Was I too aggressive in this situation???

Schmed · #1 02-10-2003, 09:47 AM

Last night in Holdm I had j [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] 9 [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img] in the little blind. I limped in along with 4 other players. I had only been at the table for 4 hands so I hadn't come to a conslusion about how tight or aggressive the table was. (typically these games are pretty preflop loose).

The flop came 8 [img]/forums/images/icons/club.gif[/img] 10 [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img] q [img]/forums/images/icons/spade.gif[/img]

First to act I bet everyone called except the guy on the button and he raised. I reraised, the rest of the table folded the guy on the button called.

The turn came q [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img]

I bet the guy on the button raised, I called.

River came 2 [img]/forums/images/icons/diamond.gif[/img]

I checked he bet I called.

He had q, 8 and took the pot down with the boat.

In looking back at this hand I wonder if I was too aggressive when the q came on the turn. Would the right play have been to check to him and call the bet? I went over this hand with a friend of mine who is an advanced player and was sitting at a different table and his question to me was, "what did you have him on at the turn?". I said "top pair". He said I should have put him on at least two pair and maybe trips because he raised the initial bet and when I reraised he just called.

pudley4 · #2 02-10-2003, 10:10 AM

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
(My friend) said I should have put him on at least two pair and maybe trips because he raised the initial bet and when I reraised he just called.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with your friend. The button could have easily had a top pair hand like KQ or QJ or a draw like AJ or KJ.

I think you played it perfectly.

Louie Landale · #3 02-12-2003, 01:32 PM

I like the flop bet. But once "everyone" calls and the player to your right raises, you should be tempted, very tempted, to just call and hope everyone else does also; since they are all likely 2-cards behind. Thus, you should consider "slow-playing" in accordance with your position vis-a-vis the callers and the other raiser. Had you bet, got raised, and THEN called, then by all means 3-bet it.

On the turn ... [1] if the raiser is passive then you are probably beat and should check-and-call him down. If its Mother Theresa then check-and-fold. [2] if the raiser is aggressive you should bet since he'll likely check the turn (if he raised w/o a Q), but may still raise you if he DOES have a Q. [3] Its a tough call if he's unknown. Betting and calling him down is no disaster.

Your friend's advice has some merit, but primarily because most players are MORE reluctant to raise when the board is coordinated (like QT8) than otherwise, and are therefore more likely to have two-pair or a set when they DO raise.

- Louie

Schmed · #4 02-12-2003, 02:31 PM

"Your friend's advice has some merit, but primarily because most players are MORE reluctant to raise when the board is coordinated (like QT8) than otherwise, and are therefore more likely to have two-pair or a set when they DO raise"

That is actually a great point and a great way to think about it. That is probably where my friend was coming from even though he tried to explain it to me in terms of reading what the opponent had.

Thanks both y'alls comments are greatly appreciated

Ed Miller · #5 02-12-2003, 08:15 PM

I went over this hand with a friend of mine who is an advanced player and was sitting at a different table and his question to me was, "what did you have him on at the turn?". I said "top pair". He said I should have put him on at least two pair and maybe trips because he raised the initial bet and when I reraised he just called.

Nonsense. I would have put in at least one more raise than you did... so I would have lost two more bets.

angelo alba · #6 02-14-2003, 02:58 PM

Isn't it great that HE is such a simple game? [img]/forums/images/icons/frown.gif[/img]

You've been on this table for only four hands so despite your comment that " these tables are typically loose pre flop" you are more correct when you say that " you had not as yet come to a conclusion as to how tight aggressive the table is". In short , at this stage you haven't the foggiest as to who is a rock, a maniac, etc.

While hindsight is always 20/20, I have to along with Pudley 4 here, IMHO , you played it perfectly, which is to say, straight forward; and while world class $1,000-$2,000 players would have easily seen right through your opponent and put him on two pair because he called instead of raised, thus obviously showing a stronger hand, AND easily told you which two pair and their suits [img]/forums/images/icons/grin.gif[/img] (sure). One can, folowing similar logic also argue for the opponent having AK (or just about anything) and making a classic bluff when the board paired by raising with nothing and betting your check on the river , no?

I'd be interested in hearing what your friend says. And while we're at it , how about you just checking the flop to induce a check raise, and then----

Are we geting fancy or brilliant here? [img]/forums/images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

Really, it's fascinating as to how many different ways one could legitimately argue this hand should have been played and I hope (no I'm NOT being facetious ) that Ray, Mason, David, and everyone else I highly respect comments on this very 'simple' hand.

Hmm...