not what majorkong was talking about...

[tpir90036]

here is an exmaple of majorkong's advice used incorrectly. don't do this:

party 1/2. mostly passive with a few agressive spots, one of them is MP2. hero is on the button with A /images/graemlins/spade.gifQ /images/graemlins/club.gif
UTG, MP1 limps, MP2 limps, hero raises, SB and BB call.

flop (12 SB): J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, MP1 bets, MP2 raises, Hero 3-bets. SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls 3 cold (!), both MPs call.

Turn: (12 BB) K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif
UTG checks, MP1 checks, MP2 checks, Hero bets, UTG calls, MP1 check-raises, MP2 calls, Hero calls (mistake?).

River (18BB): 9 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
UTG checks, MP1 bets, MP2 calls, Hero overcalls (mistake #2?) UTG calls.

i was getting 20-1 on the call.... stupid with this many opponents? someone has to have a ten, right? i am starting to second guess myself so much that i don't understand the difference between a good call and a bad call anymore /images/graemlins/confused.gif. i thought about folding after being check-raised by an opponent that i had no read on.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
my hand was (obviously) not good.
UTG had a weakly played set of jacks and MP1 showed T9.

comments? i think i did OK pre-flop and on the flop. how badly did i botch the turn/river? assuming the tens were live i was getting OK odds to call the check-raise on the turn. was calling the river fishy as all get out?

[rayrns]

If you had TPTK instead of second pair TK, I believe majorkong would advise to call. I don't know if I could call the river on that board.

[chesspain]

In the light of day it looks like checking the turn may have been the smart move. There was a bet, a raise, and 3-bet coldcall on a rainbow flop, and now a K falls, which is a pretty scary card for you. I would have bet that you were behind after the K fell, and I would have taken the free card and seen what kind of action developed on the river ahead of me.

On the river, it looks like you dead. In fact, it's difficult to conceive of the type of turn checkraising hand that MP1 could have which you can beat, as it seems highly unlikely that he's now bluffing with a busted flush, since he would not have called two cold on the flop with only a runner-runner shot to a baby flush.

I guess the question on the river is whether you might be good here 5% of the time. I doubt it, but you probably have to make the crying call anyway.

[Ed Miller]

The pot is enormous. It's never a big mistake to call down when the pot is huge.

When you make these calls, you will usually lose. You are SUPPOSED to usually lose. Get used to it.

Could you have found a fold here? Maybe... I'm not at my best right now to decide. But calling is just not a big mistake. Don't sweat it...

[ArchAngel71857]

Could you have found a fold here? Maybe... I'm not at my best right now to decide. But calling is just not a big mistake. Don't sweat it...

Ooooooooo, you post holiday drunk.

the river call seems fine. but whether you should have gotten to the river, Eh.


-AA

[bernie]

this is a turn fold. the profile of the table is passive. and this player just c/r the turn. passives dont usually do this without a very strong hand. and they usually wont do it if their 'might' be a hand that will beat them. highly unlikely the MP1 is doing this with only a set. the turn card would freeze his set.

i will agree that calling down isnt a huge mistake, but repeatedly doing it when it may be obvious your beat can compound. one should be able to get a line on opponents play or at least just the general table texture in about 1/2 hour of play. if one doesnt have at least a decent basic read of it, he's on the wrong table. along with your other post, which i thought was great, i think beginners ought to also learn how to read basic profiles a little and how certain profiles play. (in a general sense) It really isnt that hard if one is paying attention to the table as many of the players at that level arent as complex as you face higher up.

profiling players and acting on one's read with given information is greatly lacking on this forum. and has been for some time. i'm not sure what to do about that to change it or help. any ideas?

there is virtually no way his hand is good here on the river given this table description. he's behind on the turn, and didnt improve. no one is bluffing here into this pot. calling in one pot or so isnt bad, but repeatedly can develoop a nice leak.

b

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
this is a turn fold. the profile of the table is passive. and this player just c/r the turn. passives dont usually do this without a very strong hand. and they usually wont do it if their 'might' be a hand that will beat them. highly unlikely the MP1 is doing this with only a set. the turn card would freeze his set.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that this is terrible advice. Hero is getting 18:1 to close the action. He has at least four good outs to a straight, (albeit a possibly chopped pot), even if MP1 just turned the straight.

However, there is no way I'm putting MP1 only on a straight just because Hero described the table as "mostly passive." I think it is ridiculous to assume that MP1 would not c/r with a set or even KQ, which would have given him top two-pair. Maybe I'm just dense, but I don't understand what you mean by "the turn card would freeze his set." From my perspective, a set may well be the best hand at that moment, with outs for a boat. Just because some of the cards on the board may be in others' hands does not mean that they are all out of play. Furthermore, it is folly to even assume that the average, "passive" 1/2 player is even thinking on this deep of a level.

Whereas the river call could go either way, folding on the turn for one bet is the epitome of weak-tight.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
He has at least four good outs to a straight,

[/ QUOTE ]

i would highly doubt he has 4 clean outs here. and you need a nice overlay for a split pot.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is ridiculous to assume that MP1 would not c/r with a set or even KQ, which would have given him top two-pair. Maybe I'm just dense, but I don't understand what you mean by "the turn card would freeze his set." From my perspective, a set may well be the best hand at that moment, with outs for a boat. Just because some of the cards on the board may be in others' hands does not mean that they are all out of play. Furthermore, it is folly to even assume that the average, "passive" 1/2 player is even thinking on this deep of a level.

[/ QUOTE ]

the deeper level of thinking is you thinking your set or 2 pair may be good. you're right, they dont think that deep, which is why a set may freeze here. especially 2 pair. passive players are notorious for seeing monsters under the bed and not betting with decent hands. hence, passive. but they are also very easy to read. which is why you dont have to put them on a wide range when they c/r turns. this is also what makes them very profitable to have in the game. not just their calling factor but the way they bet.

[ QUOTE ]
Whereas the river call could go either way, folding on the turn for one bet is the epitome of weak-tight.

[/ QUOTE ]

this isnt just a turn bet. it's a c/r on a big bet round from a passive player. there's a big difference. you have to think how they see hands a little to learn how to play against them when they are representing a great hand. they bet the turns with decent hands, what will they c/r with? their range narrows quite a bit. not much but near nuts. there is no way he's c/r with 2 pair. a set is far fetched, but ill admit, possible. what next? maybe this passive player is c/r a turned draw? no way. then you get to consider what the others are calling with. it only takes one of them to have another out gone.

far from the epitome of weak-tight, but i dug the hyperbole.

b