and he's not betting? Nonono. Just bet and build yourself a pot.

I guess he should call but it sounds like he let 98s get there. And if not, I'm doubtful that he's dragging this pot. And if he does he should donate the pot to the blind or something. This hero sure as crap ain't my hero.

[Vehn]

If I was playing in the 30/60 game here at home and the hand happened to play out as it did I would probably shrug and call 2 cold. If I was playing 15/30 I would probably shrug and fold. I haven't played the 30/60 at the bellagio so I can't tell you what I would do post shrug.

[mikelow]

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
Because if you never check good hands twice then when you do check the turn, your opponents will be all too happy to bet you off your overcards/gutshots/etc. that you'd like to see a river card with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't put in long enough sessions to create such a situation. Nor do I play a level where I see the same players over and over. Therefore, I was unable to see any reason what so ever to check.

I think I understand but I still don't like it.

Peace,
JT

[lil']

The problem I see with the 2nd check is that there is both a straight draw and flush draw out there now. You just can't risk giving another freebie.

Having said that, I am surprised at the lack of aggression at a high limit game like this.

[Vehn]

If someone picked up a flush draw or an open ended straight draw they would almost certainly bet the turn when checked to. A lot of people would bet with a gutshot too.

[andyfox]

What do you put the raiser and reraiser on that hero can beat both?

[Zeno]

Hero should bet the flop. From there on out he/she can make decision based on the following action of the players.

-Zeno

[karlson]

Ah, but what do you put them on so that he can't beat one of them?

I am having a lot of trouble coming up with consistent hands at all. I suppose they could have 89. That seems reasonable. They could have just A7 or something. Could they both have just hit a 7 and that's all? Unlikely, huh.

I'm with Vehn, except I've never played 30/60. I shrug and fold, because I'm playing 15/30.

FWIW, I have no problem with checking twice. Mason wrote about the benefits of betting out here, because people won't put you on a two, though.

[Depraved]

My experience has been that if there is a double checkaround and then a river explosion, someone usually slowplayed a monster. In this case, 66 sounds about right. Any call here appears borderline since the pot is so small. You have invested exactly 1.5 big bets, so I wouldn't lose sleep over folding. The action seems very suspicious. The double checkaround would set off alarms in my head when it comes back two cold. If it's not a full house 89 also seems possible...

Now, there is the possibility the two guys have overvalued their hand since they have no reason to believe the hero has a deuce. This is the hero's predicament - if he checks his good hands twice out of position, he can expect tough decisions like this since he will find it hard to know where he's at, since no one else does when they act.

[Mark Heide]

majorkong,

I think you want us to guess what hand the aggressive button player holds. Since, he's AGGRESSIVE, I'd say he would have bet if the board had helped him before the river card came, so I put him on 8-9, maybe even suited if he's tight.

Let's look at the pots odds and see if we can justify calling. First with 5 players there is $150 in the pot. On the river EP bets $60 and button raises to $120, putting a total of $330 in the pot. You know you will have to at least call for $120, so at this point you are getting 2.75 to 1 to call. I'd say fold, because the button knows that the EP will call, indicating that the button has a big hand.

Good Luck

Mark

[PokerPrince]

Looks like your friends got a case of slowplayitous. I'de bet that hand a great deal of the time on the flop. You'll get calls from TONS of hands that are drawing dead or near dead. Overcards,threeflushes,and pipedream straight draws will all take a cheap shot at the turn card if it's a single bet. To not bet the turn after the flop checkaround is a pretty Special Olypmics play. As for the river? Who knows I wouldn't have put myself in that situation.

PokerPrince

[DocHollyday]

[rigoletto]

Fold - this is slowplaying land and hero is the underdog with lousy odds.

Bet the flop hero!

