Checking the flop through with AA...

[chesspain]

I finally was able to properly use a stop-and-go concept from HEFAP to maximize my chances of winning a huge pot. Tell me if anyone disagrees with how I played this hand...

Party 1/2...pretty fishy, with a couple of uber calling stations....

I'm in MP, and dealt A /images/graemlins/heart.gif A /images/graemlins/heart.gif

UTG calls, folded to me and I raise, MP2 coldcalls, folded to the CO poster who folds, button coldcalls, SB coldcalls, BB three-bets, UTG folds, I cap, everyone calls...five to the flop for 22SB...


T /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 3 /images/graemlins/club.gif

It's checked to me, and realizing that my best chance of winning this pot is to make others call at least one BB, I only check, MP2 and button also check...


[T /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 3 /images/graemlins/club.gif] 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif

SB checks, BB bets (Bingo!), I raise, folded back around to BB who calls...headsup to the river for 15BB...


[T /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 3 /images/graemlins/club.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif] 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif

BB bets, and given that he just bet into me when this third club appears despite my raising him on the turn, I just call (too weak?)...results below...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
BB shows K /images/graemlins/spade.gif K /images/graemlins/club.gif, and MHIG

[Trix]

Bet flop, u capped preflop...you are expected to bet this. and u cant give a flushdraw a free card. and ull smile if some1 with an overpair or a ten with a good kicker checkraise you /images/graemlins/smile.gif . bet river, its good more times than its not, as far as i know.

[TBone]

[ QUOTE ]
It's checked to me, and realizing that my best chance of winning this pot is to make others call at least one BB, I only check, MP2 and button also check...


[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? Your best chance of winning this pot is continuing with your aggression when you likely have the best hand! You've got two possible draws out there, you've got two people behind you, you capped the flop, so the odds of someone betting into you (or even after you check) is very slim. You're in essence giving every pair, every flush draw, every open-ender and gutshot draw a free card after being super aggressive pre-flop. Heads up, a play like this could work, but with this many people in the hand, you're playing with fire--a very dangerous fire!

T

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
It's checked to me, and realizing that my best chance of winning this pot is to make others call at least one BB, I only check, MP2 and button also check...


[/ QUOTE ]


Huh? Your best chance of winning this pot is continuing with your aggression when you likely have the best hand!

[/ QUOTE ]


No, No, No...anyone who is on a club flush is going to hang around to the end no matter what I do. In addition, anyone who either has a gutshot (e.g. QJ, 67 etc.) or caught any piece of the flop (e.g. K8o) is going to have the correct odds to see the turn, since the pot is already huge.

However, if I do bet the flop, and receive four or five callers, I will have now increased the size of this already huge pot even further so that all of these non-flush chasers now have closer to the correct odds to also call a bet on the turn, which increases the likelihood that someone will draw out on me on the river.

In situations like this, with the pot already huge by the flop, the number one goal is maximize your chances of winning the hand, which means trying to prevent someone from outdrawing you on the river, since there is no way you are going to prevent them from outdrawing you on the turn.

This is all directly out of HEFAP, and has also been discussed at length across various threads here in the past month or so.

[Chaos_ult]

I think it's a close call between checking and betting, because as you have already stated, given the size of the pot, you aren't going to be pushing out any club draws ( as you said, 22 bets in the pot, that gives any drawing hand the correct odds to call a raise ). On the other hand, you really dont want to give the draws a free look at the turn. I think your decision was fine given the circumstances, however.

[MicroBob]

yes....i was just re-reading that section earlier tonight.
if they're going to call your flop bet anyway then it is best to just call and then go for the raise on the turn according to S&M.
they specifically state, 'it may sound crazy....but wait for the turn to raise'
you're hoping to scare away someone from seeing the river card with this raise on the turn.

somebody may draw out on your on the turn....but they were going to see the turn anyway...

i'm not nearly experienced enough to answer this with any degree of authority (i.e., I still kinda suck) but it appears your logic jives with that of HEFAP in the When The Pot Gets Big section.

[Ed Miller]

IMO, you played this hand perfectly. If you do not understand chesspain's flop play, read the Loose Games section of HPFAP.

[PokerNoob]

BB should have bet out the flop, knowing you might raise and charge the drawers or get them out. I suppose he was looking to checkraise you, but position was all wrong, you want the field to be facing two, not calling and then calling again. On the other hand, maybe he just fears AA and wants to see if you bet.

