Re: A hand from the archives
 

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop was asked to be ignored. Run some math on th flop call. It's nowhere near as bad as you make it sound.

[/ QUOTE ]


especially considering that the hero is getting 7.5-1 on the flop call with bottom pair+Bdoor straight and bdoor flush draws. that's a good flop call

Re: A hand from the archives
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the only things i like about this hand are the turn raise and the river bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to (learn to) elaborate. There is a lot going on in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry.

ok, the preflop call is not good. we know that. i dont think it's a good call on the flop with 2 backdoor draws and a pair either.

on the turn we need to get sb out. as you can see our 2pr outs are tainted and theres a chance we split if we hit our straight. so we need to raise here, especially since we have prolly somewhere around 15-19 outs.

on the river our bet is a value bet. an overpair is likely as is a hand like KJs. i think he'd bet an ace here and possibly even a set if he's really a solid tag. so, even though our bet might lose us 1BB in this case I think we're good at least 50% of the time here.

Re: A hand from the archives
 

The flop call is close but if you can count on a call or two behind with about 5ish outs including bd draws and some implied odds I would peel one here.

The turn looks good to me, a raise may win it there and there are plenty of ways to improve. The 3bet tells me I need to hit a draw. I put hijack on AA,KK,QQ,JJ,AJ, or KJ (maybe even of hearts).

On the river we hit 2pr (still behind JJ, AJ, AA but ahead of QQ,KK,KJ) . It's likely he checks in fear of the straight which would mean we are only behind JJ so we should bet.

Nice hand and I doubt I would think this much in the middle of the hand even though I should.

Re: A hand from the archives
 

[ QUOTE ]

The turn looks good to me, a raise may win it there and there are plenty of ways to improve.

[/ QUOTE ]

Raising here strictly for semibluffing reasons is bad.

Re: A hand from the archives
 

mmbt0ne: on the flop, i call. hijack is raising AsKs, AhQh, etc, etc here to try to knock people out, and get HU with the loose EP. [censored] him and call.
mmbt0ne: if it gets 3bet and capped, then you can go "oh [censored], i need to watch out"
mmbt0ne: similar reason with raising the turn
soma: flop call is boring
soma: odds alone make it worthwhile
mmbt0ne: although, at this time, we can be pretty sure he has at least a pair
mmbt0ne: and not just overs
mmbt0ne: unless he has hearts
mmbt0ne: because a solid tag doesnt usually fire another barrel UI against this crew
soma: right
mmbt0ne: a raise makes it -EV for a naked A to call on straight outs
mmbt0ne: which is important if we can clear up your 5s
mmbt0ne: when everyone folds, and hijack 3bets, you go, eff me in the a, i better hit this river

editted for soma purposes.

Re: A hand from the archives
 

this whole hand rules

Re: A hand from the archives
 

the reason i dont like the flop call is that it sucks to get 3bet here. then there's the chance you're drawing to runners.

it definitely isnt horrible though, i just wouldnt do it

Re: A hand from the archives
 

[ QUOTE ]

This had got to be the worst hand I've ever seen.

You CC PF with trash.

You CC on the flop with bottom pair no kicker with two trashy backdoor draws.

You raise the turn with your trash backdoor draws.

You river a trash two pair.

Good job.

And when I say 'you', i don't mean JT, just the Hero.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably the best hand I've ever seen, ignoring pre-flop.

Re: A hand from the archives
 

you need to explain, preflop was horrid and flop was very marginal. turn and river were easy imo. what makes this the best hand ever?

Re: A hand from the archives
 

FWIW- there's some like meta posting reasons you might want to re-think your response. If a hand that has to many obvious seeming flaws received enough discussion that it was recalled from the archives, I think it's a good contextual clue that it's not what you think it is. I remember the original, and seeing that it had some 50 responses and thinking "there's no way this hand is as straight forward as I think, because it simply wouldn't have generated this much volume". That allowed me to be more open minding and see what I was missing before.

I mention this because I think the same deductive reasoning and use of context that tells you "hmm, something is up with this post" is the reasoning that aids you as a poker player in term of hand reading and so forth. It's an important skill to develop.