MasonMalmuth@TwoPlusTwo.com

Here's a hand I played this evening in a $20-$40 game at The Mirage.


I was dealt 9h9s under the gun. An Ad had been accidentaly exposed and was now out of play. I raised. Everyone passed to the player on the button who called, and both blinds folded.


The flop was Qc 8d 3d. I bet and my opponent called.


The turn was the 6s. I bet and my opponent called.


The river was the Qd (which paired the top card on baord and put a third diamond out). I checked, my opponent bet, and I called. He turned over AhKd and my pair bet his ace high.


All comments are welcome.

The above post was actually written by Ray Zee, but let's not make fun of him for being so stupid as not being able to get the subject and my email address on the right lines. However, the hand should prove interesting to discuss.

I have a hard time believing this, since Ray never uses capital letters. Why would Ray use Mason's e-mail address?

I don't much care for the way button played this hand. The only way his play makes much sense is if he thinks Ray will think he was slowplaying a decent hand, and he further thinks Ray will lay down a pocket pair based on this read. However, the exposed Ad combined with the Qd on board make his holding a flush unlikely, while the second Q on the river makes him less likely to have a Q -- both factors which should make Ray more, rather than less, likely to call with a pocket pair.


Preflop, button should know the exposed ace has slightly increased the chance Ray is raising with a pair, while also decreasing the chances of his AK to beat a pocket pair by the river (from about 49% to 43%). However, button can overcome this disadvantage somewhat by reraising preflop anyway, since now Ray will also take into account that he is less likely to be reraising with AK. Thus Ray might misread the reraise for a big pair just a little more often, allowing button to use his position more effectively after the flop.


As it is, button misses almost every opportunity to make Ray fold by misreading him for a bigger hand. When he finally does make a move on the river, the exposed Ad and extra Q on board devalue his bluff greatly, since he can't hold any reasonable flush after cold calling two bets preflop without the Ad or Qd, and is now less likely to be read for a queen. Ray might have thought the button was slowplaying a decent hand, but these possibilities have diminished greatly by the river.


As for Ray's play, he can't be too afraid of a bigger pair with no reraise preflop. The Q on the flop is a little disturbing -- with an ace gone it seems marginally more likely the button might hold a Q. However, once the button fails to make a move by the turn, Ray seems to be in the clear. On the river, inducing a bluff is all the better since button could have been slowplaying something, is unlikely to have made a flush with the Ad and Qd out, and is also now less likely to be holding a Q with two of them on the board.

Your play seems pretty straightforward and clearly correct to me.

I don't have a hard time believing that Ray wrote the post, beacuse, well, I believe everyone. :-)


I suspect that Ray discovered the "shift key" (and the "enter" key for paragraphing) out of respect to Mason's email address.


Tommy

You and Ray played it well and the guy on the button played it poorly, but it would have been less poor (but still not well played) if he checked behind you as you were not about to fold with anything he couldn't beat or call with anything he could.


He also has a clue that you don't have an ace in your hand which I think went over his head.

Button obviously erred in betting the river. For the same reason, your river no-bet and subsequent call was correct.


The only interesting thing I see about this hand is a hypothetical: what if you were raised on the turn? I believe that given the proclivity of Malmuthians to bet out middle pairs until facing heat (then folding), raising on the turn against them seems like a good play in situations such as this. How would you have reacted to a turn raise? I'm guessing you would have folded the best hand here.

When Tommy caught me saying something stupid, he made a joke about it and I owned up to it. Now the boss man puts his email address and the subject in the wrong place and blames another person, when the evidence is plain for all to see that he is a prevaricator. Shame on you, Mason.


I'll leave it for others to elaborate.

"Malmuthians," wasnt that one of the groups in Gullivers Travels?? :-)


Pat

Mason,


I can't see anything wrong or debatable about your play. But the button should have three bet before the flop. I'm not sure that the exposed card makes much difference.


Given the way he played, he wasted a bet on the river since you would surely call with that betting sequence.


Regards,


Rick

If raised on the turn you are in a tough spot, especially with that board. Much depends on what you think of your opponent. However, you must bet the turn since you shouldn't give a possible two overcards a free card.

Given that I would usually call with a pair of nines in early position, does it make sense to raise given that an ace is exposed and out of play?

Who in their right mind would call an UTG raise from a noted expert, with AK, after you BOTH watch an ace get burned?


And even if he called thinking you'd think everyone thought this so THAT's why you're raising with an ace... How can he bet the river? Of course you're calling. Tell me you wouldn't have called with an ace-high bust given that board. Silly if you ask me.

Given that an ace is exposed and that I raised in early position is it correct to play an AK, and if it is correct to play it should you call or just raise.

Given that I might be less likely to play a hand like AQ given that an ace is exposed (and thus am more likely to have a big pair), does it make sense to call down with a hand like AK?