Raise the river, you're behind only to AK of clubs and I'm not sure he bets that on the turn. If he 3 bet TT pf, good for him.

[ecooke]

Since you know the /images/graemlins/club.gif flush draw is getting the pot odds to call regardless of when you bet, charging the maximum to see it is your only option IMHO. This point is only compounded by the 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif falling on the turn. With bottom pair, even a marginal player will often fold to a bet on the flop, but now trips is more of a concern (you said the table was fishy). I like the raise on the turn, but in the future the damage may already be done. Calling on the river can go either way.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]

Raise the river, you're behind only to AK of clubs and I'm not sure he bets that on the turn. If he 3 bet TT pf, good for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I admit that I did not put as much thought into my river play as I did for my flop check. Given that I raised him on the turn, and he still bet into me on the river, I had to wonder if I was no longer the favorite to win this hand, especially since I assumed that there was close to zero percent chance that he was bluffing.

Looking back over the action suggests that BB was likely thoroughly confused by my stop-and-go action. Indeed, why would he only call my turn raise yet bet into me again on the river, unless his hand had improved. Since his hand did not improve on the river, his turn and river plays seem inconsistent in retrospect.

I am guessing that my flop check made him believe that I could not possibly have AA (or even any premium pair?), and that I was semi-bluff raising with AK/AQ on the turn when the second three hit.

Nonetheless, given his lack of aggression on the flop and turn, I had to consider on the river that he had a hand which could beat AA. Hence, my river call.

[kiemo]

I thought the BB was going to show a pair of threes!


I like the play. I didnt fully understand it until your second post, but it makes sense now.

[Brian462]

I think you played this hand very well and it perfectly illustrates what is talked about in HEFAP. I don't think things could have gone more smoothly, with the flop being checked through and the BB betting into you on the turn.

Although, I wonder what the best course of action would be if either MP2 or the button had bet on the flop and a few callers came along. If MP2 had bet and you had a few callers do you think waiting for the turn is still the best play? If so, when the turn comes do you now check-raise or do you bet out and hope MP2 raises you there(although most players wouldn't raise with a hand on the turn that couldn't beat you at this point). The reason I ask is because sometimes when I attempt a play like this it doesn't get checked through all the way and I'm not sure if I would be better off building the pot on the flop or sticking with my plan of waiting for the turn.

Any suggestions would be appreciated, thanks.

[TBone]

IMO, you're giving your micro-limit opponents too much credit. Most micro-limit players are not good players, many of them probably don't even know about pot odds. They're going to call w/ total crap. MajorKong's post said to play aggressively when the pot's big, and this pot is big. You completely missed a bet from all the players who would have called. This advice may be good when playing better players, but I still disagree with using this play at micro limits. You state in your original post that your best chance of winning this hand is to make people call 1 BB on the turn as opposed to increasing the pot size w/ a bet on the flop, but I don't think this applies at all in micro limits. Just my opinion.

T

[BugsBunny]

Yes and no - the point of this play is that by keeping the pot smaller at the flop you're actually draining your opponents bankroll faster.

When they call the raise on the turn it's a -EV play for them. If you had raised the fjop it becomes +ev for them. Granted it's more +ev for you - but you're better off facing giving them -ev situations rather than any +ev at all (when possible - sometimes you can't avoid it)

It seems counter-intuitive - but by not raising the flop you help them lose faster - which means you win faster.

[ProfLupin]

The thing is, this play worked here against micro-opponents! He got everyone to fold on the turn. If he had bet the flop, he might be on the river against many opponents instead of just 1.

Great hand! Great learning experience for us.

[me454555]

I'm not really sure if the play worked or not. I'm pretty sure that no one with a flush draw folded the turn, and I think open enders would have called as well. Most LLers are pretty oblvious to the subtletess of poker such as pot odds and implied odds.

I think as everyone pointed out, the pot is HUGE. Almost any draw can come along and get the correct odds to do so. Raising the turn doesn't make things much better b/c I've seen LLers call to the river in a big pot with anything, regardless of the pot odds. I think playing aggressive and betting out might be the way to go. If the draws are coming along anyway, charging them is better than giving them a free shot to hit it.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not really sure if the play worked or not. I'm pretty sure that no one with a flush draw folded the turn, and I think open enders would have called as well. Most LLers are pretty oblvious to the subtletess of poker such as pot odds and implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Sklansky's Fundamental Theory of Poker, it doesn't matter whether your opponents understand pot odds or not, or even act according to said knowledge. By forcing everyone acting behind me to coldcall on the turn (after not increasing the size of the pot on the flop), I cut their pot odds to 7:1, meaning that anyone playing on with middle pair or a gutshot was not getting the correct odds to call. Since the pot was already huge, I would not have minded if everyone, including BB, folded right there, but I am not overly displeased if they call, since I am theoretically making money on their call whether I win this hand or not.



