My email to Ulysses

[jen]

I think this hand is very context-sensitive and so didn't think it was particularly relevant for 2+2, but Ulysses strongly disagreed with my play and really wanted me to post. So Ulysses, here you go --

LC, 5-5 game, $200-$1700 stacks. I was the biggest stack.

****************

there's a decent regular there who plays aggressively
(bluffs and talks a lot...asian, sunglasses). he bluffs
a lot but mostly stays out of my way.

ok, first hand we played together - he limped. all
folded to me in the BB. I called. flop came high cards.
I checked, he bet the pot ($20 - an auto-bet for him
here), I re-raised ($50). he said to me - "you got
some of that, huh?" - and folded. I said, "I just
knew that you didn't get any of that." guy beside me
laughed. asian guy said, "just keep doing that..."
an hour later, XXX does the same check-raise move
to the guy... asian guy said - "just keep doing
that..."

fast forward another hour - XXX opened utg for $15,
asian guy called, two others called, I called with
3h6h in SB, BB called.

flop: [2 5 T] (rainbow)

checked around.

turn: [2 5 T] 4 (rainbow)

I had ~$1700, barely covering the asian guy. I bet
$40, BB called, asian guy raised $120, making it $160
to go. all folded to me. I went all-in. BB folded.
asian guy thought not too long and called.

river: [2 5 T] 4 6

I busted asian guy who had a slow-played set.

[Ulysses]

My initial response
---
With these stack sizes, I go back and forth on the pre-flop call. I only make the call if I'm playing well enough that I feel I can get away from losing all my money w/ flush over flush. How big are the other stacks around the table (this should be in your post, as it's important in the preflop decision)?

[addendum: most of the stacks were much smaller. Given that, I say just muck it pre-flop]

First off, the turn lead bet. If someone is going to call $40, they're likely to call a pot bet of $90. You can't count on getting raised here, but the more you get called with on the turn, the more you can bet on the river. Also, betting $40, you are laying a great price for someone to bust you w/ something like 78.

[addendum - all things considered, I'd bet at least $75 here]

So, things go well and you get raised. Now there's $90 + $40 + $40 + $160 = $330 in the pot. You raise $1500. I hate that. I'd put you on exactly two hands at this point - a set or A3. If I have TT I have a really tough decision. If I have A3, you bust me. But when a straight is possible on the board that has an Ace in it, it's easy to put someone on that hand since you'd expect them to play A3s in this situation. So, you let the guy easily get away from a ton of hands - overpairs, pair + straight draw, small set, etc. Sure, the guy is waiting for an opportunity to get you. But I think it would have been a much better play to raise $400-500 and then push on the river.

[addendum - with that kind of raise, I don't think a one-card straight card on the river that requires you to have a 3 will kill action from any hand that would have called an all-in on the turn. But he will be getting odds on the river bet to call w/ some hands that he might have thrown away to the turn all-in]
---

And some elaboration in another email
---
First, pre-flop. The more I think about it, the more I dislike that call, mainly because it's so easy to lose all your chips to a bigger flush. I don't think this is a big deal, though.

Then, you have a huge hand on the turn. You'll either get action or you won't. If one or more of your opponents has something like 88, they will quite likely call two bets. By betting more on the turn, you can bet more on the river. If they are going to steal (which is a big possibility on that board after it gets checked around), by betting more on the turn you make them put more chips in for a steal raise, so again, betting more on the turn is better. And if they have a hand (say, Ten crap-kicker), betting more on the turn just makes it easier to get all the chips in. So, I think the weak underbet is a big mistake for that reason. As well as the fact that you are giving great odds to a gutshot draw. And if they have a monster, well, it doesn't matter all that much.

Now, when you get raised, I really dislike the push. There are some idiots who will call here w/ anything that beats top pair. But you said this guy was OK. It's not hard to put you on something like A3 here. So you let him get away from a lot of hands that could bleed off most of his chips in two bets.

