AQs in one-table Stars satellite

[M.B.E.]

This was an $86 satellite for a seat in the $650 WSOP qualifier. Blinds are 25/50 and we're eight-handed, all pretty close in chips. I am in 7th with 1475; chip leader has 2380.

UTG+1 (stack 1885) raises to 120. This seems to be a novice player whose bets and raises are generally too small. This particular raise of 2.4 times the big blind is weird. A player two seats to my right, with 1505, calls. I call on the button with A/images/graemlins/club.gifQ/images/graemlins/club.gif. Blinds fold so we're three-handed.

Flop: K/images/graemlins/club.gif T/images/graemlins/heart.gif 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif

Checked to me, I check.

Turn: A/images/graemlins/spade.gif

UTG+1 bets 50 into the 435 pot. The other player calls and I call.

River: K/images/graemlins/spade.gif

Both opponents check to me. Now pot is 585 and I have 1305 (opponents have me covered, but not by much). I bet 200.

Probably my play on every street is debatable. I'm interested in comments and will post later as to how it turned out.

[La Brujita]

MBE you are clearly a better player than me but fwiw I would have played it differently on every street.

First off, what is the payout structure for the tourney, two spots or one?

Two checks to me and I probably would have bet the flop. I would have done so because (a) I might be able to take it down right there if the flop missed everyone, (b) I might get a free look at the next two cards and (c) if I am facing a reraise I am pretty comfortable I am way behind and can fold.

On the turn a bet of 50 is very very odd, but I would have to think I had the best hand because wouldn't AK bet the flop? AT is possible as is QJ, which would put you in bad shape. Sure a reraise puts you in a bad shape but a decent raise here from you gives you another chance to win and makes a singleton Q or J have to pay to draw.

I would have checked the river because I am not really sure where people are at but I think UTG might hold AK. I can't explain why, I just have a feeling. Also anyone who checked with K weak kicker has you in trouble as does QJ. This seems to be a classic place that you will have to fear a reraise and let go of your hand so a check seems better.

Best

[M.B.E.]

There was a consolation prize for second place, something like $70. First place received a $650 seat.

Preflop, I'm wondering if anyone would fold here. If my AQ had been offsuit I would probably have folded, but considered moving in. Calling was 8% of my stack; since I had the button and was suited, threeway, I think my call was correct although close.

La Brujita makes a good case for betting the flop. The main reason I didn't was that I was still confused by the weird amount of the preflop raise. There was a chance he had AA or KK, and I didn't want to be checkraised out of the pot when I still had a gutshot draw to the nuts. Also, at this stage a pot-sized bet would have been a third of my stack. If I had bet much less than the pot, I'd probably have been called by any medium pocket pair. If the flop had been K-9-4 rather than K-T-4, I think I would have bet 300 or so on the flop since I wouldn't mind folding to a checkraise.

The tiny bet on the turn just seemed so weird -- like it was begging to be raised. That's why I didn't. But in hindsight I agree with La Brujita that I ought to have raised. Probably the bet was indicating that he had some kind of draw (perhaps JJ) and he did not want anyone to put in a regular-sized bet. If that was the strategy, I fell for it.

On the river, I like the way I played it. When the king paired I had top two-pair, top kicker. When both my opponents check to me I have to figure that my hand is the best (or possibly tied for the best). Surely if either opponent had trip-kings or better, they would bet the river -- especially after the lack of action on the flop and turn. I also thought that when I bet 200, there was a very good chance that both opponents would call. My bet would look like a possible bluff, so my opponents should call with any ace, and probably a medium pocket pair. If checkraised I would fold, but a checkraise was very unlikely.

What actually happened? After I bet, the first opponent went into deep thought, letting his clock tick a little, and then folded (presumably JJ but who knows). The other opponent called, and was nice enough to show his hand after he lost: QQ.

