2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

hand 1:

i have ~15K, phil has ~100K.

i'm in the SB w/ 66, a really bad player limps on the button w/~9K, i raise to isolate making it 450 straight.

to my dismay phil calls, and the limper folds.

flop comes 6-5-5 rainbow.

i lead for $600 phil calls.

turn comes a Queen putting two hearts on the board.

6-5-5-Q two hearts.

i check call $1200.

river comes an offsuit duece i lead for $2K.

i was really at a loss for how to maximize my profit on this hand, i had a hard time putting phil on a hand here, as he often times likes to call in position and take pots away, so he could have been on a total bluff or had a hand like 77-JJ.

i contemplated checkraising the turn but i felt it would scream strength, and i hoped my river lead would look like a bust.

he ended up folding after not too much consideration, so i'm still not sure what the best line would have been.

any thoughts appreciated.


hand 2:

i'm in BB w/AKspades and ~20K phil still has me way covered.

phil limps, all fold to me and i raise to $500 he calls.

flop comes Q-10-3 rainbow.

i check phil bets 1K i call.

turn comes a brick (i think a seven) putting two hearts on the board.

i check phil bets 2K i make it 5.5K.

any thoughts?

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

hand 1 looks fine, although i might try for the weaker lead on the turn, but it depends how agg. he was playing and whether he would try to steal this one from you there.


hand #2. your pf raise is borderline at best.

i would bet the flop here though, and go for the CR semi bluff on the turn if you really want do try that here.

what hands would you check twice in that same spot? you playing QQ like that?

it looks too much like a bluff than my line I think.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

i think u need to overbet the flop on #1.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

in hand 1, 2k seems like a weird amount. doesn't seem like you were getting called anyways, but if you were going to bluff would you lay him 3:1? seems like he either has nothing or a weak hand, and if he has nothing checking is probably much better against him.

--turnipmonster

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Where is this game played?

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Substituting phil laak for "a very good player" because I have no idea how he plays ring games.

Hand 1, the only losing hand that played the flop and call are a few 5s, making the odds that he has one very small. If he likes to bet his position, the % of the time you can induce a bluff is likely higher than that he % of time has one of the 5s, but you know his style and I don't.
I don't see any reason to CR the turn... you have no reason to think he's on a flush draw so a CR doesn't look like you're trying to push a flush draw out, rather it looks like the monster it is.
He likely has an overpair and if his 4%er hits you aren't going to lay it down to him so a scared player might CR but the check is the right call. On the river you hope a flush or high card hits and you can check and induce a river bet.

Hand 2 is a tricky bet number. He knows you aren't that afraid of a backdoor flush so I like that you kept the bet controlled. I hope he didn't have 10-10.

Was there another play you considered?

topout

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

In hand #2, why not consider taking the same line as you did with your monster in hand#1?

Call the turn and lead the river for 3 or 4k.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

[ QUOTE ]

in hand 1, 2k seems like a weird amount. doesn't seem like you were getting called anyways, but if you were going to bluff would you lay him 3:1? seems like he either has nothing or a weak hand, and if he has nothing checking is probably much better against him.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think 2k looks like a weak blocking bet or something similar that Phil might try to steal away?

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

on hand 1 ALOTTTTT wider range of hands in this game will call the river then a high 5.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Could be.
Do you think AA or KK are calling 6% of hero's stack on the flop for top boat value? Does he think they're good and is trying induce the second barrel?
If you mean there are other 5s, I tweaked my post for clarity. I mean a small % of 5s would be played this one, it doesn't matter which just that they are infrequent.

topout

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Hey rbk,

Wasn't it your line that I remember reading on the boards a while back for when you flop a monster out of position?

As I recall, the line is: overbet flop, check call turn, fire big on the river . . .

Anyway, I've incorporated the line into my game, and it seems like a great line to get paid off (assuming, of course, that you don't always take this line w/ your monsters oop, and that you don't only use this line w/ monsters), and this seems like a decent spot to use it.

I also tend to agree w/ turnipmonster's point, however, that a river check may be optimal against Laak in this spot, as the only way you're likely to get any more coin out of him (unless he has a queen) would be to check it to him and let him bluff at you. As played, your bet of 2K into a ~5K pot seems like a bet that wants to get called . . . I also like fsu's weak lead the turn idea, so I think either overbet, weak lead, check/raise, or overbet, check/call, betting big on the river might both have won you a bit more than you did.

I've never played anywhere near this high live, however, and only very sparingly online, and nowhere near this deep, so take this w/ a grain a salt, if you will . . .

