Hand to Talk About

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I played poker earlier this evening for the first time this month. The game was $80-$160 at The Bellagio.

Even though it was a full table, everyone passed to me and I raised on the button with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gifT/images/graemlins/club.gif. Both blinds called.

The flop was Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gifJ/images/graemlins/diamond.gif6:/images/graemlins/diamond.gif giving me the nut flush draw and a gutshot straiht draw. Everyone checked.

The turn was the 6/images/graemlins/heart.gif. The small blind checked, the big blind bet, I raised, the small blind folded, and the player in the big blind called.

The river was the 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif giving me the nut flush. My opponent checked, I bet, and he folded.

All comments welcome.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Franchise (TTT)]

Seems to me you're playing it like you don't have a diamond, and have a vulnerable hand (big pocket pair, top pair) you want to protect but only when the turn card isn't a diamond.

Too bad you didn't get paid off.

[stripsqueez]

if you bet the flop and neither of them had a pair or a diamond you might of won it then

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Garland]

Hi Mason,

I guess I don't see any reason not to bet out on the flop and see if you can pick up the pot there. If you encounter resistance in the form of a checkraise, at least you know where you stand.

Garland

[leon]

Mason, I prefer the bet on the flop here. As the preflop raiser you're supposed to like a flop like this. Bet the flop and see what happens. At this point with 9 nut outs, 3 more likely nut outs (the gut shot) and an ace overcard I like your chances. If you get played back at here you can certainly take it to three bets.

If you bet the flop and they come along, you can most likely take your free card on the turn if you choose, or keep pounding away. The only situation where I wouldn't bet this flop is against habitual "stop and go" players who might check call the flop, then bet into you anyways on the turn.

Routine semi bluff on the turn. Would you have fired again on the river if you missed here?

Leon

[ShortStack]

I'm new to the game (I've been playing about 2 months) and more than a little nervous responding to the guru's play. But where is there a better place to learn?

I liked the raise on the Button. I would have raised with as little as Q8.

With the three-diamond flop (not to mention the belly-buster) and the A /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in my hand, I would have bet. After all, if my opponents had bet I might have raised with the intention of getting a free card on the turn. So if it is correct to make it two bets as it is in so many cases, why not push one bet out there?

Also, if you did bet the flop and raised the turn, wouldn't you be able to bluff on the river if a blank hits? I'm assuming the 80/160 game at the Bellagio has reasonable players (I've never played this high nor been to Las Vegas.)

I would have raised before the flop, bet the flop, called the turn (though I like the raise), and of course bet aggressively on the river.

I'm still trying to put a "straight forward" game together so these types of plays are somewhat beyond me. Still, it's a great opportunity to think about the game. Thanks.

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Hi Mason,

I am not sure why you waited until the turn to bet and then put in 320 with only one card to come. If you simply bet the flop not only might you win it there, but if you don't win it there, a smaller diamond (and top pair) will certainly call, so if you make your hand, you will still win a nice pot. Even if check/raised on the flop, you are only putting in 160 and then you can simply call the turn for another 160 (320) so the money is the same. Please elaborate on your thoughts during the hand.

Also, what did you put the bb on? A steal attempt or a semibluff?



LGPG,

Babe /images/graemlins/heart.gif

[34TheTruth34]

umm...what do you need to bet the flop?

[scalf]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif the underlying reason that you check: you were watching stock quotes more closely than the game since you have too much money to know what to do with....lol...

but my guess is that you did not want the hand to "get outta control" on the flop..i.e. you were in a classic steal position; and anyone with a pair or draw could made it reall difficult for you...

but by waiting til turn...opponents now put you on made hand or top pair..you set yourself up for steal...opponent probably had middle pair or some kinda str8 draw...gl /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

[lil']

I feel like my answer is too simple, but a bet on the flop often wins the pot right there and then.

[mike l.]

i cant really say much about this hand except that you would need to tell us something about the bb's tendencies and skill level. given no info i think the way you played it is fine but not necessarily much better than all sorts of other options.

mason, when you finally post a hand that you lost on the showdown i think we will have much more to discuss.