[spoody]

Is a baby three of a kind a good enough hand to play that way? I don't think so. Maybe after the flop, but once the turn card produced the making of a flush and straight, he had to punish those players trying to make their hands. To give free cards now, so you can get freecards later seems like a loser to me.

spoody

[Ed Miller]

I think you guys are missing the point. This is not a 2-4 game. Seeing this turn get checked around is very surprising. It's virtually unheard of that no one out of four players wouldn't take a shot at ragged board on the turn after the flop was checked around.

Maybe after the flop, but once the turn card produced the making of a flush and straight, he had to punish those players trying to make their hands.

Someone who picks up a flush or straight draw can be expected to bet the turn in this game. Anyone with a pair, draw, or even maybe just an Ace can be expected to bet the turn when checked to in this situation in this game.

Also note, you have trips. Your hand is not vulnerable. If you do miss your turn checkraise and give a free card, it is likely that you will be doing so to a field of four players who are all drawing stone dead in a small pot (because anyone with a hand that is good enough not to be drawing stone dead will likely bet the turn).

Anyone who thinks that betting the flop and/or turn is mandatory is simply wrong and needs to reevaluate his understanding of poker. This is a very safe situation to check twice... a small pot with a strong, hidden hand.

I'm not saying that betting on the flop or turn is wrong. In many games and situations, you will make more money by betting your hand than by checking it. But you are mistaken if you think that hero horribly misplayed his hand on the flop and turn.

[RollaJ]

I vote crying call, raise is silly since it opens you up to a 5 bet in the Bellagio. The beauty is in this game is that the reraises could be resteals. That being said the hand was played like crap, checking trips twice against a large field is just poor playing.

As for Tyler, exactly how much is an assload??
[ QUOTE ]
the average beginner could make an assload

[/ QUOTE ]

[Ed Miller]

I will say that the pre-river play in this hand was fine. If you think it was horrible, then you need to think it through a little more.

Hero made a river decision in the actual hand that was different from the one I would have made. He remains convinced that his decision was correct while I am convinced that I am correct. I told him I would post this hand to hear the thoughts of others. So far, we don't have much to go with... though it seems like we have votes mostly for call with a couple of votes for fold.

I'd like more feedback before I post the results.

[RollaJ]

[ QUOTE ]
I will say that the pre-river play in this hand was fine

[/ QUOTE ]

IMHO.... Wrong, the second that turn card comes out and put a double draw out on the table you are looking at a value bet on so many levels. People will call with over cards at times, as well as flush draws and str8 draws and of course people who have made a pair. You cant give people infinite odds to draw out on you!

[spoody]

I have never played in the 30-60 at the bellagio, but have spent some time in the 15-30 there. And I agree that usually the turn round gets bet and even raised. But what are you saying? He had a good hand, he should have bet it.

Unless was he planning a checkraise, we will have to agree to disagree. But even then, I dont like it, I'm sure once the flop came everyone immidiately thought the BB might have a piece of it, so make them prove you wrong.

I say his hand was vulnerable...its not like he had top set or something. He had bottom trips with a terrible kicker and straight on the board after the turn card came. He had like the 10th nuts or worse. Sure he had a good hand, but by sitting on his hand, he had NO idea what the others had. Maybe if he had bet the turn and been raised, he might have had some clue where he stood. He maybe could make a little more money with the extra raises on the end by ultra-slowplaying his hand, but he risked all that money in the pot he might have won on the flop or the turn. He possibly actually lost more money by having to pay a premium on the end to call. Unless you have the nuts, especially against 4 or 5 opponents, you might want to take what you can get.

spoody

[Ed Miller]

People will call with over cards at times, as well as flush draws and str8 draws and of course people who have made a pair.

The point is that you can reasonably expect these hands to be bet on the turn, so you can checkraise.

[Ed Miller]

Unless was he planning a checkraise...

Of course he was planning a checkraise.

[spoody]

Hindsight is 20-20 :-)

I still would have bet out.