I guess it comes down to this: If he has a set, you can get all the money in regardless. But by pushing, you give him a chance to escape from bottom set. But a lot of other hands, you can get more chips in, so the three scenarios are:

1) He's stealing: how much you raise is moot, he's folding.
2) He has a medium-strength hand - he'll fold to an all-in, but will call raises up to a certain size based on his hand, then will call more on the river.
3) He has a set - if it's top set, it probably doesn't matter. With bottom or middle set, if you raise he'll either reraise or the pot will be big enough for you to easily stack on the river. But he might fold those hands when you push. In any case, I don't see any upside to pushing on the turn when he has a set.

It seems pretty clear to me that pushing on the turn here is a mistake. I'd never do it. I think it would be interesting to hear what the real experts think. One thing I consider is that maybe I don't push enough. This is a great example of where I think (including the given context) it's clearly correct not to push. I'd definitely like to hear what others think. So, post it. Please. :-)
---

[Paul2432]

This is a game mostly played by regulars right? I think it really is impossible to say what the right play was without being there. Jen may have picked up on some small dynamic of the game, that told her that the all-in would be called.

Paul

[J.A.Sucker]

Hey Jen,

Who was it? Was it Vin (8 seat, Vietnamese guy)?

[JKratzer]

I agree with Ulysses on every point. Preflop, not a good call, consider - if they weren't suited would you play? Too many times people overvalue suited cards. 3 6 is not a good hand. I would also bet more on the turn and reraise much less than all-in. Reraise just enough that you think he will be pot-commmited--> depends on his stack. If you truly feel your actions are correct based solely on your personal read of this particular player, no one can really disagree with your actions, because you did get all his money this way. However, against most solid players I would not expect similar results consistently.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
if they weren't suited would you play?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's actually a really good question.

[sam h]

I agree with Ulysses on the preflop play and that a bigger turn bet is called for. But as far as the push goes, I think Jen might be right here and it is pretty player/vibe dependent. The thing that swings it in favor of a push (in addition to the player and history, which is the dominant factor) in my mind is the small turn bet. I can just see this guy thinking, "She must be bluffing. Why make such a small bet on the turn if she had a wheel or top set on this board? Yeah she thinks she can push me around but I've got a set damnit!" Other factors favoring pushing: Jen will be in a tough spot if she raises 500 or so and the board pairs (although generally a laydown will be safe here). Jen's action may be killed if she raises 500 or so and another straight card hits.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah she thinks she can push me around but I've got a set damnit!

[/ QUOTE ]

The times he has a set, sure. But I just think that sometimes given this sequence he'll have something that's not a set, but can potentially still get all the chips in the middle. And pushing is the only way there's a chance he can get away from a small set.

[ QUOTE ]
Jen will be in a tough spot if she raises 500 or so and the board pairs

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably not. I'd expect him to re-raise all in on the turn most of the time when he has a set, so the money is likely to go in on the turn when he has a set.

[ QUOTE ]
Jen's action may be killed if she raises 500 or so and another straight card hits.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's a 3, possibly. But if an Ace or 6 hits, I don't think that changes much. If he calls the turn raise, I don't see him deciding on the river that she has a hand with a 3 in it. Sometimes he'll fold, I guess, but I think that if he has a hand that would call an all-in on the turn, he's very likely to call an all-in on the river with those hands even w/ another straight card.

[jen]

Yes.

[jen]

I didn't read Ulysses' post (I read it originally when he emailed to me), but here were my responses to him:

1. I don't think folding 36s is bad, but I also think it's playable in this game -- passive, full of unscary players. I wouldn't play this out-of-position in a more difficult, aggressive game.

2. I bet $40 on the turn, because any two over-cards may call as well as a host of other dead hands. I wanted to build a pot. And I believe that given my table image, if I bet the pot, $90, then all might fold.

3. I went all-in because the Asian guy was feeling like he was getting pushed around. I also thought he either had a set or nothing. If he had a mediocre hand on the flop, then he would have bet it. If he had a mediocre hand on the turn, then he would have called.