[ QUOTE ]
I think as everyone pointed out, the pot is HUGE. Almost any draw can come along and get the correct odds to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, as I just pointed out, this is untrue. Some draws had the odds to continue, some did not. Ignoring your responsiblity to understand pot odds and to play in such a way so as to manipulate the odds in your favor will prevent you from maximizing your winnings in the long run.



[ QUOTE ]
Raising the turn doesn't make things much better b/c I've seen LLers call to the river in a big pot with anything, regardless of the pot odds. I think playing aggressive and betting out might be the way to go. If the draws are coming along anyway, charging them is better than giving them a free shot to hit it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen players coldcall on consecutive streets with 27o when the board shows all Broadway cards--so what? That doesn't make it correct to just throw money into the pot willy-nilly and hope that you win.

I admit that until recently I did not clearly understand the concepts illustrated by the play of this hand. But I worked hard to make myself understand. However, if some of you are either too lazy to try to learn these concepts or are simply refusing to acknowledge that they will apply, then you are losing money. If that is your perogative, then so be it.

[AviD]

Good post and great play chesspain! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I like the river call, especially coming from BB. You played it correctly IMO with him betting into you despite your turn raise.

[CardCuda]

IMO - Played perfectly. Well done!

[BaronVonCP]

I find it suprising that people are still saying that you need to bet the flop to "charge the flush draws".

MajorKong goes nuts trying to beat it into our heads and people still think that this is a bad preflop check.

"they are going to call anyway, make them pay to draw out"

If they are going to call anyway, make them call when it is a -EV play not when the may have odds to chase the longshots on the flop, thus building their odds on the turn.

blah


oh yeah, very well played. I would have raised the river. I wouldn't think that 2 clubs would bet out the turn. I can see 2 clubs betting the flop, but not the turn. I think you have an easy river raise. You confused your opponent. Call and lose to a 3bet, but you win this one more than enough to make the raise profitable IMO.

[TBone]

I understand the point of the play, but there was no bet on the flop with only a couple people to play behind.

The example listed in HEFAP also does not include a flush as well as a possible straight draw--when checking the flop w/ AA. He specifically mentions that allowing a free card can be dangerous as someone can spike their second pair or a backdoor draw. That is not the case here as there is both a possible flush and open-ender draws, and you've in essence given a free card to some very live draws in addition to anyone who flopped a pair. (there was no bet and one or two players to act behind hero)

A very important distinction that is not discussed also is the fact that someone needs to bet the turn in order for you to raise. You have no idea where that bet may come from. If a rag on the turn is checked to you, do you risk another free card hoping someone behind will bet, or do you bet, therefore losing the opportunity to raise?

I still think this play is not appropriate at this limit and given this situation.

T

[CardCuda]

I think chesspain played this hand well....but let's (for discussion purposes) say using the same hand. It's not checked around...MP2 or the BTN bet the flop and everyone calls to you.... Raise or call?

And how does the flop bet from late position effect your turn play with the board pairing? Just curious.

[chesspain]

With respect to a late position bet on the flop, my decision to call or raise would be dependent on how many players have already called the bet and how many, if any, would have to call two cold if I raised. Obviously, if MP2 bet and it was called around to me, I would only call. Otherwise, it would necessitate a quick judgement call.

With respect to my turn play after this, whereas I was mildly concerned anyway about someone having a 3, I would not have been more concerned about a 3 in play following a late position flop bet, since between the heavy PF action and the scary board, I would be incredulous if someone holding only a 3, with no other draw, would be willing to bet on that flop. So basically, any LP flop bet would not make me more worried about someone holding a three.

[jmark]

[ QUOTE ]
According to Sklansky's Fundamental Theory of Poker, it doesn't matter whether your opponents understand pot odds or not, or even act according to said knowledge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this. I've seen people cap the turn looking for a inside straight at these microlimits. I would tend to think that alot of people playing on these tables are going to the river with their inside straight draws or bottom pair, etc.

If your raising on the turn isn't going to get the draws out (whether or not they have the "correct odds" to call), the only people you're getting out are the ones with absolutely nothing who would fold the turn for 1 bet even if they called your bet on the flop.