[alphamale1]

I would not have played it the way you did.
The benefits of your action are
1) maintained control of the hand and put alot of pressure on the BB by your turn raise, 2) possibly conditioned the SB and BB to check to you more often on your ante steals(deterring them from restealing)
3) for that hand, possibly encouraged a bluff tough it would seem that had at least a pair. Do not think they would have called your raise with nothing.

What would you have done in that instance if you missed everything on river? Bet again?

As other posters have said, I would have bet the flop. I bet it often enough when I am stealing that I would like to bet it when I have 12 or 15 outs; flush draw plus gutshot. This would seem a standard way to play this.

[scalf]

/images/graemlins/cool.gif but..!!

does winning the hand on the flop maximize profits. poker is a game of situations...to win consistently; ya gotta maximize cash won...not win the pot the quickest; necessarily...note there were only six small bets in pot before the flop...as the pot gats larger; the more ya wanta win it right there...and vice/versa..

jmho..gl /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/club.gif

[karlson]

So I kind of like these hands where you represent a slowplay. I understand that often you'll run into opponents who will fold a J or even a Q to your turn raise whereas they would have called you down had you bet the flop. Heck, you may even get an extra bet from the turn bluff if no one had anything.

The danger here is that perhaps someone with a hand like a 6, 88, or perhaps even a J, who would have folded to your flop bet decides to call you down (instead of betting out like your opponent actually did) because you checked the flop. Now, about half the time, you'll lose the pot. I suppose this is a matter of knowing your opponents, and I guess the 80/160 Bellagio players are more aggressive than this.

So, if you're certain that a 6 or a J will call you on the flop, this makes a lot of sense, since also, with this flop, there's no danger of giving a free card to someone who would have folded (except for the bottom end of the straight, perhaps).

Thanks Mason.

P.S. I really don't understand why no one has yet mentioned the fact that many players in BB's spot will fold a Q, and almost certainly a J. Am I crazy to believe this?

[astroglide]

i like it. it looks like you slowplayed a monster, which will cause many jacks or even a queen to fold.

[TJSWAN]

Garland & Co.,

I think Mason has enough outs to allow the flop being checked thru, thus inducing the bluff on the turn. He then raises and is only called. I think he would have won this one on the river regardless of another /images/graemlins/diamond.gif hitting or not.
Net reult 2 extra BB vs. none if he wins it outright on the flop.


Tim

[mike l.]

"I think he would have won this one on the river regardless of another hitting or not."

youre wrong. or else why would the bb have called the turn. mason was likely beat on the flop and turn.

[mikelow]

Now, I know the obvious play is to bet the flop, which 99.9% of holdem players would do.

I would have bet the flop. And I would have gotten two folds. So your way is better, though riskier.

[TJSWAN]

Mike i,

Why didn't BB 3 bet then ??
Coulnd't BB be bluffing?


PS. Enjoy your posts.

Tim

[astroglide]

it can be less risky. consider, for example, if the opponent has the Kd and mason bets the flop. bb checkraises, mason calls, calls the turn, and folds the river. also note that's 2 bbs (1 on the flop, 1 on the turn). if he checks the flop and raises the turn against the exact same hand, he puts in those same 2bbs and wins. there's also the already-mentioned ability to make his opponent fold a better hand more reliably.

and yes, i know he could 3bet the flop if checkraised but this is one of many ways that it could play out. i think that the way he played it has the best chances of making his opponent fold a better hand, the best chance of him seeing a showdown if he has the better hand, and strengthens his payout if he does strike a flush.

[surfdoc]

Hi Mason,

First off, let me say how awesome it is that you created and actively participate in this forum. It is pretty amazing to be able to read your books and come online and discuss topics/hands directly with you. I also think this hand and the responses so far are interesting in that a few people have been willing to disagree with you. I think there is a bit of what I will call poster bias on these pages. (In this case maybe it would be Pooh bias) This is the idea that someone with a lot of posts and credibility around here can post a hand and get completely different responses than a newbie. I am sure that this has been discussed before but I just haven't seen it. I am also somewhat sure that when you explain your reasoning, the rest of us will nod our head and finally understand. (as usual) That being said, on to the hand.