[DocHollyday]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is that you can reasonably expect these hands to be bet on the turn, so you can checkraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you bet the turn with just holding overcards? Seems to be kind of risky with that many players. Be honest, the hand was played awfull the whole way. It is far not strong enough to slowplay.

With this hand (which is crap obviously without such a flop) you consider yourself happy if you hit something and be even lucky to drag the pot, so bet the hell out and hope nobody draws out on you.

For the river, I'd do a crying call and pray that my hand is good.

[rigoletto]

Someone who picks up a flush or straight draw can be expected to bet the turn in this game. Anyone with a pair, draw, or even maybe just an Ace can be expected to bet the turn when checked to in this situation in this game.

You could call this an argument for betting the turn!

I would still bet the flop though!

[Ed Miller]

Be honest, the hand was played awfull the whole way.

You caught me in my web of lies and deceit.

Ok.. I'll start being honest now. The hand was played awfull the whole way.

[RollaJ]

I actually had a hand like this this past weekend at the Taj I saw the flop with K5 /images/graemlins/club.gif from the big blind (for a raise). I checked a flop of 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif2 /images/graemlins/heart.gif to the preflop raiser and check-raised the flop and bet the whole way (even with the case 5 coming off on the turn). Had it somehow been checked aroun I certainly would have bet the turn..... If you play long enough, you know slowplaying trips gets you in trouble when against a field. Heads up it would have been the right play.

BTW, is our hero Mason??

[DocHollyday]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok.. I'll start being honest now. The hand was played awfull the whole way.

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/wink.gifFinally. Could you do us all a favour and release us by posting those d*amn results!? Please, please, please with sugar on top!

[James282]

I wouldnt mind going for an overcall here. My reasoning is this. If the game is aggressive and you believe your opponents are aware of this, then they will not put you on a 2 at this point. Your bet here could look like T7o as much as anything else. The first raise behind you could be as little as a pure bluff, trying to say "I've got a better kicker than your little 7" or "I've got a straight, fold since it's a small pot, you're tight, and your hand is weak". The reraise from the back could be A7s(or, gasp, another bluff) if they read the first raise as a steal. I believe that these opponents would have bet any hand that makes a straight on the turn, especially 98s which has 10 reasonable outs even without the 4 flush.

In this game I believe that somebody would have bet a boat on the turn, but maybe these opponents are super geniuses and knew they could get more action on the river.

Anyway, the pot is small, but I think you will win this pot 20% of the time against aggressive and thinking opponents and that you have the required odds to make this call. If you have a read on your opponents as I described, you might even consider reraising! But yikes, I am not nearly aggressive enough for that.
-James

[Ed Miller]

[Joe Tall]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone who picks up a flush or straight draw can be expected to bet the turn in this game. Anyone with a pair, draw, or even maybe just an Ace can be expected to bet the turn when checked to in this situation in this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

So then he should 3-bet the river.

With your deduction I think that's the play.

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks that betting the flop and/or turn is mandatory is simply wrong and needs to reevaluate his understanding of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got me thinking about this, to the point that I slept on it and am responding today.

Excellent post, MK, and great way to keep it bumpin' and live.

Peace,
JT

[nykenny]

agree 100%

[mikelow]

I think you're trying to get people to agree with your viewpoint on this one. It's the play on the flop and turn that is wrong, not on the river.

[PokerPrince]

Well-stated because it mirrors your opinion?

PokerPrince

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
If someone picked up a flush draw or an open ended straight draw they would almost certainly bet the turn when checked to. A lot of people would bet with a gutshot too.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that is the case, then this is an easy call on the river.

I am just not so sure that someone will bet with a gutshot on the turn, and only some of the time I would think even opend ended or with a flush draw, with this large a field.

I echo most everyone else's comments that the turn check was poor given the unsuccessfule bid for a check-raise on the flop and with the turn card that came.

