Another NL hand for review

[Gomez22]

Stars .01/.02

I'm SB with A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, Button calls $.02, I call, BB raises to $.12, Button calls, I call (should I have re-raised here, and if so, by how much?).

FLOP($.36): 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif J /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check, BB checks, button checks.

TURN($.36): 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I bet $.10, BB calls, button calls.

RIVER($.66): K /images/graemlins/club.gif

I check, BB bets $.22, button calls, I call (Should I have raised here???).

Comments on this hand????

RESULTS to follow.....

[bunky9590]

River BB bets .22, should have raised pot.

[Paul2432]

Please give the stack sizes. Your questions cannot be answered without knowing the stack sizes.

Paul

[Gomez22]

Thanks Paul... didn't realize stack sizes were important in reviewing NL hands... as I may or may not ahve said, I'm a limit player.....

All stack sizes prior to deal......

I had $2.42
Button had $9.06
BB had $5.93

Hope that helps some..... below is a copy of the hand so you can see it easier:

Stars .01/.02

I'm SB with A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

UTG folds, UTG+1 folds, Button calls $.02, I call, BB raises to $.12, Button calls, I call (should I have re-raised here, and if so, by how much?).

FLOP($.36): 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif J /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

I check, BB checks, button checks.

TURN($.36): 4 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I bet $.10, BB calls, button calls.

RIVER($.66): K /images/graemlins/club.gif

I check, BB bets $.22, button calls, I call (Should I have raised here???).

Comments on this hand????

RESULTS to follow.....

[Nottom]

I don't understand why you didn't raise preflop. When I have AK in the blind I really just want to win the pot right there since I will be out of position the rest of the way.

On the turn, make a bet that matters not that 1/4 pot crap. I would have bet about $.25 if I was gonna bet anything.

I have a feeling that you are chopping this one.

[Gomez22]

MHIG......

I need ALOT of practice at NL, I realize this, but always am thinking others are slowplaying. I really don't know how much to raise with what hands, and how to interpret other's raises.... Completely different world than limit!

Virgin territory is what I am....

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

'Mez

[Paul2432]

Gomez22,

Stack sizes are important because in NL you can only bet as much as you have in front of you (or your opponent has in front of him if you have him covered) (the table stakes rule). Often, the correct play is different when the money is deep (i.e. stacks are large relative to the blinds or current size of the pot) compared to when the money is shallow.

For example, on this hand if you only had $0.20 the correct play would probably be to raise all-in when the action first got to you pre-flop. AK is a hand that likes to be all-in before the flop, but generally not for too much money and as the raiser not the caller (so you have the added equity of your opponent folding). If a lot of money goes in pre-flop with AK you are likely up against AA or KK which is a terrible situtation.

Post flop with a lot of money left to bet (say 3x the pot or more) AK needs to be played very carefully especially out of position like you are on this hand. It is a hand that can win a little or lose a lot. On this particular hand if you decide to re-raise pre-flop I think another $0.50 is a good amount, although if you do re-raise you are pretty much committed to the hand. Do you see why? If you get called, you'll have about or perhaps a bit more (depending on the number of callers) than the size of the pot left. Your re-raise represents AA or KK with which you would almost always follow through with on the flop unless the board is very scary. Likewise you should probably follow through with AK here too to force small pairs to fold. This play will probably be successful most of the time, but you are risking your whole stack. If you get re-raised all-in by the BB pre-flop though you can probably safely fold.

On the other hand if you just call the BB's raise, you could have different set of problems unless you flop something like a flush or top pair and a flush draw (in that case you should be very happy to get all your money in). If and A or K comes on the flop and you bet out and get raised you are once again faced with a very tough decision. AK is not an easy hand to play without position after the flop.

On the other hand if your opponents are so passive that they will check to the river and let you hit your hand then you have a good situation. At the higher limits this will generally not happen. You would have been forced to fold on the flop or turn. On this actual hand on the river, I think you played it right. Your hand is much better as a bluff catcher than as a value bettor. I would call the river and expect to chop or win.

BTW, I strongly recommend the Ciaffone/Reuben PL/NL book. These concepts are discussed in much greater detail in this book.