Yuck! I agree with many previous posters that a bet on the flop is a must. It is like you are slowplaying a non made hand. Then, when the board pairs, you raise and I guess represent a big Pair, a made flush, or a 6. In this game, I am sure everyone knows you (even if you don't know them) and they have to know you will not check a big pair into a three /images/graemlins/diamond.gif board. I also think they will have a hard time giving you credit for a 6 or a flopped flush. Therefore, you are very likely behind on the turn and even though you have plenty of outs, a non A or /images/graemlins/diamond.gif on the river puts you in plenty of trouble. Do you fire out another one on the river, or check behind? I have a hard time believing your opponent called your turn raise with no pair.
I would like see a newbie post this hand in the micro forum. The flaming would be intense!

[Mike]

Being $80 - $160, I am guessing opponents are thinking on at least the second level. That being true at least for BB, the flop check scared him.

On the turn I would think the BB doubted his initial thinking and tested the waters. Your raise reminded him of his initial supposition.

His river check/fold must mean he either missed whatever he was hoping for (splitting with the straight?) and he couldn't beat QQ. A flush hand would not be played for normally so he should discount it.

Wish $4-8 was that easy...lol

[mike l.]

"Why didn't BB 3 bet then??"

because he's scared of the chance mason does really have a big hand. btw big hand here does not have to mean flush or full house or even trip 6s. big hand could still be big pair. that river bricks and bet you anything we see mason lose to a pair of Qs or Js more often than not.

"Coulnd't BB be bluffing?"

if he's bluffing then why would he call the turn raise? he would just fold. or he could be waiting to try and bluff the river, but wouldnt the river then be a terrific card to bluff on? he could also be drawing to something like KT or T9. but i think more often than not he has a pair.

[Piers]

I have to admit I am a flop better here. I just hate it when someone pairs up on the turn with random junk and takes my pot away. Or are you saying the blinds are too tight to do this?

[mike l.]

i think you guys are making too much of the flop check. it doesnt seem that strange to me, it's a check i make sometimes. it's important to vary your play and you gain little either way by betting or checking, it doesnt really matter.

[astroglide]

i supported the flop check. i didn't state or imply that it was strange. i disagree that it makes little difference, and i outlined why. are you replying to the wrong person?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi surfdoc:

If a newbie posted this hand in the micro-limits he should be flamed. Do you see why?

best wishes,
Mason

[Garland]

Hi Mason,

I forgot to mention that maybe the turn would be a good time to call a bet, hoping for an overcall from the SB in case you make your hand. It's unlikely the BB is bluffing (he wasn't bluffing given the fact that he called your raise...but that information came retrospectively).

If you make your hand on the river and he continues to fire out at you, you can use your best judgment to raise to try to get one more bet from BB or try to get SB to overcall. I think that would be a good way to get more value out of it.

I guess the only real valid point to raising is as a semi-bluff. I don't know anything about the players and their capability to fold to a raise, but the only real reason to raise the turn from my view is to make them both fold right there and then.

Garland

[Depraved]

Not knowing the tendencies of the players involved, and also what you expect to achieve in future situations when you steal raise, my standard operating procedure would be to bet/raise the flop, check the turn, and fold the river unimproved.

I'd like my free card to be the most expensive one if possible.

[Ginogino]

Mason:
It seems to me you have to begin the analysis before the flop. What does your open-raise on the button mean to them? What will they re-raise with, and what would they fold?
The tighter they are, the higher the bar for both their re-raising and folding hands will be. The looser they are, the lower the bar for both kinds of hands. Also, do they know you, and how might this affect their game?
What do they take your open raise from the button to mean? What you'd open-raise with depends a good deal on the kind of players you're against, I'd think. Against players who fold too much, I think I'd open raise with QTs or pocket 5's or most A's. Against players who fold too little, I'd want KJs or pocket 6's or A9o or so (but this is very player dependent, and I'm not sure how much your game differs from the low limits where I play -- I know it's a lot, but don't know just what that means).