After all that, given the way the hand went down I would call on the river.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone who picks up a flush or straight draw can be expected to bet the turn in this game. Anyone with a pair, draw, or even maybe just an Ace can be expected to bet the turn when checked to in this situation in this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what range of hands do you think might raise a turn bet from Hero here?

[Peter R North]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks that betting the flop and/or turn is mandatory is simply wrong and needs to reevaluate his understanding of poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
But you are mistaken if you think that hero horribly misplayed his hand on the flop and turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow I do believe I missed the ceremony where you were crowned king of all limit poker. In the words of Chandler Bing, could you BE any more arrogant? Has it occurred to you that maybe this hand isn't clear cut? How can you possibly state that you're right and everyone else is wrong? I'm at a loss for words when you post something like this.

[CrackerZack]

[rigoletto]

Wow I do believe I missed the ceremony where you were crowned king of all limit poker.

You should have been there! I particularly enjoyed the part where Major in his diamond tiara was sprinkled by $100 chips while clubbed by the spades. It touched my heart so much I flushed.

[James282]

Where do I explicitly agree with majorkong here? I did not comment at all about the flop or the turn, besides agreeing that someone would likely bet with any improvable hand on the turn in order to win the pot right there...which I believe to be fairly obvious if you are playing against aggressive opponents. I mean really, an aggressive button with a chance to improve, and position, actually has somebody placed on a check-raise when it gets around to him on the turn again??? This seems like an ABC bet that would be made at 3/6 much less 30/60. Now all of a sudden our button friend pops a reraise on the river when a straight card comes. If he is very tricky he could be slow playing 6s full of 2s, thinking that no one will call him on the turn and he wants someone else to improve, but this seems to be a longshot.

Anyway, I don't find the turn decision to be interesting discussion. A check doesn't seem awful. While I would never do it, and I do believe trip 2s is vulnerable on this board, I think a case can be made for it, specifically, someone will almost always bet in this situation.

Anyway, most people on this thread is being deconstructive rather than constructive or even speculative. Andy posed an interesting question, "What could our opponents be raising with?" And I have attempted to answer. Agree with me, or don't, but I don't see anywhere else on this thread where somebody writes any analysis even close to mine, and I think it shows a different way of looking at the river, which is the topic at hand, right? No need to call me a mimic, especially without refuting my points. Why do we even bother posting hands if we can't discuss different possibilities?
-James

[Ed Miller]

Ok... I guess it's time to put this thread to rest.

My friend folded to the river 3-bet. The river raiser called and won with A7. The button had J7.

I thought his river fold was terrible. I would have called, looking for the overcall from the initial river raiser whom I almost certainly have beaten.

The problem in my mind was that he spent three streets telling his opponents that he had nothing. His river bet appeared to be done on a very weak holding. Thus, he needed to be willing to accept that his show of weakness might induce excessive river action (especially against aggressive opponents) and see the showdown.

When asked what range of hands he put the button on, he said 66 or 43. This button checking the turn in the passout seat meant extreme weakness or extreme strength. When he 3-bet the river, my friend assumed it was extreme strength and folded. But I still don't think he can fold.

[James282]

i wouldnt have put the button on J7..i hope your friend changed his read on him from "aggressive" to "idiot". Looks like I mixed up him and the original raiser who was the one I was having the most trouble figuring out...anyway really interesting hand, too bad the flop and turn play dominated the discussion!
-James

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
My friend folded to the river 3-bet. The river raiser called and won with A7. The button had J7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not surprising hands IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
The problem in my mind was that he spent three streets telling his opponents that he had nothing.
...
Thus, he needed to be willing to accept that his show of weakness might induce excessive river action (especially against aggressive opponents) and see the showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the earlier responses said almost exactly this. I definitely agree.

[ QUOTE ]
This button checking the turn in the passout seat meant extreme weakness or extreme strength.

[/ QUOTE ]

When an aggressive button checks on a turn like this, I find it to be extreme weakness the vast majority of times.

