Interesting two pair hand.
 

Is there a converter for full tilt??

Anyhow, I put this hand in here:
http://www.pokerhand.org/index.php?p...mp;hand=196147

You can see the result and what really happened but try to be objective.

I am in this situation a lot. River 3-bet good or bad? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

No reads.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I'd fold PF pretty easily. I'd also fold the flop with two people behind you. BPTK isn't good enough for a CR here IMO. I don't like the river 3-bet either really. Though it's a little closer because he could have AK/AQ

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

tou should fold preflop. I definetly would not raise the flop, because all you have is bottom pair. I think you may have gotten lucky on the river but i dont like the way you played this hand.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I must confess. I didn't play this hand [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] My friend did and asked my advice --> I decided to put it here [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

edit: but is this so bad? If I calculated correctly I am getting 8-1 on the flop. The pf-reiser might continuate bet with AK for example. If I can isolate him with a c/r I think it is a good play??

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I played this hand actually. I must agree with you guys that my call from big blind pre flop was probably a mistake, since there was a significant risk to be dominated with A4 against the raiser and I was drawing to three outs. However, I am certain that my play was correct after the flop. I immediately put the pf raiser on AK/AQ/AJ or a big pair. Action on the flop after my check was: check-check-(continuation) bet and there was a flush draw on board so I had to raise, calling was out of the question, since someone could have been drawing to flush and I had to charge them 2 bets. Against AK/AQ/AJ I knew I was ahead and if the raiser had had a big pair he would have re-raised and I could have folded. Turn was J and he didn't re-raise so I knew he had either AK/AQ and I re-raised for value with the best hand, easy re-raise since I thrusted my read. He couldn't have been playing AT so passively.

Check-raise is of course quite aggressive play with BPTK but I like that play if I suspect I am against unimproved overcards and I am ready to fold later if it seems that I am wrong.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

Preflop play sucks, Don't do that ever again or you will be in for a nice little red number under pt "A4o".

Post flop is prefecto.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I don't like much of this hand. I think you are being results orientated.

True

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I must confess. I didn't play this hand [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] My friend did and asked my advice --> I decided to put it here [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

edit: but is this so bad? If I calculated correctly I am getting 8-1 on the flop. The pf-reiser might continuate bet with AK for example. If I can isolate him with a c/r I think it is a good play??

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not getting 8:1 if you raise. You could be dominated by AT here too. I would give this hand 4 outs on the flop. Getting 8:1, that makes for a pretty clear fold in my book. If you were heads-up this would probably be OK, but against 3 opponents? Muck it.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
However, I am certain that my play was correct after the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a joke?

[ QUOTE ]
I immediately put the pf raiser on AK/AQ/AJ or a big pair. Action on the flop after my check was: check-check-(continuation) bet and there was a flush draw on board so I had to raise, calling was out of the question, since someone could have been drawing to flush and I had to charge them 2 bets. Against AK/AQ/AJ I knew I was ahead and if the raiser had had a big pair he would have re-raised and I could have folded.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with this logic is that you're not the only one who can checkraise here. Someone else could be planning to checkraise their ten, in which case you're in a pretty bad spot. Even if they just call with it, you won't know where you stand.

[ QUOTE ]
easy re-raise since I thrusted my read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, so this is a joke... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Preflop play sucks, Don't do that ever again or you will be in for a nice little red number under pt "A4o".

Post flop is prefecto.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I like to defend my big blind a lot, maybe too much. I have called one bet with (a lot) worse hands so Ax seems reasonable. Of course there is risk of domination but if an ace flops without my kicker and there is action on flop I am capable of throwing the hand away and losing only one or two small bets in addition to my big blind. I have lost from the blind positions in the long run but I think it is normal and I have continued to defend my big blind to show that I cannot easily be stolen from.

I still think that folding that above mentioned hand on the flop is too passive poker if I sense that I am against ace high hand. I would be throwing away the best hand and the pot is reasonably big, a major mistake. Of course there are two guys who could be trying check-raise but what the heck, you just can't fear check raises too much. Pre flop raiser raised after two limpers and normal players don't do that with only AT, they only call with that and therefore I thought he had bigger Ax so the flop was good for me since I hit a pair and hitting any pair is difficult in holdem. I have won many big pots by check raising the flop against pf raiser with BPTK or MPTK, because many people then call with unimproved Ax and then when they improve on turn or river after an ace hits the board, they make a pair of aces with big kicker, maybe TPTK, and they raise me with the 2nd best hand and at the same time I make two pair and can raise them more (=good implied odds when we both hit ace).

3 betting the river was an obvious play. After that action it was clear to me that my read was correct, he hit his ace on the river and thought he had the best hand. Of course I then re-raise for value with the best hand. All in all, after flop I think I played perfect poker.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a converter for full tilt??



[/ QUOTE ]

Full Tilt Converter

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Preflop play sucks, Don't do that ever again or you will be in for a nice little red number under pt "A4o".


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

[ QUOTE ]
there was a flush draw on board so I had to raise, calling was out of the question, since someone could have been drawing to flush and I had to charge them 2 bets.


[/ QUOTE ]
You really aren't charging a flush draw on the flop because they have about 35% equity on the flop, and additional players in the pot do not eat away their equity.

If it is threeway, they are about breakeven on all bets that go in on the flop, given no one has a huge hand like a set. Don't forget that most draws usually have some other outs so their equity is usually a little better. So in some instances they profit on the flop when you bump it up.

There really is nothing you can do about the flush draws. But your flop raise certainly does knock out some hands you want gone.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

Preflop is a fold but flop and river are perfect. Turn is the interesting street to me. Can you really fold to a raise? Depends on the texture of the game but many people like to semibluff with 2 overs+gutshot (and sometimes they even have flush draw to boot!). So if we cant fold to a raise, the question is whether villain will bet if we check. If villain will do this most of he time, I kinda like a check/call turn. But then river is tough if it blanks-- I like to donk/call river against thinking players and check/call against maniacs. Not a default line, but something worth thinking about.

Re: Interesting two pair hand.
 

I don't like it much either, but I'll agree that if we had to play the flop, it would certainly be the way you did it.