By the way, it sounds like this game was playing three-handed, w/ Laak on your left? It must have been a bitch to play oop vs. him w/ such a deep stack, though I'm guessing the third player was enough of a soft spot that it made tangling vs. Laak on occasion more than worthwhile. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Hand 1:

Flop and turn look good…I think leading the river seems like suspiciously strong hand. Check the river and let him hang himself. I think he will bet with more hands than he will call with here.

Hand 2:

I agree with most other posters. I’m not a big fan of check–call / semibluff raise the turn…I think most strong players see through this…I like FSU’s thought of betting flop, and check-raising the turn.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Hand 1: I'd make my standard continuation bet of 3/4 pot on the flop. I'd make this same bet on this board with any 2 cards after raising preflop, so it gets money in the pot without giving much information about your hand.

Betting or calling the turn defines your hand as AQ or better. I think you checked, he tried to steal, you called, and he shut down. Your line is probably fine here. He's likely got middle pocket pair. If you bet again, you'll probably fold him. Only 2 hearts or QX might call--he'd probably put you on AQ-KK-AA, and wouldn't expect you to fold to a raise. Checking gets at least another $1200. You might try a small check-raise here. If he's semi-bluffing with two hearts, he'll probably call, and if he doesn't call a check-raise here, he probably won't call a bet on the river. Also, if you make a small check-raise on the turn with a monster, it sets up cheap bluffs later on, such as hand 2.

2: I'm not sure why fsu thinks this pf raise is marginal. Looks standard to me. I think if you don't bet the flop here, you pretty much need to fold to his bet. Best case scenario, you're drawing to 10 outs, none of which will get paid off that well. Worst case, you've got 7 outs, but you don't know whether the A or K is good.

What are you representing with your turn check-raise? I guess QQ might get played this way, but so might KJ, A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]X[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], AQ. What I'm saying is, he doesn't need a set to call you, and you won't necessarily push him off something like QJ. KJ, 9T, X[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]X[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] should call.

I guess I don't like it because there have to be easier ways to make money than to make marginal bluffs against skilled players.

Anyways, after I won either hand, I'd jump around and do some shadow boxing and crunches, while yelling "YEAH! YEAH!" and give Phil a big hug.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Hand 1: I lead that turn every time. You have to give him an opportunity to move some chips to take it away from you. If you check, representing nothing, he can do what he did - take a cheap stab. Having check-called the turn, I check the river and hope he takes a stab w/ complete air.

Hand 2: Overall, seems fine. I can't see you making that move w/out a good feel that he's going to fold enough. Impossible to judge that without being there. How often do you semi-bluff checkraise when you pick up a draw?

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyways, after I won either hand, I'd jump around and do some shadow boxing and crunches, while yelling "YEAH! YEAH!" and give Phil a big hug.

[/ QUOTE ]



[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

rbk-
how many players were in the game on the 2nd hand.

i may or may not want to recant my previous statement about not liking preflop. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Hey rbk,

Both hands, I think any history would be helpful, even if it's that you just sat down. More specifically, I think that his read on YOU is more important than any read on him...

Hand 1, I bet more on the flop. And, I lead the turn. Given the check-call of the turn, I would check the river or bet smaller, hoping to get raised. Your bet is too big to look like a block and too small to look like a bluff. If he did indeed have a five, I think you won near the minimum.

Hand 2, I agree with others that bet flop, check-raise turn might be a better line, but there are merits to yours. If he's more likely to raise the flop than to call to try to take it away later, I like the check-call fine. Not to mention the fact that you wouldn't mind seeing the flop go check-check. As to following through on the turn with the check-raise, I think it's a feel play that none of us can really comment on. Out of curiosity, what is the river plan if called (shut down I presume, but I'm curious as to what you would do if you hit your A or K)?

ML4L

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

[ QUOTE ]
i may or may not want to recant my previous statement about not liking preflop. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what exactly was your logic there? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

ML4L

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

was this at commerce tuesday night? I was there playing the 40 80 and I saw Phil playing at the NL table .... also Men Nguyen....oh yeah and lou diamond phillips but no one cares about him

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

Isn't this a great example of the turn check-raise semi-bluff that makes up in equity what you lose when you actually have a monster there?

