Deep thinking hand
 

http://www.livejournal.com/users/ribmeister/26323.html

Read and offer opinions.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Unorthodox hand played in an unusual manner because of your history with this opponent, to be done only when the opponent is good and knows your play, and even then only occasionally.

But if he was a good player, then you certainly could not expect him to have AA there – he should be raising in late position with unopened pots with AA, A2, A3 and some other hands, so your read seems a bit of hindsight.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Not at all, he wont make a bet on the flop without a legitimate reason. A nut flush draw is certainly good reason to. Likewise I wont call without a strong hand, so when I do he knows I have a legitimate reason to call. The range of hands is pretty slim for me to hold. It's not a flush draw so I must have 2 pair, set or the straight. He is well aware of how often I check raise him which is shown by his check on the turn. This also tells me that he doesn't have QJ obviously, he may still have a set but with him definately having an ace it lessens that. I do not know at this point he has AA, but if I check to him again I believe this is the only way of getting money out of him. He doesn't have the nuts and any bet from me on the river will tell him I do, so if he believes I don't have the nuts, then there is a chance he will bet.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Good poker.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Ok, he open-raises CO+2 in an un-opened pot. If he is good, he can have AA, A2, A3, A45x, and perhaps other stuff occasionally to mix things up AKJ9, KK24, 2345, JJT9, JJQQ etc. You call, so he can put you on roughly the same range minus the crappier holdings.

It’s heads up and you check. He should be betting with a fair number of hands here. QJ, Ax clubs, Kx clubs, a set, two pair. Also semi-bluff hands like AQcT8c, AQQT, and occasionally even with pure bluff hands like A288ds, since your preflop call could easily have been something like A234 that has to go away now.

When you call the flop, yes he can now narrow you to two pair or set, but wouldn’t you also call here with AKQ9ds to the K in clubs? What about QQT8ds? What about A27c8c? Why are you so sure that HE can’t be continuation betting with A27c8c ?

What happens if he has a set with the naked Ac and a club hits – then he bets and bluff you out? Or the board pairs and he holds Ax clubs and bluffs you out?

Look, the hand was played fine, and your turn read set up a nice river play. But it easily could have gone differently if his cards were different, or you got different turn/river cards.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

[ QUOTE ]

Ok, he open-raises CO+2 in an un-opened pot. If he is good, he can have AA, A2, A3, A45x, and perhaps other stuff occasionally to mix things up AKJ9, KK24, 2345, JJT9, JJQQ etc. You call, so he can put you on roughly the same range minus the crappier holdings.

It’s heads up and you check. He should be betting with a fair number of hands here. QJ, Ax clubs, Kx clubs, a set, two pair. Also semi-bluff hands like AQcT8c, AQQT, and occasionally even with pure bluff hands like A288ds, since your preflop call could easily have been something like A234 that has to go away now.

When you call the flop, yes he can now narrow you to two pair or set, but wouldn’t you also call here with AKQ9ds to the K in clubs? What about QQT8ds? What about A27c8c? Why are you so sure that HE can’t be continuation betting with A27c8c ?


[/ QUOTE ]
I am well aware there are a lot of bets he will follow through on, but A278 is most certainly not one of them [ QUOTE ]

What happens if he has a set with the naked Ac and a club hits – then he bets and bluff you out? Or the board pairs and he holds Ax clubs and bluffs you out?


[/ QUOTE ] I would check raise QQxx for one, as it's very unlikely he has the nuts. I would throw A278 without a moments hesistation to any bet on his part. If he has a set and a naked ace and a club hits, then yes he does bluff me out because I can't call a pot bet, that's pretty standard play. He will not bluff me out should the board pair, as the range of hands I am holding when I call him on the flop are either 2 pair, a set or QJ, none of which do him any favours bluffing against. He cannot afford to be bluffing if he does not know I do not hold the nuts, this is very important to remember. Almost all bluffs, solid player against solid player are done in full knowledge that the opponent cannot call, because the tricky play both are capable means neither know the others holding for sure. [ QUOTE ]

Look, the hand was played fine, and your turn read set up a nice river play. But it easily could have gone differently if his cards were different, or you got different turn/river cards.

