Getting too Fancy?

[Michael Davis]

Here is a hand I played in unusual fashion in an $8-16 game yesterday:

I have ATo in the big blind. EP limp, MP raise, CO and button coldcall, SB calls, I call.

Flop: 983 rainbow.

Checked to the button. Button bets. SB calls. I raise...

-Michael

[rory]

I don't really understand what this raise is trying to accomplish.

It can't be to try to win the pot right there because it is extremely unlikely the button and SB are going to fold for one more bet.

It might be a value raise I guess, but I doubt it with this many players, but who knows with the action the way it was on the flop.

It's unlikely your raise is going to get you a free card because the button will call for one more bet with any kind of draw, most likely.

Also some of your outs might be dead-- hitting a 10 makes you top pair, but the SB having a hand like JQ is totally consistent with his play thus far.

I think I would wait for a better spot to try to mix up my play next time-- this flop is too easy for people to call with draws even if there is a remote chance you have the best hand now.

Also fold preflop.

[Steve Giufre]

You are gonna lose money fooling around like that long term. There are six players in the pot, it doesnt look like an ideal time to make a move. Check fold. Your ace might not be an out, and your ten may not be clean either.

[Michael Davis]

FWIW, I think this was the wrong hand to make the play, but its purpose is to clean up my ace outs.

-Michael

[rory]

Michael,

That is what I figured was the purpose of the raise. You should check out Bob Ciaffone's book "Middle Limit Holdem Poker"-- the advice is not so great in some spots, but his discussion of playing with overcards has really helped my game. I used to pull moves like this in bad spots like this too, but that book really helped me identify situations where using these types of moves has more value. Check it out-- I guarantee you you will think about this hand while you are reading and smile.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I think this was the wrong hand to make the play, but its purpose is to clean up my ace outs.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

Not worth it. MP probably holds AJ/AQ/AK, and might fold it for two bets, but even then you're cleaning up a two-outer that might not be good when you hit it anyway. I think you need at least a little bit more equity in order to contemplate this, like a gutshot or a backdoor flush draw, and even then I think it's costing you chips in the long run.

Now, if the SB hadn't called *and* Button is aggressive *and* the other players are capable of folding - all of those things could well be true - then we have a much different situation, since you then have a pretty good chance of taking down the pot unimproved, especially if your table image is strong.

[Michael Davis]

I haven't looked at this one in a long time, so I'll review it.

I should have asked the guy who was reading it at my table yesterday for a quick peek...

-Michael

[Michael Davis]

I agree with you. This was a garbage play.

Interestingly, the winning hand was A6o held by the small blind for paired sixes on the turn after the turn and river got checked around. So, I probably had the best hand when I raised, though this was certainly not what I was thinking.

-Michael

[balkii]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, I think this was the wrong hand to make the play, but its purpose is to clean up my ace outs.

-Michael

[/ QUOTE ]

If you thought your ace outs were gonna be dirty on the flop shouldnt you have just folded preflop?

[Michael Davis]

Balkii,

No.

-Michael

[elysium]

hi micheal
muck pre-flop. on the surface mike, the call looks o.k. the problem though is that this holding is dominated. the SB call pre-flop destroys any value this hand may have had. remove the SB from the equation, and you have a possible call provided that you play well post flop.

your check-raise against that particular field tells your opponents that you like to make fancy plays at the wrong time. this hurts you. this hand is going to be showndown against the SB on the river. what's bad is that often, a fancy play, especially a fancy check-raise, a play that can tip the scale of table control in your favor, usually is made to fold out, not showdown. when you get caught like you're destine to be here, your opponents will call you down again when check-raising a short handed field. the check-raise you make here should only be made if the SB is out. it's not the number of opponents. this check-raise works, for exammple, if the CO bet-out and the button called. it fails however against the SB. he can now take control of this thing by calling and betting out on the turn. he may also reraise right now.

this situation can be avoided by folding this dominated hand pre-flop after the SB calls the raise.