[La Brujita]

You make a very good point about nobody betting the river after weakness on the previous two streets. I had not thought of that. I still think a check on the river would be my preferred play.

I have noticed in various threads that we seem to have a bit of a different philosophy of betting when a reraise is possible. I recall in the QQ hand you posted from the WSOP sat you didn't want to raise with ladies from the blind because of the possibility of a reraise. I have no conclusory point to this paragraph other than to point out what I have noticed.

[M.B.E.]

Yes, it's a point from TPFAP but I may be taking it too far. The two main examples are preflop, if you have a few limpers, in NL don't raise on the button with AQs or 99 (although you might in limit).

The other example is if it's headsup on the turn and you have AKs, giving you top pair with the nut flush draw, and your opponent checks. You'd definitely bet if it were limit holdem but in no-limit you check (assuming a deep stack) since you can't stand a checkraise.

As I said, I might be carrying this idea too far in my rationale for not betting the flop in this thread.

[La Brujita]

The reason I pointed out the difference is if two good players (not to give myself too much props) disagree on something, it is worth reexamining.

I think the AKs example iirc is a bit different. You have a good hand that might well be the best hand but could well improve to the nut hand. If you can't stand the heat due to deepness of money you check the AKs.

In your example you may hit the nuts on the turn but it is more of a semi bluff than a value bet if my terminology makes sense in this context. In my opinion a reraise in your example leaves you more comfortable with a fold than a reraise with AKs in your flush draw example.

Your above post is going to make me reexamine my policy of betting good hands which may improve. It is clearly a difficult area of HE.

PS I hope someone else responds so that this doesn't turn into a private conversation between me and MBE.

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope someone else responds so that this doesn't turn into a private conversation between me and MBE.


[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I'm here to make it a trialogue.

I think I would be playing most of this hand very similar to what M.B.E did, unless I have a strong specific read on UTG+1, which isn't very probable in this stage of the game. However, I have some other thoughts about the river bet.

PF: UTG+1's raise is weird. After one MP caller, I'm probably calling here too, but ready to play very carefully even if A or Q hit. In other words: if I call PF, I'm going to play it very passively most of the time (some people will say weak, I have no problem with this against 2 players), hoping I'm ahead of weaker aces or Q's, but without being sure of it.

Flop: UTG+1 check here does not necessarily means weakness, with his strange raise PF. He can very well hit his set of K's. I wouldn't bet here, as LB suggested, because in order to make a reasonable bet, I'll have to put too much of my stack, when I'm not really sure where I'm standing, and against 2 players, who definitely have something. If I get called, or raised, I'm not in a good shape. So checking looks fine to me - you get to see the next card without paying, I'll take it.

Turn: UTG+1's bet is very weird, again. If I don't know this guy, I'm very suspicious. I call here too, and play it basically as what some posters here call "bluff-catcher". There are many hands you can be behind now with this strange action going on, so again - why risk too much when UTG+1 (and the other player), give you another card for only 50T? I don't think that's a good spot to apply aggressivenss.

River: this is a bit of a tough spot. I think I check here. The reason is that I don't think there's a hand that I beat that will call a reasonable bet here (if I'm betting here, BTW, I'm probably betting around 400, and not 200. This is basically so people wont get ideas about small-bets by me, later on in the game). The only weaker hand that might call here, maybe, is AJ, and I don't think UTG+1 has it, so it leaves us only with a small chance of MP holding it. Not enough.

Otherwise, all other calls (and surely raises), will be by stronger hands.

So, I don't think you're achieving anything by betting here. If you're ahead, like you were, the pot is yours. If someone was stupidly slowplaying his stonger hand, well - you didn't lose much here. That's how I see it.

Again, I don't think this is weak. It's a reasonable play with a hand that didn't improve much, against PF EP (weird) raiser and another caller, and on a dangarous-looking board. You might say that with this kind of play you could have mucked it PF, and that's a good point. Folding PF is probably not a big mistake. That's my opinion.