Mason and/or Ray (excuse my obtuseness for not having figured out exactly which one of you played this hand),


I feel kind of funny telling you what I think since you guys "taught" ME how to play (Mason in particular for holdem). That aside, if I'm raising this hand in early position, its to thin the field and either play against or win the blinds. With an ace exposed this play is even more effective, even in a somewhat loose game. If this was your goal(I assume it must have been) then I guess that this is where "preparedness + opportunity = luck" or however that expression goes. I have nothing else to add except thanks for all of your work (David too, of course).


Mike

I think the exposed ace could turn a call into a raise for 2 reasons: 1) a big ace hand might become less likely to reraise you (which it looks like actually happened on this hand) and thereby outplay you with position, and 2) your edge against a big ace hand has increased hugely from about a 51% favorite to a 57% favorite.

I think it's still correct to play the AK, with a few adjustments. I would still reraise preflop with the AK, so that I can represent a big pair on the flop if I think I can get away with it, and to put some dead blind money in the pot. The exposed ace is somewhat of a double edged sword, since it makes me less likely to make a hand, but it also makes you more likely to read me for a decent pocket pair when I reraise preflop. However, I am now much less likely to continue in the face of aggression without having picked up an extra draw or a pair, as I am less likely to improve, more likely to be against a decent pocket pair, and more likely to be misread for a better hand than I have (which means I should fear your aggression more than usual).


It is true that my AK has lost a lot of edge against a typical early position raiser's hand with an ace MIA, but I still have positional advantage to play with, and likely dead money from the blinds after my preflop reraise.

I don't think it makes much sense to just call down with the AK after an ace has been exposed. Your opponent is less likely to show aggression with a big ace hand and thus is more likely to have a decent pair when he does show aggression.


If you are going to play the AK at all, I think it makes more sense to throw in a reraise preflop and hope you get checked to for a free extra shot at hitting your hand if you missed the flop. You might also bet the flop if checked to, and hope to see the river card for free with a very small chance to pick up the pot outright.


If you miss the flop and get bet into I think it makes more sense to raise (for a chance to take a free card or represent a big pair on the turn) or fold (if you don't think you can get a free card or pressure him into folding) than it does to just call, with folding probably being the better option unless you have picked up a gutshot draw.

assuming ak player knows you are a very good player and saw the ace exposed...couldn't this be an early steal, semi-bluff, much like raising early with A7s(which i know mason does not advocate), but if the AK holder is reasoning that you are taking advantage of the situation...perhaps he reasons that calling you down, combined with the chance you are playing a weak ace or high cards , not a pair, (which is unlikely ), and his chance of hitting 3 potential live K's and 2 live A's, make a good play....

If, after you limp UTG, other players would raise with pocket aces through pocket tens, A-K and A-Q, there are now only 57 such hands possible, as opposed to 70 with all four aces still in play. If other players would limp with, among other hands, A-J and A-xs 9 (x being T or lower), the limping hands are reduced by 14 hands. Plus they would be less likely to limp with the remaining 42 limping hands that contain an Ace. (Can someone check my fuzzy addition?). I would think these factors point towards a raise rather than a limp for Mason.


On the other hand, wouldn't now someone holding K-Q, K-J or Q-J be more likely to reraise?

A-K's reraise value lies largely in the fact that A) you are likely to have an opponent dominated; and B) it can win unimproved against one opponent. As both possibilities have been decreased by the exposed Ace, the reraise value is also decreased. Since you're also less likely to catch a piece of the flop, and less likely to outthink your opponent given who he is, it seems a fold would be best when Mason Malmuth raises UTG.

You call down with the hope that either your hand is curently best or you will draw out on your opponent. Since both possibilities are less likely with the one Ace gone, calling down makes less sense than it otherwise would.

I'd say no. It is not correct to play any hand containing an ace (unless AA). If you are going to play it, you should absolutely raise. One- you are hoping that no one would put you on an ace since one was exposed. Two- You want to fold out all marginal hands and some legitimate ones which would call if they knew you had an ace.

I'd say of course. You may fold out other decent overcards (which you'd want). They couldn't be sure of what they want to hit.

You know it's Ray. If it were Mason, it would read "Hnad to talk about"....

It's also less likely that a big ace hand will even be out there.

"On the other hand, wouldn't now someone holding K-Q, K-J or Q-J be more likely to reraise?"


That's an interesting point. However, if they think you are more likely on a pair they shouldn't make that play with these hands since you are less likely to fold if small cards flop.

I agree. An easy way to see this is to first realize that under normal circumstances you wouldn't want to play AQo in this spot (against the solid early position raiser). Now with the ace exposed the AK may not be as good as an AQ normally would be.

Mason,


You note that you usually limp in with 99 under the gun; would the exception be if you were in a loose -aggressive game, where you'd often expect to see 3-4 bets pre-flop?


perfidious