If this is the case, it doesn't seem like it matters how you play the hand, tricky or straightforward -- if you were destined to lose you're going to lose. So why not get in your bets when you can because you're going to win here more often than not. As an extreme example, the posted hand here would seem to be one of the best possible because you might get in a raising war with KK if he's the kind that won't give you credit for aces.

[spamuell]

Nice post chesspain, this illustrates a very important point.

You played the hand excellently, although as others have said, you should probably have raised the river, but the point of the post is clearly about the flop/turn play and that was perfect. Nicely done, your talents are wasted on microlimits. (I read your post about obsessive personalities in the Psychology forum, and I understand why you play them).

[chesspain]

Spamuell,

Thanks for the kind words. However, I'm not so egotistical to believe that I'm ready to begin crushing the higher limit tables. I remained at .5/1 until my bankroll was up to $1000, which was obviously a higher amount than was necessary. Since my bankroll is now approaching $1900, I may well decide to make the jump to 2/4 in the very near future, assuming I don't lose too much money during my trip to Vegas later this month. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ScottTheFish]

I think what chesspain is saying is that you're right, playing tricky or straightforward probably won't affect the outcome of this one hand.

But any time you can manipulate the odds, and get your opponents to do things that are mathematical mistakes, you come out ahead in the long run. Like Chesspain said, every time they put in a -EV bet, he makes money, regardless of the outcome of this hand.

This and a lot of the other concepts Sklansky teaches are pretty complex. I'm a long way from implementing them in my own game, but I'm starting to see why they make sense, and that's a start! /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

For example, it would never have OCCURRED to me to play AA like this in this situation. But after reading these posts, I see why it makes long term sense.

[CardCuda]

Excellent -

I often run into this kind of scenario, large family pot with a big pocket pair, rag flop.

I often struggle with how to play the flop and turn when a "weak" player (anytwowilldo) bets after I've checked my overpair (EX - AK bluff attempt seen it too many times, or even QQ bets this flop) also when somewhat of a decent player bets his draw to build a pot (either OES, or flush on this particular flop).

But is there any instance when it's a large family pot that it is better to raise the bettor in an attempt to thin the field on the cheap st. and at the same time give them more odds to call?

I currently play it depends on the the number of callers...more callers = call and less callers = raise. Even though I feel and sometimes know I have the best hand the raise on 4th st. is still ideal.

In short I can't think of any reason a call on the flop and a raise on 4th st. is not the best play with Big pocket pairs. But I want to make sure I'm not missing something.

PS - Am I making any sense here? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[el_grande]

Don't be so overly cautious! Assuming you have a job and your bankroll is not your life, move up as soon as you have 200BB-300BB at the next limit. You should be playing 3/6 right now.

My party bankroll started at $100, and I'm getting closer to $400 where I will switch to $1/$2. I don't think there is any need to worry about better opponents until $5/$10.

[cold_cash]

This post has been up for awhile but I just got to it and had to say that I think this hand was excellently played.

I don't have any specifics about the hand itself, but one thing I did notice in a few of the responses (that I don't know if anyone else covered already) was the notion that just because a poor player "doesn't consider pot odds or implied odds" and will call any bet with any draw, and is oblivious to this mistake, manipulating the size of the pot in order to get that player to make such a mistake is a waste of time.

The fact is, it simply does not matter if that player realizes he is making a mistake or not. What matters is that he is, in fact, making a mistake. Whether he knows it or not is irrelevant -- keep making them make mistakes.

Nice hand.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
This advice may be good when playing better players, but I still disagree with using this play at micro limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

the concept is from the loose games section. this section is fantastic for the micros. what type of players are playing in loose games? not good ones. that's why they're called loose games and not tough games. get the idea?

b

[bernie]

would you rather them cap the flop with a gutshot or the turn? i prefer to have them pay the most long runwise that i can.

the idea is that if they are staying, they are paying much more longrun than if you bet the flop. especially since you're that much more of a favorite if you're still ahead.

b

[bernie]

another example in the book has the str8 draw. you have to have an inkling that someone will bet the turn to make this play. you cant always just assume the worst will happen. especially if you've been watching the players well enough.

b

[chesspain]

...although of the five hundred individuals who read this thread, she was the first one to see the following:

[ QUOTE ]
I'm in MP, and dealt A /images/graemlins/heart.gif A /images/graemlins/heart.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

and state "So, you were dealt two aces of hearts?" /images/graemlins/smirk.gif


DOH!...Of course, one was the ace of diamonds. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[AviD]

That is how I intpret it as well. By betting/raising the flop and getting many callers, you are generating a bigger pot for drawers, and therefore (despite their poor play) making it a +EV play for them to call turn bets/raises (sometimes).