So if he had nothing and was trying to push me off my weak bet, then he wouldn't call a pot-sized bet either. But if he had a set, then he'd call my all-in (when it's possible that he won't call an all-in on the river if a scary card hit).

4. This guy is a decent, aggressive, bluffing player in my estimation -- but I wouldn't put him in the "good" category.

[AeonBlues]

Ok, I may be a low stakes NL player, but I just have one comment.

My instinks tell me that Jen is a good enough player to get away from a 6 high flush when it's beat by a better flush, and I can't imagine her facing a hudge reverse implied odds situation with this hand, so the pre flop call seems reasonable.

This week I laid down a J high flush on the flop, and watched the A high beat the K high..... Jeeezzzz, it wasn't even a tough fold, it was totaly the obvious thing to do.

AeonBlues

[Boris]

Ummmmmmmmm..... let's see here. It cost you $10 to get to the nuts and then you win $1700. Looks like good poker to me.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
The times he has a set, sure. But I just think that sometimes given this sequence he'll have something that's not a set, but can potentially still get all the chips in the middle. And pushing is the only way there's a chance he can get away from a small set.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know the player. You think this guy would call four or five hundred more here with two pair? If the board paired on the river and Jen checked, would he put her in regardless of whether he filled up or got counterfeited.

[ QUOTE ]
If it's a 3, possibly. But if an Ace or 6 hits, I don't think that changes much. If he calls the turn raise, I don't see him deciding on the river that she has a hand with a 3 in it. Sometimes he'll fold, I guess, but I think that if he has a hand that would call an all-in on the turn, he's very likely to call an all-in on the river with those hands even w/ another straight card.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think you're right about this.

I guess my thinking was 1) He's probably not calling a decent sized raise here with two pair anyway, so its going to be a fold unless he has A3 or a set 2) The small bet on the turn makes the chance of this player folding a set, given the information about his play and the table dynamic, pretty unlikely.

If you widen his range of calling hands for a pot sized raise, maybe that is a best option. I've never played with this guy, so I'm working off pretty limited information.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know the player. You think this guy would call four or five hundred more here with two pair?

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely.

[ QUOTE ]
If the board paired on the river and Jen checked, would he put her in regardless of whether he filled up or got counterfeited.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, good point. I didn't consider that case. She probably loses money there because I think there's a good chance he'll check behind when counterfeited and bet when he fills if he has two pair on the turn.

[Phat Mack]

I don't pretend to be an expert in NL, but I liked a lot about how you played this hand.

1. I don't think folding 36s is bad, but I also think it's playable in this game -- passive, full of unscary players. I wouldn't play this out-of-position in a more difficult, aggressive game.

I've come to the conclusion that there are no good and bad NL hands, only hands that I know how to play, and hands I don't know how to play. I used to know a guy whose life's mission was to promote the play of 3-6. I thought he was ridiculous. I started playing it occassionally so that I could be ridiculous, too. It's not that bad a hand, because it's not a hand that I am going to get in trouble with. Being suited helps, but you don't want a flush or a flush draw: you only want a flush as an "escape" if it comes runner-runner while at the same time making someone a higher straight.

I don't see how you can lay it down for $10 BTF if you are comfortable playing it. You are getting close to 170:1 against a guy you feel you can out play.

2. I bet $40 on the turn, because any two over-cards may call as well as a host of other dead hands. I wanted to build a pot. And I believe that given my table image, if I bet the pot, $90, then all might fold.

The $40 bet worked. Some guys would have seen it as a milk bet and gone to ground. Others would see it as an attempt to keep the bet off and jumped on it. This guy raised. Good read/good play.

3. I went all-in because the Asian guy was feeling like he was getting pushed around. I also thought he either had a set or nothing. If he had a mediocre hand on the flop, then he would have bet it. If he had a mediocre hand on the turn, then he would have called.

