Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I would raise the flop on the JTs hand. Would that be incorrect?

[/ QUOTE ]

JTs draws most of it's strength from the flushes and straights it makes so it's usually the "more the merrier" with this kind of holding. Even on the button you usually don't want to drive players out. It will win sometimes when it makes top pair but it is easily dominated and (since we always play aggressively) it can be a be big loser as top pair because of the relatively weak kicker. I am not even that happy when I make a JJTT two pair (when a J and T hit the board) because it most of the strongest preflops hands contain two Broadway cards (like AK, AQ, KQ) so we have to fear a straight right to the river.

That's not to say that it is always "incorrect" to raise with JTs. If you are very strong player post flop (I am not nor are most micro-limit players) you sometimes will want to play your opponent instead of your cards so raising with a medium strength holding like this can be raised with plans to "out maneuver" your opponent(s) post flop. Also if you are first in late position it can be used to try and steal the blinds almost as a semi-bluff. If the blinds fold great but seeing the flop isn't the end-of-the-earth either.

Re: one pair disaster
 

re two hands, played okay, except possibly the river, where i would have checked and called...

in a .50/1.00 game i doubt many folks are going to get bluffed out on the river--and as i recall from reading Phil Gordon's Little Green Book, it usually takes two pair to win a 10 handed game. In the first hand you offered, there were 2 picture cards on the board, so it was possible someone came in with QJ and would have you beat...thus calling seems best...can't recall the second hand--see next post for comment on that one

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think I would raise the flop on the JTs hand. Would that be incorrect?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would raise also.

Re: one pair disaster
 

2nd hand...K scare card came on the river...thus i would have checked as well...a King is a card the SB could well have had.

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
fold to the river raise in hand 2.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thought that we are beat is right but with this scary board they have the perfect bluff opportunity. Im sure we will lose the bet but we only have to be right 1 out of 10 times to make this call correct. I would have ck called the river instead.

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
Stakes: .50$/1$ at PP
Profit after 2,500 Hands: 24$ (1BB/100H)
Profit with one pair: -112$


[/ QUOTE ]

a. don't worry about tiny samples like this
b. click the only show hands that you didn't fold box, in the top right corner of the misc stats page .. if over a large sample you are still losing with 1pair, you are either running absolutely terrible or grossly misplaying your 1pair hands, most likely the mid/bottompair hands .. and its far more likely to be bad play, and not running bad .. if the sample is a decent size

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi nofutures hand one looks good. In hand two i would have probably raised pre flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would raise also.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am curious as to the reasons why you would raise this preflop??

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi nofutures hand one looks good. In hand two i would have probably raised pre flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

[/ QUOTE ]

We have a good hand, position, one late position limper which means he is either bad or weak/tight, get rid of the blinds, be the aggressor and give myself a strong chance to win the hand unimproved.

Also we can't check/call the river in hand two since we are last to act so its just a question of whether this is a value bet or not.

Re: one pair disaster
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also we can't check/call the river in hand two since we are last to act so its just a question of whether this is a value bet or not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep,messed up on position. I would still ck, betting is -EV.

[ QUOTE ]

Hi nofutures hand one looks good. In hand two i would have probably raised pre flop.



Why?



We have a good hand, position, one late position limper which means he is either bad or weak/tight, get rid of the blinds, be the aggressor and give myself a strong chance to win the hand unimproved.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a tight game with good reads and me having a good image this is a quality play but as a rule JTs on the button is great position for a quality drawing hand. I would rather have a couple of players to make it a multiway pot. This is a hand that I want as many players in as possible and pay as little as possible to see the flop.

[ QUOTE ]
be the aggressor and give myself a strong chance to win the hand unimproved.

[/ QUOTE ]

If our limper is weak/tight (we have no reason to believe it based on the info given) he probably has us beat with an Ax,Kx Qx or PP. Weak tight wont be the first to limp with sm suited connectors. We must get him and the blinds to fold. At this level the BB and most SB usually cold call with anything and the limper will certainly call. What kind of flop would you expect that would miss all so you can push them out?