Hand to Talk About

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading....

[/ QUOTE ]

When a great player does something I don't understand, I think about it because I know it has a lot of potential to help my game. When joe blow newbie makes it, I assume he's making a mistake and spending more time thinking is a waste of time. If I post, I'm probably doing it to try to help him, not help myself, and I don't feel the need to think too deeply. This is totally reasonable. A more complicated analysis would hurt a newbie more than help anyways. You think a 2/4 player needs me to add, when viewing this hand, "but if you were in a tough, slightly loose and aggressive 80/160 game, you might just call the river"? No way.

There are a million poker posts on the internet. It's only natural to start, when trying to improve your own game, with the ones where players you respect do something you don't expect or understand. That's not being a snob, it's just good common sense.

-Eric

[/ QUOTE ]

By the very nature of what you're saying it's snobbish. Also, it's possible that a lot of very good players have leaks. By trying to emulate their worst hands, you just create leaks for yourself. All of a sudden you aren't raising your overpair at any point in the hand because Tommy Angelo didn't, or raising the river with trips, top kicker against a loose-aggressive and tricky opponent because Mason did it. Why? Because you can reason 1 or 2 scenarios where this might be the correct play. Ask yourself how you would play a suited ace in this hand, besides probably mucking preflop. Frankly I would play it exactly like the BB, and so would a number of posters on this board. Check-raising the flop would be juvenile and I doubt that most if any good players would do this with pretty much ANY ace in the BB, since it would be terrible. Also, I would rarely go for a bet-three-bet against Mason because I know how rarely he puts in extra bets postflop. Note that against more aggressive players I would probably do this, but against Mason, no thanks. I know he is checking behind KK and QQ on the turn. Anyways, you can respond to whomever you wish, of course. I don't have a problem with the posters of this board per se, just a problem with the general direction the board is taking(or has already taken).
-James

[David Steele]

It is an obvious raise and the follow up reasoning by Mason seems inconsistant.

In these quotes your argue that the game is tougher and at a higher level


[ QUOTE ]



If I was in a $15-$30 game at The Bellagio I would certainly agree with you. Or perhaps if it was tournament time and there were a bunch of European pot limit players sitting at my table. However in general, the typical unknown (to me) $80-$160 player at The Bellagio does play better than this. Perhaps in some other places this is not the case. But I hardly get out of the house anymore, less go to those other places.

Also, in a less skilled game, perhaps at a lower limit, perhaps out of town, or perhaps around a tournament my thinking would be to make that raise on the river.



[/ QUOTE ]
but in these quotes your argue that the players are at a fairly low level.

[ QUOTE ]

The flaw in your argument is that you are comparing with how a hand should be played versus how typical players do play them. So while I agree with you that it is probably best to check and call with a weak ace, in my experience most aggressive players rarely do this.


Your scenario is certainly a possibility. However, it's my experience that the unknown players in this game don't think at that level. They assume that if you have some like kings, you'll at least call the flop raise.



[/ QUOTE ]


If the guy plays ok then it is like ElDiablo describes, he was likely doing the standard check-call, check call ( bet the river perhaps ) when he decided you might check a weaker hand after the Ace hit the turn.

If he plays poorly then he could have any goofy hand. If he is really bad, he might not even reraise his something-full of aces ( in the unlikely case he has it ) as he is afraid you slowplayed a bigger monster, so that is one more reason to raise his probable loser.

When a weaker player makes an unusual sequenced (out-of-the blue ) bet, the default assumption is a poor bluffing attempt not some devious plot to extract an extra bet.

Either with a weak player or and agressive advanced player the river raise is right and it is not close IMO

D.

[Robb]

Actually El Diablo already made my point (with a little more detail as well)

[mike l.]

"I think this was pretty clear to many of us who play in this sort of game a lot."

mason this is exactly what's going on here. youre not adjusting correctly to today's games. give your opponent's less credit and you will doing better.

