45Player
03-22-2004, 01:51 PM
In the latest issue of CardPlayer magazine, Roy Cooke analyses a NL hand which he reckons was played incorrectly i.e.
http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=13893.
The game was six-handed and the hand in question had 3 participants. The button had $4500, UTG had $3500 and MP had $2400. His friend picked up a pair of Aces on the button.
UTG flat-called the $20 blind and was called by MP. The button raised it to $140. UTG called the raise and raised another $140, making it $280 total. MP moved all in with his $2,400. The button moved all-in with his Aces, and UTG thought for a long time and folded.
Roy Cooke thought that “a much better way” of playing it would be for the button to call the MP’s all-in raise and hope that UTG would either call or reraise all-in.
I don’t think that this was a "much better" play, I would have done the same thing as the button but Mr Cooke has now planted a doubt in my mind. It's possible that he is correct, I haven't done any EV calculations.
I’d welcome some opinions on this.
http://www.cardplayer.com/?sec=afeature&art_id=13893.
The game was six-handed and the hand in question had 3 participants. The button had $4500, UTG had $3500 and MP had $2400. His friend picked up a pair of Aces on the button.
UTG flat-called the $20 blind and was called by MP. The button raised it to $140. UTG called the raise and raised another $140, making it $280 total. MP moved all in with his $2,400. The button moved all-in with his Aces, and UTG thought for a long time and folded.
Roy Cooke thought that “a much better way” of playing it would be for the button to call the MP’s all-in raise and hope that UTG would either call or reraise all-in.
I don’t think that this was a "much better" play, I would have done the same thing as the button but Mr Cooke has now planted a doubt in my mind. It's possible that he is correct, I haven't done any EV calculations.
I’d welcome some opinions on this.