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i may or may not want to recant my previous statement about not liking preflop. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, what exactly was your logic there? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

ML4L

[/ QUOTE ]

if its SH 3-6 players or so, raising out of the blinds doesnt give away much about his hand.

if its at all full however, I dont love the idea of raising an excellent/agg. player there with AK bc you are narrowing down your range of hands pretty good, unless rbk raises from the blinds a lot, but i doubt it.


edit: the more I think about it, I do agree with the raise, but i wouldnt do it everytime.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

I just want to know if he acts like a 12 year old when hes not on TV.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

ok there have been a ton of valuable replies and i'm going to try and give some feedback here but if i left you out feel free to let me know.

fsu, the game was shorthanded, i think 4 or 5.

and i think it was turnipmonster that asked about my image at the table.

i've played w/ phil quite a few times and i think he views me as a pretty aggressive player who isn't afraid to mix it up (ie: bluff, semi-bluff), and while he knows i am a winning player, he doesn't seem to mind playing pots with me and seems to like to call my raises in position.

when i'm playing in a game with really deep stacks against observant opponents i try and mix up my game as much as possible, so i rarely take one line consistently through the night.

i am just as likely to be check-raising the turn with a total bluff as i am with a monster. when playing in this game if you can't do both then get up.

as for the second hand he literally beat me into the pot with his call, the river bricked off and i check folded to his $4K or $5K bet.

as for the jumping around and shadow boxing thing, i definately think he was trying to play it up for the cameras in the hopes of making a name for himself, which he did.

at the tables he is always a good sport. he's a real quality individual and if he wasn't so damn good at poker i would say its a pleasure to play with him.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

agreed

Phil plays a little funky sometimes...
 

...so I find playing hands straight up and fast is the best way againt him most times.

Since he is a "known" poker player he expects people to try to make moves on him and throw a lot of curveballs.

He told me a few weeks ago that since he has been on TV his earn in the cash games have gone way up because of what I just said.

He does some funky ass ish as you probably know. I have seen him just check call with the second to the nuts that was clearly the nuts against that particular player and have seen him make moves in a spot that he just can't represent and then get there.

Also, I have seen him pay off people that I thought was just horrible and then laydown Kings before the flop vs. Aces without spending a cent of his money preflop. The latter being in a private conversation as we know Phil never shows down hands unless he has to.

As for hand 1, I would have just bet 2/3 the pot on every street and take control. Obviously after his flop call, Phil clearly has a hand here, as to how strong of a hand that remains to be seen.

But based on that board, if he calls you on the flop he will likely call you down to the river. You could hope to get lucky in that spot and hope that he has like the 7,8 and attempt to make a move on you on the turn, but the stars are rarely aligned like that.

Your only quandry is, if he indeed did have the 5, you would be kicking yourself because you would probably feel you could have made more.

And he could have the 5, because he comes in with funky hands against bad players because he gets paranoid that someone else will get their money before he does.

An isolation attempt by you against the live one won't work against players like Phil, because they are not thinking about you, they are thinking about them. And to all the posters out there wanting to learn pot odds, implied odds, etc. etc. what I just said is the key to no limit poker.

As for hand 2, I don't like it, I think the flop was the time to make a move, not the turn. The turn looks too much like you are trying to make a move, especially with the two hearts on board. He is too saavy for that.

BTW, Riverboatking, you asked for my name on some post that you responded to a while ago, my name is Jasper.

I have been sick for the past 2 weeks and haven't made it out to Commerce in a while, I had to recover from the all the madness at the Bellagio tournaments.

Are you Armenian? Just asking. I am the late 20ish Korean dude. See you at the Mecca...

Re: Phil plays a little funky sometimes...
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, Riverboatking, you asked for my name on some post that you responded to a while ago, my name is Jasper.

I have been sick for the past 2 weeks and haven't made it out to Commerce in a while, I had to recover from the all the madness at the Bellagio tournaments.

Are you Armenian? Just asking. I am the late 20ish Korean dude. See you at the Mecca...

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not armenian, however my good buddy is (and he usually is with me), so sometimes people think that i am.

i'm also in my early 20's, and my name is jonas...if that rings any bells.

if you are who i think you are, i ran into you at bellagio and we talked for a couple minutes. paul was there too.

i'll see you soon.
peace.

Re: 2 50-100 hands vs. phil laak
 

hand #1

Just pocket change to me but... -I've not read other responses...

turn check-call is ok if you're going to go for the check raise on the river. The check call screams either strength or that you don't trust your opponent in position. If you had checked the river he could've put you on a wider range of hands and bet with an overpair against your pocket 7's, say. He could've felt he could push you off if you check-call the turn and check out on the river. You made the fold easy for him I think.

You must check-raise either the turn or the river.