[/ QUOTE ] In each of his holdings, I gain nothing by betting the river, if he had different cards then I still want him to bluff, it's the only way I will win money on the river. There is no value bet. Because of all the scare cards that could hit, I want to keep the pot small out of position. I will work out the equity of me betting the turn against checking it twice and winning via a bluff and check raise.

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Assuming that your read is correct... He has a good hand, but a QJ is unlikely since you believe he has Aces, why would you check the turn, if you know he fears a check-raise. You give him infinite odds to catch up. All you get in return is a chance to catch a bluff. If he has AAxx with clubs, he is probably not betting unless he makes his flush or catches an Ace. Why not pot bet the turn and take it down now. If he has the straight and a redraw, can you honestly say you could fold the turn pot bet that is quite likely to come? You seem to be risking an 80-90 dollar pot to win 125 or so and I jsut dont see that you can count on him betting a weaker hand AND paying you off all that often

I am even confused by the narrow ranges of hands you describe. And to be quite honest, it is this sort of situation that I have the most difficulty understanding in pot limit O8 Won't the pre-flop raiser bet at MANY pots in this spot. If he is only going to be called with 2 pair or better, it seems he should bet the pot, or perhaps less, with EVERY hand. Won't the caller have a fairly wide range of hands, most of which either beat AA or have a good draw to do so. It really seems like this kind of situation, a high flop in a high low game, has to become a contest of wills as much or more so than a contest of cards. Is the callers positional disadvantage so great the he simply cannot win a "pissing contest" and that he must therefore only contest the pot when he hits it fairly solidly?

Jim M

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

Because I know the player very well, the range of hands he would follow through with on the flop is not that great given that I would never bet out on the flop, only ever check raise. This is not a situation that comes up too often, but against players you have played for over 2 years on a regular, often daily basis, you have to occasionally throw them a curveball. Let's say he is now aware that I am capable of checking the nuts to him 3 times. If at some point in the future I establish that by the river, having checked 3 times to him, that he does not have the nuts, I may again check raise any bet and he might have a flashback to the day i stung him for $125 on the river and fold. Also by checking this way, it can very well pay itself back in free cards when out of position in future.
On the turn I gave him a free 20% chance of hitting the river. This was worth $17 to him. I would wager that should the river come a blank, it is worth more than $17 to check to him again and call a bet. If I pot the turn, he will not call, although most players will. As I have pointed out on previous occasions though, sometimes your opponents have no chance whatsoever of winning, and any aggression from you causes them to fold. If you allow them to keep betting , sometimes it's the only way of winning money, plus it makes you look clever when it pays off......

Re: Deep thinking hand
 

You think too much, it blows your brain out.

Seriously, since you've known this player so well, didn't his preflop pot-bet scream out of AA there? What were you calling for? You were the only caller, you know better than me that you were a huge underdog preflop against him. Calling his pot-raise preflop without enough players with your high only cards is a -EV play in long term.

Edited, postflop play was awesome.

Re: Punking post
 

So you slow played a freakin flopped straight, against a good opponent, with a scary board, who happened to hit the perfectly wrong card on the end, BFD.

You played the hand cautiously, and for value, and he is victimized by having a really seductive nut flush draw materialize into top trips against a made straight. Bad luck for him, good solid play by you-- that could have cost you a pot if the river comes club.

You make this hand out to be the Negreanu vs Deeb finesse steal that Harrington lauds in HOH2, when in my view the hand was played the way a large number of solid players would play it, albeit differently than you would play it against most opponents. The cards fell perfectly into place giving you the nuts and him a hand that most people can't get away from.

I'm not knocking you, I've got a couple hundred hands with you and I respect your play, but posting this on two sites is a bit of a brag job under the guise of an O8 primer. It is especially hard to appreciate from an online player perspective.

Your self-gloss is tame in comparison to ATE though.

PS Scoreboard!

http://www.imagerage.com/pic1/iwF81830.jpg

You've been punked.