I think this was the correct play. I've only played the LC game a few times, but I noticed that the players didn't like it when I shoved my stack in too early. It was more like a pot limit game. He may well have thought you were bullying him. To get a big payoff, you need an opponent with a strong 2nd-best hand. There's no way to finesse some cheese out of $1700.

Against a better player, you might consider simply going all in on the turn. There's no reason to, so he can't put you on the straight.

Have you thought how you will play this situation the next time it comes up against the same line up?

[J.A.Sucker]

When Ulysses originally told me about this hand, I basically agreed with him, essentially for the reasons that he brought up. However, I don't dislike the way you played it that much anymore now that I know who your opponent was. However, I would have bet the pot on the turn, enticing Vin to make a raise of ~ 300 with a lot of hands. Then, you can just push in. If he has a hand, then he'll call. If he doesn't then you allowed him to bluff off more chips when he tries to resteal from you. Against most players, I think you have a better chance of getting paid in 2 shots (pot turn reraise, rest on the river), but against Vin, who fashions himself as God's gift to poker, then I think that pushing in sooner rather than later might even get some sort of a "hero" call. Nice hand.

[Ulysses]

LOL. Here's what I said to Jen when she told me who it was:

"My comments re: the general situation stand (and so the post is still helpful). But I think I like your push against Vin. He bluffs so much that he is indeed someone who could call your all-in w/ one pair there."

I think my one pair comment is what you mean by the "hero" call.

But I also think that given the opponent, who is likely to re-steal on the turn, a bigger turn bet will lead to a bigger re-steal and thus is your best shot to get the most out of your hand in the case where nobody has much of a hand.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Ummmmmmmmm..... let's see here. It cost you $10 to get to the nuts and then you win $1700. Looks like good poker to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the board had paired on the river, would it have been bad poker to be in this hand in the first place?

[Ulysses]

So, the reason I wanted Jen to post this was because I often don't push in spots like this, trying to milk more money out of my opponent. But I sometimes wonder if maybe I'm just not pushing enough. So, that was really the question I hoped people would give some input on. As I stated in my initial response to her, I don't think the pre-flop call really matters either way.

But thinking about it a little bit more, I'm reconsidering. In a game like this (5-5 blinds, 10 to open) with stacks like this (you at 1700, others 200-1500), with 4 people in the pot for 10 or 15, are you calling w/ any two on the button? In this spot, if you were Jen on the button w/ 36s, would you call? Sure, you have two to act after you instead of one, but you do have the button. If you call w/ 36s, you call w/ 36o, right? And if you're calling on the button w/ 36o to a small open w/ multiway action and some deep stacks, aren't you pretty much going to call w/ any two? At least any two that can make a nut straight?

That just feels wrong to me, but maybe I'm not playing enough hands. I dunno. Anyone got anything interesting to add?

[limon]

will the raiser lose a bundle with an overpair? is he one of the $1000+ stacks if so ill call here pre flop. i know before i ever call that the only player ill get in against without the nuts is the raiser. i dont want to get bushwhacked by one of the cold callers. i have ok relative position here. ill get to see the field react to the raiser on the flop and figure out if i can manipulate a situation to my liking.

on the turn im gonna bet out bigger it looks more suspicious. and when he raises me i just might move all in if i KNOW hes on tilt. it doesnt sound like hes on tilt here just sorta paranoid, in this state hes gonna call a much bigger bet than usual with a mediocre hand. i figure its 50/50 hes just making a play for the pot, if hes got a big hand hell set me all in or call all in on the river. I want to set this up so ill bet the pot on the turn.

[Boris]

It's irrelevant if the board pairs on the river. The fact is Jen got all her money in when she had the nuts.

