Malmuth's Poker Essays III: I'm confused

[Pirc Defense]

In Poker Essays III, Mason Malmuth in the "A Note on Steaming" article says the following:

"Suppose...you are in early position in a large multiway pot; you hold Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and the flop is J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].

You bet to avoid giving a free card, and five people call. The turn is a blank, you bet again for the same reason, and this time you get four callers. On the river another blank hits and you lose to someone who makes two little pair....Unfortunately, it turns out that you didn't play your hand right! This is because the size of the pot naturally draws lots of callers and you knew this. Furthermore, anyone with a small pair was correct to call due to all the bets in the center of the table. Thus you used strategy that was inaccurate for this particular situation."

Ok, I give up, what is the correct strategy?

[Nottom]

I assume he wants you to try and checkraise the flop.

If you wiff on the flop your turn bet will at least be giving the guy incorrect odds to draw out on you.

[Pirc Defense]

Given the play of the hand, it seems this table was quite passive.

Suppose you attempt to check raise and nobody bets. Surely the infinite odds you've given five opponents is a larger mistake than betting top pair/workable kicker?

I believe Mason would have served his audience well if he had explained his reasoning for believing betting on this hand is incorrect.

[VeraN]

I don't know if it's the right play but I do it a lot, and in this situation I would check. If a player raises, I reraise and usually most limpers who would have limped in if you raised on the flop would now fold. If everybody checks, and the turn comes with the blank, I'll raise.

[Noo Yawk]

Theres no possible draw on the board, and the two overcards that can beat you aren't as likely, but still possible, as there was no preflop raise. No overcard or little pair is folding for one bet and you have a large field. You need to attempt a checkraise to protect your hand from chasers.

[Pirc Defense]

Ok.

Now, if there was a flush or straight draw possibility on the flop, is betting then the correct choice? If so, why? To avoid giving the drawers infinite odds? Would not the same desire to make them pay a double bet apply?

I assume with only two opponents, the correct play would be to bet out?

Here I go, thinking I know something about poker, and this example comes along. Dammit.

[Gregg777]

Pirc,

It is a matter of 6 to 1 pot odds vs 3 to 1 pot odds, if I understand the abreviated example correctly.

Even if nobody raised the flop so you could check-raise, you still give the other players worse pot odds by waiting for the turn.

This gives a free card, which you normally don't want to do, but that is probably what he meant.

[Noo Yawk]

Hi Pirc,

The thing with hands like this is that there are no player descriptions. If you thought the player to your left would raise, then you could bet into him. If the player on your right was probably going to bet, you go for the check-raise.
Both instances will cause hands that may beat you to be in a position to call 2 bets cold and put pressure on them to fold. If you have some draws out there, you might want to wait till the turn and force people to call 2 BB's cold with only one card to come. They may outdraw you, but you'll win a bigger pot when they don't. The idea is to consider all options, and understand the best EV over the long run.
Read Ed's new book, as it explains these concepts much better than I can. I'm sure you've heard the rave reviews here, and it sounds like some of the concepts he discusses would benefit you.

The idea of Mason's essay is more about why bad beats are often the result of not considering how to protect vulnerable hands than they are actual bad beats. Read all the bad beat stories you can, then look for Dynasty's responses. He ususally does a great job of showing how wrong people are about percieved beats.

[Pirc Defense]

Thanks all for the responses.

I've been trying to find the Miller book in bookstores but they never have it. Tried to order from this site, but got a "you must have cookies turned on." I do have them on, of course, which is why I get automatically logged in to the site when I surf here!

I guess this type of hand relies heavily on the particular table you're at. The goal is to make opponents pay double to see the turn, as I understand.

So, if the table is aggressive, you'd be more apt to bet, as you can expect a chance to 3-bet? On the other hand, you'd be more apt to check, as you can expect somebody else to bet, allowing you to then raise.

If the table is passive, you'd maybe want to bet as it might pass that nobody bets behind you, giving a free card (though this might be the lesser of all evils). On the other hand, you'd want to check and hope that nobody behind you bets, so that drawers on the turn aren't getting their odds.

I need some more time to sort this out!

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]

I've been trying to find the Miller book in bookstores but they never have it. Tried to order from this site, but got a "you must have cookies turned on." I do have them on, of course, which is why I get automatically logged in to the site when I surf here!

[/ QUOTE ]

I had the same problem. Try ordering from Amazon. I did and it arrived in about 5 days.