Against some players I could be sure that anyone with a Queen or Jack would take a shot at this pot by lead betting the flop. I'd think that some players might slow-play a flopped flush (though they'd be less likely to do so without the nut flush). You're the before-the-flop raiser; how likely are they to check to you on the flop out of habit? It's unlikely that you're against a set, as the monotone flop makes a set-holder fear a flush. So unless someone's slow-playing a flush (which I'd think improbable), what you are mostly against is hands that entirely or mostly missed the flop -- or that hold a singleton diamond worse than yours.
The turn 6h probably doesn't help anyone (it reduces the number of 6's in the unknown cards and there will be a reduced number of hands containing a 6 that the blinds will play, even against a possible steal-raise before the flop).
When the BB lead-bets on the turn, it sounds to me, then, more like a semi-bluff with a singleton diamond or maybe a straight draw or a small pocket pair.
You raise, and I'd think this has value both by reason of your nut-flush draw (other flush draws are drawing dead) and by reason of the chance that your Ace will win unimproved and by reason of setting up a potentially successful bluff attempt on the River (will he call you down if he has a tiny pocket pair? a pair of Jacks?).
Like many who have replied to your post, I'd be curious to know what you thought of the players in the blinds. And thanks for posting this, and all the other, hands.

Gino

[Ginogino]

Garland:
I agree with your analysis -- plus one very likely family of hands that Mason's up against are pinning a good part of their hopes on a flush draw (supported, in their minds, by Mason's check on the flop -- lol). Why not give these hands a chance to make their flushes?

Gino

[GuyOnTilt]

Obviously your plan was to raise the turn and hopefully take it down there, but what if the SB had bet and the BB had called the turn? Do you still stick to your plan and raise?

GoT

[mike l.]

you like the flop check, others dont. im just saying i dont think it matters much either way EV wise in this case. i usually bet the flop, why let a free card come off?

but checking for deception and because there's a still a good chance your hand is best and will either remain so or improve (or appear to improve) is fine as well.

so im criticizing (probably incorrectly) anyone who is taking much of a stance for either position. mason will end up saying that the flop check/turn raise is good here because it represents a monster. against any sort of thinking opponent it doesnt really do that, most higher mid limit players just bet the hell out of their hand whether they hold the nuts, are betting thin, or bluffing or semibluffing. so mason's check and then raise just seems weird to the average thinking opponent, but not necessarily like a huge hand.

we wouldnt be reading this hand to talk about had the river blanked and bb checked and mason checked and the bb showed his KJ and mason mucked, which is precisely what i suspect wouldve happened.

[elysium]

hi mason
great post. that is exactly how to play this hand. i would have bet the flop without thinking. clearly though, the correct way of handling this whether you hit the nut draw or not, is to check the flop.

assuming that you have the conditions needed to make checking down the flop a viable option, i think we can also safely assume that calling any bet or raise to you on the flop, is an equally viable course of action that you would likely have taken here, although calling a raise isn't etched in stone, and neither would reraising be. but we will assume with relative certainty that on the flop, when the action gets to you, you have already decided that you are not primarily interested in building a big pot or getting a free-card. so the first questions then would be; what motivated you to check-down the flop? was it the texture of the board or was it field conditions? and to simplify that, we will also assume that your image is listed under field conditions. this way, when we answer these first questions, we can then focus on just two issues; first, how the flop decision manipulates the size of the pot downward giving you a better opportunity to get heads-up and increase your number of outs. and secondly, how your opponents will respond in the turn in both instances in which you either hit or miss your draw. we will set the validity of the A aside unless you get heads-up. we will assume that heads-up you have a value bet. we can never know, however, whether you would have considered your A pair good in a 3-way. that's too far reaching and would be in the near proximity of where you draw the line between analysis and head ache.