I don't know how people can criticize her so much. She shoulda done this, she shoulda done that. blah, blah, blah. A big part of no limit is playing the player. she did so and got all his chips. she manipulated the guy to get busted when he had way the worst of it. what more can she do?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
It's irrelevant if the board pairs on the river. The fact is Jen got all her money in when she had the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my point, Boris. You said "it cost you $10 to get to the nuts and you won $1700." The fact that she won $1700 here is just as irrelevant wrt the question of whether or not the pre-flop call is good. I happen to think it's very close and am not sure that tossing in that $10 here in this situation is going to be a long-term winning play. See limon's response for some good thoughts on that question.

[ QUOTE ]
she manipulated the guy to get busted when he had way the worst of it. what more can she do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Those of us who know her opponent have agreed that the push was a reasonable play against this guy. But I'm surprised that you think the discussion re: how to bet in this general situation is worthless. She didn't know this guy had such a big hand when she bet the $40. But she did know that this is a guy who might make a move at her with position. Given that fact, might a bigger turn bet be better in this situation?

Additionally, I find myself in this situation sometimes where I have the nuts and I think my opponent has a pretty good hand but not necessarily a great one. The initial point of posting this was to get some discussion on what circumstance might make a push right as opposed to trying to milk his stack in two chunks.

[Phat Mack]

In a game like this (5-5 blinds, 10 to open) with stacks like this (you at 1700, others 200-1500), with 4 people in the pot for 10 or 15, are you calling w/ any two on the button? In this spot, if you were Jen on the button w/ 36s, would you call? Sure, you have two to act after you instead of one, but you do have the button. If you call w/ 36s, you call w/ 36o, right? And if you're calling on the button w/ 36o to a small open w/ multiway action and some deep stacks, aren't you pretty much going to call w/ any two? At least any two that can make a nut straight?

It would be nice if FossilMan would jump in here. I've always thought he had a lot of interesting ideas about these situations.

[tewall]

36s is better than any two. There's some definate things you're hoping for. One is the nut straight, and another is a flush in a situation where you know the flush is good (for example, heads up against someone you can read is not on a flush, or backdooring it). So being suited adds some value to the hand.

I think you're right that the decision is close. With large stacks it would be easier to decide to call, and with smaller ones to fold. Extrapolating a bit further, with larger stacks you could have a marginal call with any two that makes a nut straight. But who knows where to draw the line?

[jen]

"Preflop, not a good call, consider - if they weren't suited would you play?"

No, I personally wouldn't.

I think whether me playing for $10 more in this spot is "correct" is a judgement call based on my playing ability and the nature of the game. I'm not sure how you can make such a blanket statement that the hand wasn't playable in this spot for me, unless it's your position that 36s is never a playable hand in NLHE -- in which case, I disagree.

[jen]

Thanks - that basically sums up my line of thinking. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[jen]

"I've come to the conclusion that there are no good and bad NL hands, only hands that I know how to play, and hands I don't know how to play."

Exactly.

"Have you thought how you will play this situation the next time it comes up against the same line up?"

Not really - but I'll probably use a more subtle approach. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[jen]

"However, I would have bet the pot on the turn, enticing Vin to make a raise of ~ 300 with a lot of hands."

I obviously didn't know that Vin was going to make a play for the pot when I originally bet $40. I bet $40 because there were enough fishy players in the game who'd call $40 but not $90, and I thought that was the best way of building a pot.

Regardless, if I bet the pot and then pushed in after a raise, then I think Vin would be less inclined to call my all-in as I would clearly be representing a real hand.

"...who fashions himself as God's gift to poker"

At least we're talking about the same guy. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[jen]

"will the raiser lose a bundle with an overpair?"

The opener is different from the guy I was playing against. But any of the people that were in the game are apt to lose a bundle with overpair.

"is he one of the $1000+ stacks if so ill call here pre flop."

The opener probably had ~$500, but a $15 open doesn't suggest a particularly strong hand in that game.

[limon]

you call a raise with cheese hoping to break someone with a losing hand they cant get away from. if people are opening with all sorts of crap this is a re-raise or fold situation. why would you want to play without a read on your opponent? with players in the middle i fold.