Paul

[tewall]

A standard raise is around 3 or 4 times the big blind. It's a good idea (especially starting out) to make all your raises the same size, so pick an amount and stick to it. That way you avoid giving away information about your hand. If your opponents usually call your raises, then out of position you want to stick to really good hands to raise with (like high pairs and AK). If your opponents usually fold, then you can sometimes mix in other hands.

The idea behind raising AK is two fold. First of all, you want to limit the field. Some hands like to play multiway and others don't. AK doesn't (just like in limit). So you raise to limit the field. The second reason to raise AK is it makes it much easier to play later on in the hand, especially out of position. There's an NL addage which says don't lose all your money in an unraised pot. The meaning is that if there wasn't a raise pre-flop, then your opponents could have anything. So if the flop comes something like A84, you don't know where you are. If you raise pre-flop, it's easier for you to put your opponents on a hand.

One more thought. Just as picking a standard amount to raise pre-flop is a good idea, so is picking a standard amount to bet. I would suggest always betting the pot. This way you avoid giving away information about your hand inadvertantly based on the size of your bets. A pot-sized bet is not often wrong (given that it's right to bet at all).

Another thought is that even though you're playing for small amounts, your stack sizes are quite large, much larger than most of the low limit on-line games. With deep stacks, there's much more skill involved, and the strategies are different than what you will usually see suggested here. For example, with deep stacks, AK is more likely to lose a big pot than win one. It plays much differently when the stacks are smaller, where flopping a top pair/top kicker hand is a strong hand.

[Gomez22]

[ QUOTE ]
The idea behind raising AK is two fold. First of all, you want to limit the field. Some hands like to play multiway and others don't. AK doesn't (just like in limit).

[/ QUOTE ]

I just called the PF raise from BB because I felt I had an opportunity to trap one or both players here if I got a great flop, which I didn't. I bet the turn just to see how interested they were in the hand, and could have folded to a raise, here. The calls by both of them on the turn told me that I has a good possibility of having the best hand, as neither raised me here, but I was still leary about the possibility of being raised on the river if I didn't catch either an ace of king. When the river came a king, I really had no idea where I stood as either of them could have ahd a small pair on the flop with a king kicker, and just hit 2 pair, though, so I decided to just call the bet here. I couldn't have known it pre-flop, but I think if I woulda reraised BB PF, and he showed any aggression on the flop or turn, I may have been hard pressed to call down, being as I only had 6 outs.

[tewall]

You can't trap anyone with AK when the stacks are deep no matter what you flop (except for a miracle TJQ). There are no great flops for AK, which is why you don't want to call. It's very important for AK to knock people out.

If the stacks are deep, and you have AKs, and you have position, calling is very reasonable. But here your thinking is to get a nut straight or flush, not top pair. Top pair just isn't a very good hand in no-limit, which is one of the things which makes no limit much different than limit.

When the stacks are smaller, then top pair/top kicker becomes much better, worth backing with all your chips. But with deep stacks, you're much more likely to lose your stack than double up. Remember that doubling up is the goal.

I think your play of the hand was fine. Betting the turn when the flop was checked through was reasonble. You might take it down, and if not, you could hit one of your 6 (possible) outs. The check-call on the river was very good. A bet is not likely to be called by an inferior hand, one of the pre-requisites for betting on the river. By checking you possibly induce a worse hand to bluff. Raising would be bad for the same reason betting would be. You wouldn't be called by a worse hand, and if you were re-raised you'd have to fold. There'd be no point at all in raising.

Note this is also much different than limit. In limit, betting the river is a much more viable option. Since the bet is small, you are likely to be called by a worse hand since the pot odds would justify calling with many hands worse than KK.

With a good but not great hand, you should almost always check the river out of position. Betting hands should be hands that you figure are good if they are called or bad hands which you hope win as a bluff.

[Gomez22]

It seems to me that you are saying that your plays need to be made based on stack size, to an extent???? Being short stacked, you have less to lose with AK, than you do being larger stacked? If I were short stacked at a table and had 3 limpers to me, I would be more than willing to take the gamble with AK than I would, say 99, in MP/LP??? Is this correct?

Why was the check/call on the river good? In limit, this would be a good place for a value bet/raise... I can see how I may have won the most without losing a lot here, but I had the best hand... isn't this a place where you want to put opponents to the test? Or is that BEFORE ther river(with a made hand, of course), whenn you want them to pay for draw?

Also... how much of an influence do pot odds play in NL?

It seems to me that NL is somewhat similar to SH limit, in a sense.....