now i've got to go back and look at the questions. yeah.

whew.....

o.k., to make it easy for everyone, me too, i'm just going to leave all those questions, serving a duel purpose, hanging up there for reference, and give my general opinion the questions about which i have taken the time to answer hopefully with one of the above questions. so the above questions can function both as a guideline for the newby, and rhetorical answer for the expert.

for our purposes, we will safely assume that one or both of mason's opponents are capable of making a sizeable lay-down. that goes toward field conditions. just want to get it in clearer.

when we look at this situation from all the various angles, it is readily apparent that checking down the flop is correct. the coordinated nature of the board is such that it self-contains aggression. by that we mean that the suggestive texture of the board hinting at a possible nut flush draw will forever insure each player without the A of suit, that he may be trailing behind a more powerful holding, unless the board pairs. even then, any player without a flopped set has little hope of improving to beat the possible powerhouse draw. since the made nut flush may already be in its possessor's hand, only the holder of the A of suit knows for certain that he is not up against it. therefore, if a single bet is made on the flop, the opponent showing the greatest amount of strength will also necessarily be representing a made powerhouse as one of his possible holdings that must be taken into consideration. if the field is solid/ tight down to good/ average, then the first bettor entering shoulders the representation of a powerful made hand. this is very advantageous, however it is also dillemic unless the initial bettor shouldering this powerhouse representation, albeit not his only possible holding, also has the high suited card. it's dillemic because if the first bettor shows weakness any time thereafter, he cedes control of the hand over to whoever plays back strongly against him. essentially, if the first bettor on the flop weakens at any time, he makes it that much easier for either of his opponents to wrest away his advantage all to himself. quickly therefore, the first consideration he makes is that if he bets, even if he is not against a made powerhouse, he might likely be up against the A of suit. the problem with that, of course, is that the A of suit knows that neither of his opponents holds the possible nut made hand, while neither of them have this same knowledge. if first position bets, he reasons, he will only make it easier for the A of suit to take control of the hand. that in itself doesn't make betting untenable. however, when that risk is juxtaposed with the additional risk of other lesser hands of greater or lesser strength than his having a high incentive to make drive-out raises, and other various strategical raises and reraises, based on actual or representative strength; raises made by card-holders whose aggression can only be contained by the A of suit, or made powerhouse, he quickly realizes that he doesn't have the ability to contain the aggression because only the A of has the knowledge to do so, something that he doesn't have. finally, what is worst of all for first position, the A of suit knows that he doesn't know. so it is the strong possibility that his opponent knows that he lacks knowledge that, at last, makes his decision for him. he realizes that his best alternative is to check and represent a SP of the nuts.

mason takes notes.

the MP opponent faces the same dillema. the only difference here is that now first position has taken an action that represents the slow-playing of a made powerful hand. the MP checks representing a slow-play of the nuts.

mason takes notes.

before we continue, assume that at this point in the hand, mason hasn't peeked at both of his hole cards. let's assume that he has only seen the A of suit. i think that might bring this picture into sharper focus. keep that assumption with you, but alternate back and forth between his knowing and not knowing his second hole card. you can see how very similar both situations are. you can even see that whether he has a made nut flush, or the draw to it, his play in either of those two situations is virtually the same on the flop.

mason knows that his opponents aren't slow-playing. this knowledge gives mason a made powerful advantage. firstly, mason avoids the destruction of his implied odds. he knows that his most valuable tangible asset in this hand will be those times his draw completes. by checking, mason's positive expectation skyrockets. mason knows that if he bets, his opponents will not raise. he knows that, instead, they will call to prevent mason from making a reraise. they have thought through the significance of a prospective reraise, and have both decided against allowing it. mason knows this. mason's opponents would rather that mason checks. a check by mason prevents either of these two opponents from raising, and since neither one knows whether or not his counterpart will raise, mason's checking prevents his counterpart from raising. so both prefer mason to check.

they'd do better if mason bets.