[bluemoon]

I think it was a good raise..you either gonna win on the turn or you get a good mix up...its a ll about reading your players /images/graemlins/wink.gif
do me a favor and check out my hand let me know what you think about ithttp://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=759747&page=7&view=co llapsed&sb=5&o=14&fpart=1#759747

[LAGmaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
the SB call pre-flop destroys any value this hand may have had.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you explain this for me? Why is the SB's call more troubling than the CO or button?

[elysium]

hi lag
firstly, you need to quickly realize that ATo from EP will more than likely have to be played aggressively. usually, aggression up front is designed to fold out stronger hands, thus the check-raise. so, having a hand that plays aggressively and with which aggressive plays are designed to fold out, not get more bets into the pot. and no, i'm not sure i'm grammatically correct here. anyway, when you are playing something whose value is aggressive fold out action, acting absolutely first actually enhances the particular holdings value. ATo is just such a holding.

the SB is going to have a stronger A. but he will also have the extra benefit of acting first. so the SB undermines AT ability to get the stronger hand to fold. this doesn't seem important at first, but remember; the SB will have the luxury of betting out strongly. one of the great advantages of betting out with a medium strong A is being able to carefully study opponent reaction to the bet. the SB will be able to studiously observe his opponent's reaction behind the tranquility of first position. any hesitancy or winging it will quickly be picked up on. this is what makes a dominated holding so awkward. it's not just that AT is dominated by AQ, it's that AT cannot stop AQo from betting out. the same is true for KQ. the dominated hand is restricted to calling or folding, but AQo is restricted to betting out. anything AT does along the way will only succeed in getting the dominating hand heads up. AT doesn't like heads up. now a bluff raise will be called down by AK unimproved and anything stronger. even AQ will strongly consider calling heads up. so AT from any other position than absolute first will have to call to the river and bluff there. well, river bluffs are the hardest to pull off successfully, even with an over-caller in there, or because of the over-caller for that matter.

the whole problem is that the SB with his AT is betting out strongly. unless your image is extremely solid, your hand must improve. and of course that's the other half of the disadvantage in having a dominated hand. when your hand improves, your opponent's hand improves even more so. often, it's better that your hand doesn't improve, and you simply fold out by betting out strongly with your dominated hand.

if, on the other hand, you held something like JTs from first, betting out isn't so important, and you will only continue if the flop puts you within the safety parameters of math. this holding is weaker than AQ or AJ, perhaps even weaker than AT, but it isn't dominated; it doesn't have to bet out and fold out a stronger hand. it can reside within the fundementals of math. that's not to say that having an aggressive SB is necessarily helpful, it's just that should the SB elect to check, JTs doesn't have to bet. it doesn't have to bet because it's not dominated, it is weaker, a very distinct difference. so calling with JTs would have been correct, but calling with ATo is definately incorrect due to lack of position to be in position to bet out strongly for the fold.

this is why mr. sklansky says that it is sometimes correct to call with J9o from the SB when the BB isn't liable to 3 bet, and the initial bet has come from UTG. J9o can bet out if there is a reasonable chance of getting the fold. of course, the other advantage is that if his river bet-out is called, and he shows down, he will be rated as being looser than he actually is, and will get increased action. by the way, at the higher limits, he wouldn't necessarily tighten a lot after showing down on the river since that is precisely what his opponents would be expecting. often, opposition folds under the betting applied by an opponent who has just recently been caught bluffing. so often, a string of 4 or 5 bluffs in a row while complaining that you aren't getting called enough can be deadly effective in the higher limits. the best players are called down with powerful made hands.

[DcifrThs]

Elysium,

I have been a long time fan of your work here, and, despite being too new at the game to understand everything in all of your posts, there is something unique and pristine in the way in which you view the game that i can, and do appreciate.

this post, however, while not filled with the analogies that suit you MORE than makes up for it with its informational, strategic, and suggestive content.

excellent post. above and beyond.

-Barron