[tewall]

You're asking good questions. I'd suggest the book on big bet poker by Ciaffone and Stuart which goes into detail on the questions your asking.

The goals of limit and no limit are different. In limit the stack sizes are unimportant (unless they're so short someone has to go all-in). The goal in no limit is to double up. Therefore hands that can make big hands are at a premium. Those are pairs and hands that can make straights and flushes (hopefully the nut). The top pair/top kicker hands that are the bread and butter of limit are not so important. This is assuming the stack sizes are deep.

Hands like AA and KK are especially valueable before the flop, where they are huge favorites over every other hand. So they would like to get all-in if they could, before the flop comes.

AK is also a hand that likes to get the money in before the flop. The reason is that AK is even money (basically) or better against every hand (other than AA and KK). However, once the flop comes, AK is not much of a hand (baring straight and flush possibilities) because the best it can make is a pair.

If the stacks are deep and the opposition not very good, you could do fine just by playing for nut hands and going all-in when you got them. However, any decent opposition will pick up on if you're a nut player, and they won't pay you off. Hence the necessity for mixing up your play.

Pot odds are extremely important in NL, but the thinking is different than in limit. In limit you're expecting people to stay in until the end, so you'd like a lot of people in the pot when you're drawing. In NL, it's much more likely to be short-handed. So you'd either like to be able to draw cheaply or judge there's a good chance you can get your opponent out by aggression. So you combine the pot odds with the possibility of winning the pot by aggression, and the probability of being paid off if you hit your draw to decide if it's worth playing. The ability to put your opponent on a hand is very, very important in NL.

Value bets are much different in NL than limit, because of the size of the bet. In limit, a bet on the river might only be 1/10 the size of the pot, or less. So if you have even a ten percent chance of having the best hand, you're forced to call. Thus it becomes more important to value bet, as a marginally better hand stands to gain by betting. Value betting on the river is a very important part of limit play.

In NL, value betting is important as well, but the bet is likely to represent a much better hand than in limit. Because the bets escalate as you go through the rounds, the hands remaining at the river rate to be good hands, better than just a pair. There's an important exception to this, however, which is if one or both players (assuming heads up) is on a draw. In this case, it becomes a case of having a good hand (say top 2 pair or better) or nothing. With nothing, you might decide to try to win on a bluff.

So on the end, a pair is worth about the same as an ace high hand. You can't beat a good hand. Since you can only beat a bluff, an ace high hand is about as likely to beat a bluff as a pair is.

This brings us to why betting a pair for value is bad. Since it can only beat a bluff, it makes no sense to bet it, because it will only be called by a better hand. If your opponent bets, then there's just one question to ask -- is he bluffing? If you think the chances are high enough (50/50 if a pot-sized bet) you call. Otherwise fold.

As the stack sizes become smaller, the value of pairs goes up and up and high cards become more and more important. This is because the money is likely to get in an earlier round, and drawing hands don't have the implied odds they need. If you watch some of the televised matches, you can see players going all-in a lot of the time with weak hands such as KT and A2. This is because of high blinds.

[JohnG]

[ QUOTE ]
You can't trap anyone with AK when the stacks are deep no matter what you flop (except for a miracle TJQ). There are no great flops for AK, which is why you don't want to call. It's very important for AK to knock people out.

If the stacks are deep, and you have AKs, and you have position, calling is very reasonable. But here your thinking is to get a nut straight or flush, not top pair. Top pair just isn't a very good hand in no-limit, which is one of the things which makes no limit much different than limit

[/ QUOTE ]

As you are replying to the post where he is talking about just calling the BB's preflop raise, I am assuming that when you say he doesn't want to call, that this is what you are referring to. If not, ignore what I am about to say /images/graemlins/smile.gif

I like what you are saying generally. However, in this specific situation it seems you consider the situation to be very deep and hence the above advice applies to it.

I disagree that TPTK is not a good hand for him to flop here, once the BB has raised the pot. Although it's a deep money situation, it is not very deep where what you say would apply. Given the ratios in this situation, if he calls the preflop raise and does hit top pair, he has perfect position on the flop to go for the check-raise all-in without overbetting the pot too much, thus giving him a good chance of getting doubled through with top pair. If the money was so deep where he would not be comfortable playing for all his chips on the flop, then I agree with what you wrote.