[rigoletto]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This button checking the turn in the passout seat meant extreme weakness or extreme strength.




[/ QUOTE ]When an aggressive button checks on a turn like this, I find it to be extreme weakness the vast majority of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also when he 3-bets on a scary board!

Oh and bet the flop by the way!

[PokerPrince]

My reply was not to YOUR comment poindexter.

PokerPrince

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Also when he 3-bets on a scary board!

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, I don't like facing that 3-bet. But given this pattern on this board:

Flop checked around. Turn checked around. Aggressive button 3-bets river.

and the choices:

Button had absolutely nothing on the turn and caught a piece on the river.

Button made a big hand on the turn and waited until the river to decloak.

I think the first choice is going to be correct more than enough times (when you weigh the times the turn check is extreme weakness vs. the times the river 3-bet is extreme strength) to make the call. Especially on a board like this with a small pot, where the button knows that everyone might just repeat the pattern and fold to a river bet.

[rigoletto]

The problem in my mind was that he spent three streets telling his opponents that he had nothing. His river bet appeared to be done on a very weak holding. Thus, he needed to be willing to accept that his show of weakness might induce excessive river action (especially against aggressive opponents) and see the showdown.

I see your point Major and isolated the river might be a good call (if you know your opponents well) allthough I suspect it's pretty neutral EV wise. I do however think that this is an argument for keeping up the slowplay on the river and checkraise if anybody bets.

I think the problem with this hand is that it's not really strong enough to slowplay and particularly not when good draws materialize on the turn.

You allready provided an argument for betting the turn (every draw and overcards will bet here in a tough game and that could also be the case for hero). On the other hand I see turns get checked around all the time on boards like this in a tough game because once the first couple of guys check the rest gets worried about the slowplay or they simply want to draw cheap.

I also believe that if you make a habit of slowplaying these little card big hands from the blinds, you'll never be able to steal the pot with a bet from the blinds on a flop/turn that didn't seem to hit anybody.

Last but not least: if you don't bet your good hands you'll never get raised.

[mikelow]

All I can say is the fold was horrible, horrible.

You can never make a big laydown on the river in limit holdem.

[Tyler Durden]

[ QUOTE ]
My reply was not to YOUR comment poindexter.



[/ QUOTE ]

Oh Snap! He called you Poindexter!

[RollaJ]

This is awesome! How in the world can you think this hand was played well? It is easily one of the worst played hands posted here. Step back and take a look from an outsiders perspective, who doesnt know "our hero".

<font color="red"> 1)Flop trips </font>
<font color="blue"> 2)check flop </font>
<font color="purple"> 3)check turn </font>
<font color="brown"> 4)bet-fold river </font>

For some reason you have blinders on. It seems your friend outplayed himself....

[glen]

A big laydown is folding for a bet in a big pot. In this hand there was no action until the river, and then he was facing two-cold and not even closing the action. I would call this a laydown, not a big laydown. Against some opponents, calling two here would be insane.

[David Steele]

It is reasonable to go for a check raise twice and you are just being results oriented in your rating of the hand.

I would prefer to bet the turn because there are lots of draws now to give action but going for the check-raise is not "one of the worst plays" seen here.

I think I would have called the river but it is debateable.

D.

[RollaJ]

I could be wrong, altho I dont feel so in this case, but checking this hand twice is a play for heads up, not multi way against a big field

[CrackerZack]

I understand his point about extreme strength or extreme weakness but I'm not so sure its true. Everyone at the table expects the LAG button to take a stab at this pot. He should at least somewhat realize this, or if he doesn't, he should simply think, with all these checks, I might be able to pick this one up. If he's holding 66, I can't see how he lets the turn get checked through also as all overcards should be calling due to his image and the fact he's in position to try to pick this one up after all the checks.

I really can't believe he folded that there though. I'd be a bit shocked when the river went nuts, which is why I wrote I'd go for the overcall also, to risk less, but you can't fold.