The goal is to make it a -EV draw for them on the turn, and in the long run...it makes you money because they are playing hands with negative expectations.

Thats the way I see it at least.

[Dylan Wade]

What's all this concern over "winning the pot"? Why not just play for value? Who cares about winning the pot, it's not a tournament. Especially when the pot is so large it's particularily difficult to manipulate players out of the pot (and your biggest threat, the flush draw *can't* be shaken off his hand). Also, there's a good chance you'll be check-raised on the flop, shutting out backdoor and chase draws on the flop(the only draws you can shut out anyway). Even if no-one holds a hand I expect you to get check-raised in this large of a pot.

[DeuceKicker]

[ QUOTE ]

Ignoring your responsiblity to understand pot odds and to play in such a way so as to manipulate the odds in your favor will prevent you from maximizing your winnings in the long run.


I admit that until recently I did not clearly understand the concepts illustrated by the play of this hand. But I worked hard to make myself understand. However, if some of you are either too lazy to try to learn these concepts or are simply refusing to acknowledge that they will apply, then you are losing money. If that is your perogative,[sic] then so be it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it have to be an either/or situation? Can you think of no other possiblility? I can think of at least two off the top of my head.

But on to a non-rhetorical question for BugsBunny who said:
[ QUOTE ]
When they call the raise on the turn it's a -EV play for them. If you had raised the flop it becomes +ev for them. Granted it's more +ev for you - but you're better off facing giving them -ev situations rather than any +ev at all (when possible - sometimes you can't avoid it)

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say (just picking numbers out of the air) that raising your AA on the flop has a +EV for you of $.50, while it is a -$.15 EV for your opponents to call (we're not talking about the flush draws, here). Then let's assume that waiting till the turn and raising makes it a +$.35 EV for you, but a -$1.00 EV for your opponents.

I understand that the FTOP says that you want to maneuver your opponents into a worse EV situation, but should you really do so at the expense of your own EV?

Should you sum the EVs (make a play that lowers your EV (but still stays +EV) only it if lowers their EV by even more) or is it worth giving up much more EV to tip their EV to the negative? It seems to me that what's most important is widening the gap between your EV and theirs. If theirs stays positive, so be it; you're both making money off the four-out chasers.

[Yerma]

This is some crappy idea you made up. HEFAP doesn't say to do this in MP with players behind you. That's because your play is bad. You read this in HEFAP and didn't understand it. A good player looks at what you did and just laughs. Read your HEFAP again...I can see how it helped you the first time!!!

Here is a good example of when you should check with AA:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=148152&page=&view=&sb =5&o=&vc=1

LOOLLLLOOOLOLLOOLOLLLOOOOOLOOOLOLOOLLOOLOLOOLOOOOL LOL

[Zetack]

My supposition about why this kind of play bothers some people is this: Assume in a micro limit game your opponents are going to call you with a draw in a large pot whether its mathematically correct or whether its incorrect for them to do so. If this is the case, then how can it possibly make any difference (other than how much money is ultimately in the pot) whether you manipulate the pot size to make their calls technically correct or incorrect.

I admit, intuitively this is not particularly clear to me either, but far better mathmeticians than I assure me that it is so and so I accept it and applaud your play on this hand.

--Zetack

[Hallett]

To quote a well respected player on the small stakes forum:

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who I saw slowplaying AA preflop in a typical ring game would receive the following table note:

"...has mastered the subtle art of slowplaying and sucking at the same time."

[/ QUOTE ]

However, you did it for a specific reason, and it worked, so good stuff.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
To quote a well respected player on the small stakes forum:

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who I saw slowplaying AA preflop in a typical ring game would receive the following table note:

"...has mastered the subtle art of slowplaying and sucking at the same time."

[/ QUOTE ]

However, you did it for a specific reason, and it worked, so good stuff.



[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...but I did bet preflop!

However, if you ever see me slowplay AA in a ring game preflop, then feel free to quote me, on me!

[Hallett]

LOL, you are right, as soon as I saw checking and AA, and seeing it was you, without thinking I ran off to quote a well respected player from the SS.

Should have curbed my enthusiasm, your play makes perfect sense, not like mine.