you see, if mason checks, the lack of action by his two opponents now represents, if it didn't before, something mason wants it to represent; the slow-play. when mason checks, both opponents are compelled by the chain reaction of forces set in motion by the arrival of the turn, to make a bet. each one knows that his bet on the heels of what each one now can consider a slow-play, or missed check-raise, will contain the aggression and/ or win the pot. by checking, mason gives them counterfeited turn leverage; the opportunity to take control of a weak field; and an opportunity to prevent the aggression from raising their small draw or small made hand, out of the pot, by giving them an opportunity to represent the A of suit nut made flush, something whose probability mason has driven down. mason's implied odds skyrocket when he checks, not because his opponents will call when he bets, but rather because they will bet with hands mason can easily fold. why? because now mason's turn raise, after so much flop weakness, tells his opponents that he has the improbable A of suit. since mason's check-down on the flop, coupled with the turn's arrival, put forces to play that make it highly probable that the turn will come to mason in the preferred made to order 'check, bet' form, mason knows exactly what to do. if it comes in the less likely 'bet, call', mason again knows what to do. if it arrives 'check, check', mason again knows what to do. this remember, before the turn card is exposed.

if a Q or J lands on the turn, mason still stands to fair better having checked down the flop. he can less expensively fold rather than calling 2 cold, and of course he can more safely call 1 bettor on his right because the check-raise is less likely. if it does come down to that scenario, in whatever variation, since there are many hands that could be raising on the turn that mason can beat, his odds of not drawing dead go up because those bets may be coming in as a result of flop weakness. here, we get into the netherworld of when is it better not to know the status of your opponent's likely hand strength because knowing that status reduces the liklihood of your being in the lead or taking down the pot. does mason want to know that he is up against full-house? only if the number of other possible holdings make your read of that full-house a favorite that is insurmountable by pot odds. then, betting on the flop would be correct because then the information on the possibility of the full-house can be valuable. does that condition exist here? yes, i think it does. so, in fairness, i think that on our minus side of the column, we need to include this particular scenario. usually, the read of a boat won't supersede pot odds in this spot. we can't exclude that possibility here though. but usually, your read of a possible boat will not alter your determination to see the river. you will still usually be getting correct pot odds to do so. and i believe that not knowing, in that instance, actually enhances your odds.

so, from every vantage point except one; those times the turn produces a Q or J, and the betting action is such that mason's call doesn't close the action (by the way, if his call closes the action, he will always be getting correct odds, thus we can modify the minus in the column a little), mason improves his implied value tremendously by checking down the flop, as well as his opportunity to use maximum turn leverage and take down the pot. if we took the time to discuss the advantages checking down the flop gives mason those times he completes his nut draw, we would exceed our timeline.

to recap, it is better to check-down the flop because it allows us to maximize the tremendous advantage that we hold on the turn when we couple our knowledge with turn leverage.

ding.

mason's check-down on the flop also significantly increases

[Lori]

I am assuming from this post that we can work backwards to find out the playing styles of the blinds.

I also feel this is the point of your post.

Unfortunately, my Limit skills are not up to that, but by assuming you played correctly I feel we could deduce how the blinds are playing and solve this problem.

Lori

[lil']

Again, maybe I get too simplistic at times, but when I don't have a made hand, I like to win the pot sooner rather than later. The exception might be if I have a big draw.

[karlson]

Mike,

You're probably right that it's close. But

[ QUOTE ]
most higher mid limit players just bet the hell out of their hand whether they hold the nuts, are betting thin, or bluffing or semibluffing.

[/ QUOTE ]

This clearly isn't 100% good strategy, right? So better mid-limit players can both defend against this strategy, as well as deviate from it themselves.

So we should look for ways to mix up our play, especially if moving to tougher games. Some "mixing it up plays" are clearly just terrible, but I think the consensus of this discussion will be that this is a good one to have in your repertoire.