Re: Punking post
 

Fraid i've won plenty more than that off you, but then you haven't included my other 3 screen names.
I don't watch holdem tournaments, so I wouldn't know about what hands it compares to.
I hate to break it to you, but sometimes hands that you consider "bragging" can also contain poker content. Just because you want to be bitter and just look for any negative aspect to the post, does not make it so.
The sad fact of the matter is, I will only post about hands of poker I am in, and because i'm that damn good, a lot of the time it will involve me winning a pot. You're just going to have to live with that or not read my posts. Either way, as asked already by Felicia, stop with the snide remarks if that's the only thing you have to contribute.

Re: Punking post
 

I actually like all of you, although I must be insane. Maybe it's a short term side effect of chemo, and I'll get over it soon [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I do wish you all would stop fighting all of the time, or at least be required to report to my house so that I can give you spankings any time you act up...Oh, wait, this is the wrong forum [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Never mind.

Oh, and I was happy to catch Ribbo in a spelling error. Usually it's the Yanks who always misspell DEFINITELY. Why they think there is an A in that word is beyond me. I rarely see the Brits spell it wrong. Once I saw Ribbo write "definAtely," I knew I could go for the jugular, I'd found the soft spot...

LOL,

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

Re: Punking post
 

My point wasn't that I've won more off you, just that bragging threads are lame.

But, I'd be happy to include your other screen names Ribbo, as well as my other 5 Party affliate names, you can backchannel me if you think it is important to set the record straight on bragging rights.

I don't have any objections to posting hands of your own, and I acknowleged that I respect you as a player, and many of your posts. So I am sure you have many great hands to post, but I think this particular hand was unremarkable other than for the fact that your opponent (friend?) had cards that virtually everyone would have played exactly the way he did and lost a chunk of change.

Had you posted the same hand, with you in his position, folding on the end and then being shown the made straight by your opponent, I would have thought THAT was worth bragging about. Not the misfortune of your opponent.

This isn't a knock on your knowledge or posts generally, it is a specific observation that your play on the hand in question is unremarkable, except to the extent it varies from YOUR norm.

Re: Punking post
 

No, most people wouldn't have played it the same way as him. Infact on party poker most players would have shoved the turn also straight into the check raise all in. He was well aware that would be bad for him, and would expect me to bet QJ into him on the river. Because I checked again, he put me on a set or 2 pair, which is exactly why I checked to him again on the river. If he didn't have AA, because I had checked he could move me off the pot if he believed I didn't hold QJ. If he did have AA, then I would expect a value bet that I could check raise, in either case checking the river against a solid player, was better.
If you think for a minute most players in my position would have played it the same way, then you are very sadly mistaken.

Re: Punking post
 

Well my point was that most people who drew trip AA's on the end would have lost a bundle on that hand because the only possible hand improved on the card was his AA to trips.

And your check on the turn I think is risky, because it gives him a free draw to beat you, AND a very slim chance of drawing a card that forces him to bet or call you on the end (not including the hands which beat you). I will take your word that this particular player would have put you on your hand had you bet the turn, but I'm not sure how that remotely helps you unless an A falls on the river. Anything else comes and you either don't make any more money on the hand, but you give your opponent a free draw to beat you. How is that good? Also, are you sure you don't lose some amount more money on the river if a club comes? I've seen you make good folds, but he'd get the chance to get you to make a mistake.

So on the turn, by my figuring, assuming you have correctly put him on AA clubs (which you claim), you have 2 outs which probably win you another pot sized bet, and he has 9 to either take the pot or possibly more. By my calculation he is getting WAY the better of those implied odds. Do you disagree with this?

How would you have played his hand?

I think he played the flop correctly, he tried to take the pot, and he had odds if you called to draw out his flush.

I think his check on the turn was correct as well, I'm not sure I agree most Party players shove the turn with AA there, after being called-- but some would.

I think you take $85 off of virtually anyone there if you lead out on the end, probably even him. In this case you got the extra $40 by checking, but he easily could have checked the hand down, and you get nothing extra.

Again, all in all I don't see anything exemplary about anyone's play on this hand.

What odds did you put on his checking the river? What odds of his calling if you bet, and what odds of his calling a check raise?