[etizzle]

Fair enough. I wonder why he did not raise the flop then? Strange line. Thanks for the reply.

[Turning Stone Pro]

"thats what makes his play bizarre, he reevaluates his hand strength in the upward direction. yet, it makes little sense, its as though someone with AA put his opponent on KK until a K hits the flop, and then decides he couldnt have KK, do you see what i mean?

i think that anyone who could put this opponent on that sort of mental process instead of what Mason discusses either has ESP or is suffering from delusions."

Dear kagame:

I'm not trying to be rude, but if you don't understand how the 2nd ace on the turn decreases the odds that Mason has an A, you need "to do more work with your ears than with your mouth," as Dragline said in Cool Hand Luke.

TSP

[Turning Stone Pro]

Excellent analysis of a rather basic situation, that should not have drawn all of the attention it did.

TSP

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you were guilty of the very things you criticized many of the posters here about.

[ QUOTE ]
most players, even at the $80-$160 don't think up to as many levels as Two Plus Twoers do.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Only a few of you knew to think back to how the hand was played on all streets and how the play on these streets, especially the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's what is the likely scenario in your opponent's head, and I think this was pretty clear to many of us who play in this sort of game a lot.

Pre-flop he had something to defend with. Maybe a mediocre/strong-ish Ace like A8-AJ. Maybe a suited Ace. (And maybe a pocket pair or some face cards. These fall under the bluff or maybe keep you honest category at the end)

On the flop, he hits an Ace. No, he doesn't bet or check-raise. He just check-calls because a tough player has raised. So you could easily have a big Ace - and you could get away from a worse hand. So, he thinks maybe he is ahead, maybe not, but he's calling you down.

Now, there's another Ace on the turn. OK, now it becomes less likely that you have an Ace. And if you have a pocket pair, you may well check behind. So, let's bet out. If you do indeed have a bigger Ace, you'll raise, and he'll call you down to make sure. But since his three Aces are probably good, he definitely wants to get at least one bet in here.

OK, you don't raise the turn. You surely don't have a big Ace. Probably KK or QQ. And a good chance you'll check those behind, so better go ahead and value bet the river rather than go for a checkraise that will often miss - and get three-bet if indeed you were being tricky with a big Ace.

As I said, I think you out-thought yourself on this one. I think it was very simple to see that your opponent very likely had some sort of mediocre ace - or something he could very well keep you honest with by calling a river raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just so correct, Mason comments on 25,000 other replys in this thread, yet fail to acknowledge one of the only correct replys?

The real question is; Is Mason Losing It?

[amulet]

while i found the discussion fascinating. i think the most interesting part of this is that it took place at 2 + 2. i really enjoy the site, but the bet, bet, raise, raise, check raise overly aggressive style that is pervasive in the advice here is way over the top. however, in this example an expert player, did not go crazy raising. he did not check with the purpose of check raising the flop, he did not raise the turn, he called it down! a rare thing even discussed here at 2 + 2. sure the river call vs raise is debatable, but the point is the clear thinking throughout the hand. not an old style as some here who misunderstood the aggression in terrific books like ssh would say. just pure good poker. i think many 2 plus 2 'ers could learn a lot from this type of controlled play. mason, as the site becomes more popular and more profitable, a pro responding to the conflicting answers would be great.

[J_V]

People will always be envious of successful people. I'm sure you've received your share of unfair animosity in your day.

That said, most of us here, don't care about how much 2+2 is making in advertising or how many registered users there are. We just remember the day where we would sign on and there would be 5-6 fantastic threads a day, where each response was well ariculated and meaningful.

Those days are long gone and so are many of the great posters. Ikke, Creampuff, backdoor, snakehead (no more strategy posts), abdul.

Those of us that don't care about the WPT forum and such have lost our good old 2+2. Someone once told that there was a blog law called Sullivan's law, that stated that as the limit of all responses to a thread went to infinity, so did the ad hominem attacks. Guess the same is true for forums.