[Depraved]

[stripsqueez]

this thread is out of control

if mason hasnt played for 3 weeks or so the most likely explanation is that he stuffed it up and should of bet the flop not that the planets were in alignment a few moments before the hand was played

if i am to assume mason is a great player and never makes mistakes (the latter being a silly assumption) please tell me before i reply

i might post a hand where i raised UTG with 54o - if i neglected to tell you all that i never made a mistake you would all tell me i was mad - you can and should do anything at the poker table - thats an easy statement to prove

i really dont think it matters much what the conditions in this game were - i'm betting the flop 95%+ of the time - the rest of the time i'm proving i can do anything

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[Zeno]

I like the way you played the hand and would have done the same thing, sincerely (though dependent on knowledge about the blind players perhaps). I have seen others respond as above on some of your other 'Hand to talk about' posts and get viciously flamed.

I want to have that same opportunity at least once and I do not want to waste this golden opportunity, especially since I am lackluster about contributing or posting anything meaningful. By the way, was it or was it not significant that you were not reraise by at least one of the blinds preflop?


Well played, well done. Congrats.

-Zeno

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
this thread is out of control


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. elysium's post is the only thing out of control within this thread.

-Zeno

[Kevin J]

I think a key to this hand is that you are not likely to garner action from a 3rd nut draw (Td) or worse by betting the flop.

However, if somebody holds the Kd, they are also very likely to have flopped a pair as well. This means a flop bet is unlikely to get called by inferior hands, but some of these same inferior hands might now bet the turn for you. IMO-

This is also why a newbie playing 3-6 should be flamed had he played it exactly the same way. An inferior hand is NOT likely to bet the turn, while the same hand IS much more likely to call on the flop.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I've only looked at a couple of the posts but will try to get to them tomorrow. But here's my comments and thoughts on this hand.

When playing higher limit games, especially ones that contain a few tough players, it's important to add a little deception into your game.

Now deception can be a very tricky topic. But one thing for sure is that the right time to be deceptive is when your opponents will think that you have played your hand wrong, but the reality is that the theorectical cost of playing the hand that way is minimal. That should be the case here.

There's no question that normally the correct play in this spot is to bet the flop. In fact, given the number of outs that I have, plus the small chance that I could be called by a weaker hand, plus the chance that my bet will pick up the pot, clearly make a flop bet the right play as well as a profitable play. But is it right all the time?

I think Mike l above points out that playing the hand the way I did really costs very little in the long run. I agree. And that's why when this hand came up, it seemed like a good spot to switch to a deceptive strategy. Of course, I should only occasionally do this, and against weaker unaware players that populate many of the low limit games, this play should never be done.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi TTT:

Doesn't it look like I played it like I flopped the nut flush. With a big pair, wouldn't I want to bet a small diamond out of the pot?

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi TJSWAN:

[ QUOTE ]
I think he would have won this one on the river regardless of another /images/graemlins/diamond.gif hitting or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

One thing for sure. If a blank hits on the river it needs to be bet again.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Leon:

It's also good to occasionally let some of your opponents know that your checks can also be dangerous.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

HI SS:

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still trying to put a "straight forward" game together so these types of plays are somewhat beyond me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should definitely do that first. Also, when you do start to make some deceptive plays, don't get carried away with them.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Babe:

The BB could be on a number of hands. They would range all the way from a total bluff to a king high flush.

Best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Scalf:

It's also a game of more than one hand as long as you are against players who are aware of a few things.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

[ QUOTE ]
mason, when you finally post a hand that you lost on the showdown i think we will have much more to discuss.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'll look into this and get back to you as soon as I can.

best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi karlson:

[ QUOTE ]
suppose this is a matter of knowing your opponents, and I guess the 80/160 Bellagio players are more aggressive than this.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're right. At this level some of the players are way too aggressive.

best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

[ QUOTE ]
you like the flop check, others dont. im just saying i dont think it matters much either way EV wise in this case. i usually bet the flop, why let a free card come off?


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely. That's the key to this hand.

[ QUOTE ]
we wouldnt be reading this hand to talk about had the river blanked and bb checked and mason checked and the bb showed his KJ and mason mucked, which is precisely what i suspect wouldve happened.