[David Steele]

Certainly the check-raise has a place in multi-way pots as well as heads up.

Ask yourself this: What does the probability have to be that
one of the next few players will bet, for you to go for the CR?
You would do it if it was 100% right? So,to paraphrase G. B. Shaw, we have found out you agree, we only need to find out your price.

D.

[RollaJ]

I tend to c/r more with my weaker hands, but yes a c/r is fine here. but if it doest work you have to bet the turn.... I dont even feel its open to debate

[phish]

[ QUOTE ]
Why? I see no reason to check the turn.

Because if you never check good hands twice then when you do check the turn, your opponents will be all too happy to bet you off your overcards/gutshots/etc. that you'd like to see a river card with.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be a valid point if you're playing short-handed against your usual group of regulars. Against a loose field of unknown tourist, that is not an important consideration.
The biggest problem with checking good hand twice is that you're letting the worse players (people who'd call with almost anything) off cheaply.
I think he should fold here since the pot is not that big, and it is likely he's up against a straight.

[Ed Miller]

That may be a valid point if you're playing short-handed against your usual group of regulars. Against a loose field of unknown tourist, that is not an important consideration.
The biggest problem with checking good hand twice is that you're letting the worse players (people who'd call with almost anything) off cheaply.

Not to be rude, but you are describing a typical 4-8 game in Vegas, not the 30-60 at Bellagio. People don't call with "almost anything" in this game, and you are always playing against regulars.

[Ed Miller]

Look at it this way. Hero should have called the river (now he agrees with me). Beyond that, he played brilliantly. He got two players to put in 3 big bets each on the river after they were drawing stone dead on the turn. How is that not optimal in a pot that was less than 3 big bets to begin with?

If he bets the turn, these two (and the other two who are also drawing stone dead) just fold. I repeat. Anyone who isn't drawing stone dead (with the possible exception of a stiff 3 or 4) can be expected to bet his hand on the turn in this aggressive game, and hero won't miss his checkraise. He only misses his checkraise if the field is roughly drawing dead against him. That's what makes his river fold so bad, but we agree there.

[skp]

I don't think that the river fold is alll that awful. It depends on the nature of the game and the aggresiveness of the players involved but in most games, the river 3 bettor is going to show you a hand better than trips in this spot particularly when the intial bet and initial raise both come from the blinds.

I would fold in this spot in my game and 99 times out of 100, it would be a good fold.

[Tommy Angelo]

This is a most surprising thread. Here I thought I was one of the few players here who rarely checkraises the turn, and now it turns out practically nobody does.

[RollaJ]

Im sure a lot of people c/r the turn, you just need a situation where you can be relatively sure that someone will bet....that wasn't the case here. Nobody bet the raggedy flop and another rag came. Even an aggressive player with something as strong as AK has to assume one of the players has at least a pair and will call him down.

[ChipWrecked]

That's what this fold reminds me of. It's what I always think of when faced with a possible laydown situation on the river.

I don't know if it's an old scenario or not, but I read about it on Izmet's site.

[skp]

I don't quite know that this is a fur coat dilemma. Firstly, the pot is not that big and secondly, it's rare to find someone making it 3 bets on the river in this spot with a hand worse than trips. Heck, in almost any spot, it's rare to find that the winning hand is two pairs on a paired board when you have a bet, a raise and a 3 bet on the river by 3 different players.

I think that major's buddy made a good fold.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
As for Tyler, exactly how much is an assload??


[/ QUOTE ]

an assload is just a hare less than a sh!t ton

[ChipWrecked]

Firstly, the pot is not that big

Oh, yeah, that's right. I'm not used to small pots at the river /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Hobart]

To play a hand like this in the 30-60 game at the Bellagio is spooky. Why didn't our Hero muck his hand and surrender his chips after receiving a gift flop ? Majorkong can theorize forever, from the flop on Hero tried to lose this hand. A ton of posts over terrible play.