[/ QUOTE ]

But what if the river blanks, I bet, and the Big Blind shows me KJ and then folds it?
best wishes,

Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Mike:

If I could be 100 percent sure that your analysis is right, then checking the flop is clearly the best play. However, my guess is that while there is some chance this will be the case, they won't always think this way.

best wishes,
mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Piers:

Whenever you try a tricky strategy, there is almost always a downside. It's a risk you take.

best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi garland:

I don't agree. The pot is now big enough that winning it on the turn has got to be more profitable, in my opinion, than what you are suggesting.

best wishes,
mason

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Mike:

[ QUOTE ]
you like the flop check, others dont. im just saying i dont think it matters much either way EV wise in this case. i usually bet the flop, why let a free card come off?


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely. That's the key to this hand.

[ QUOTE ]
we wouldnt be reading this hand to talk about had the river blanked and bb checked and mason checked and the bb showed his KJ and mason mucked, which is precisely what i suspect wouldve happened.


[/ QUOTE ]

But what if the river blanks, I bet, and the Big Blind shows me KJ and then folds it?
best wishes,

Mason

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with mike on this in that if you don't catch on the river, you get called and lose. He called your turn raise without a diamond. So he doesn't have a diamond, that almost certainly means he has a pair. Barring the unlikely possibility that he's on a straight draw, theres no way he folds a pair on the river if no diamond comes. Now that doesn't mean that your play is without merit in general, but it does mean you picked the wrong person to try it against.

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
But what if the river blanks, I bet, and the Big Blind shows me KJ and then folds it?

[/ QUOTE ]
i seriously doubt that would happen. if he was going to fold that, he would do it on the turn.

[TJSWAN]

MM,

Absolutey, I may have thought my original post implied that, but I would be ready to bet the river if a blank hits.


Tim

[nykenny]

Hi Mason,

By implementing this deception, what kind of mistakes are you expecting to induce from these opponents in the future? Is it correct to assume here that your opponents are very tricky as well?

Thanks,

Kenny

[SA125]

Hi Mason,

Some respsonses said that if a blank fell on the river, you would check along. You suggested you might bet out instead.

As you've explained, this post is about deception. Let's take it a step further. If a blank did fall and you did bet and were now ch/r!! by the BB, how would you handle that?

He could be correctly putting you on your missed draw and making a move of his own. Crying call with A high seems crazy. Raise up the white flag and possibly be outdecepted? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Clark:

he doesn't have to fold very often for m y bet on the river to be correct.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi astroglide:

Not if the king was a diamond.

best wishes,
Mason

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
But what if the river blanks, I bet, and the Big Blind shows me KJ and then folds it?

[/ QUOTE ]

your own words.

[SLEEPER]

Hi Mason,

I am farely new to this forum and most of my playing is done at the 6/12 - 10/20 tables, so in most cases deception like this is nullified by the fact that the other players don't understand a thing.... However, I would imagine that a hand like this becomes very player dependant. Assuming that the BB knows who you are, and is a farely good player himself.... he could put you on a wide range of hands given the position you are in when you raise, that being said, you need to assume he has a wide range of hands he would call a raise with. Once the flop comes out suited, we want to see how he reacts.... Obviously in this case, he checked and that could indicate that he is weak or that he is very strong..... I would assume that in most cases if he hit a pair he would bet, as he would not be willing to give the free card. In this case, I would put him on a low diamond draw or possibly a straight draw with the K10. Once you check the flop, you are in the same predicament. Are you checking a strong hand/draw, cause I would assume that you would also bet if you had a pair, in order to make a draw pay. Therefore, he is betting on the turn, assuming you have a draw..... I think in the end it was well played by both you and the BB. However, if the river card was a blank, I would come out firing my chips from the BB position, and would take down the pot...

I don't think the deception value is very high in this particular instance..... However, you did cause the BB to bet the turn cause of your check on the flop. I think you made more money in this particular case based on the way you played it..... but in the long run you would make more betting the flop, and taking it down right there and then.