[rigoletto]

Look at it this way. Hero should have called the river (now he agrees with me). Beyond that, he played brilliantly

I don't think it's brilliant to slowplay a hand like this if you feel iffy about calling a 3-bet. I'm not arguing 'correct play' here, but just pointing out that hero would have been better of not slowplaying if he can't make that call.

I think your own arguments for calling is trapped in a circular logic: you slowplay to get action, ergo when you get action you have to call!? Would you have posted this at all if the 3-better had shown the straight or a boat?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
Im sure a lot of people c/r the turn, you just need a situation where you can be relatively sure that someone will bet....that wasn't the case here. Nobody bet the raggedy flop and another rag came. Even an aggressive player with something as strong as AK has to assume one of the players has at least a pair and will call him down.

[/ QUOTE ]
That makes no sense. If you have AK why would you assume that someone else has a pair (actually two-pair, including the deuces) but didn't bet it? If you have AK in this hand, you should figure there's a reasonable chance your hand is best on the turn (when it's checked to you), and you need to bet -- you might take the pot right there.

But that chance of taking the pot right there is why you don't bet your trips from the blind on the turn.

Majorkong's analysis of this hand is 100% correct.

[Bill Murphy]

Yeah, but you wouldn't have checked it twice around in your game, either. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but you wouldn't have checked it twice around in your game, either. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true and should be the heart of this thread. By playing poorly he put himself in a tough spot to make a decision with no information.

Shame on him for his post flop play, all streets. He tried to get cute and paid the price.

-Scott

[SoBeDude]

[ QUOTE ]
I will say that the pre-river play in this hand was fine. If you think it was horrible, then you need to think it through a little more.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Majorkong,

Sorry I'm late to the thread, been busy for some time.

I strongly disagree with your comment above. I think his postflop play was quite bad, and this bad play forced him to a tough decision on the river.

His hand is NOT invulnerable. He gave 2, count them 2, freecards to let opponents' hands catch up, then folds when he finally gets action. I missed the section in HPFAP where this is considered good play. In contrast, I did read the section where is says you're supposed to get money in the pot when you're ahead.

I'd say the chance of the river getting 3-bet would be quite small (near 0) if hero had put in a bet or two along the way. And if he HAD been betting, a laydown to a 3-bet on the river is MUCH more reasonable.

-Scott

[Diplomat]

Hi MK,

I too am ariving late on the thread, because, well, everything has more or less been said. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to post something, because it's there. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I don't know if the pre-river play was bad or good. On the turn, what makes his check bad or good is the ballance between the benefits of checkraising, and the risks of giving a free card. In other words, is the risk of loosing the pot small enough to warrent trying to get an extra bet into the pot on the turn? (checkraise as opposed to bet) And if your friend opted to bet, would this actually improve his chances of winning the pot, and is this reduction in risk worth more than an extra bet gained occationally? However, betting the turn makes sure at least one bet goes into the pot, and that must be good.

Anyway those are my thoughts about the issue. I am yet to be convinced that betting the turn would significantly increase your friends' chances of winning the pot; but I do like getting at least one bet into the pot whenever I can, when I think I'm ahead. So I have no opinion, just questions. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

-Diplomat

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
However, betting the turn makes sure at least one bet goes into the pot, and that must be good.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not in this case. The object is to get other people's money in the pot, not your own. If Hero had bet the turn, everyone would have folded. Whereas if he checked, there was an excellent chance someone would bet.

[Diplomat]

[ QUOTE ]
Not in this case. The object is to get -other- people's money in the pot, not your own.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well yeah. But they usually want me to put the same amount of money in the pot, too. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[ QUOTE ]
If Hero had bet the turn, everyone would have folded. Whereas if he checked, there was an excellent chance someone would bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure. Maybe here, but maybe not. But it is something to think about. It's something I'd consider though when deciding to bet or check.

-Diplomat