why do you not fear my min-raise? FEAR MY MINRAISE

[Matt Flynn]

ni han.

[NickPoker]

Actually, any 8 beats him.

[goodFlop]

This mini-raise is a very interesting play (it appears to provoke a large reraise). In a live game at the Taj, I myself had misinterpretted it to be a draw -- luckily my opponent was not very deep stacked, and I didn't lose too much. However, my situation was a little different:

In $1/2 NL live game, I had about $650, villain about $250.
I raise to $10 in MP with red queens QhQd, villain called (may be some others called, not important). about $40 in the pot.

Flop is 5d78d (two diamonds), checked to me, I bet $30, villain *mini-raises* to $60, all fold, back to me. I haven't yet seen villain play draws by mini-raising, but previously saw him call off a whole chunk of his stack on a flush draw, but otherwise he is fairly tight. I thought he may have a flush or straight draw. I reraise another $80, putting $40+120+80 = 240 in the pot.

Now, villain goes all in, and I have to call another $85 into a $405 pot. At this point, I'm still not sure if he is on a draw or not (a short stack may play this way) but I also thought he might have a set. I called.

Turns out he had 77, and his all-in was to protect *himself* against my perceived draw.


A related question, is there anyway I fold $85 facing an all-in player with $405 in the pot? I had (backdoor diamond draw, and a two outer if faced with a set).

Also, is there a different way I could have played this? I think a lot is read-dependent.

[Richie Rich]

Simple oversight. Although any 8 is beating villian on the flop, I think 10/9/7/6-8 are the only reasonable non-pair hands he could be up against.

[NiceCatch]

Radio, I'm glad you mentioned the K86 board. I've been on the good end of this hand, where I flopped top set and my opponent flopped the two pair. It really made me think... do I always lose my stack here, if I have the 86?

How many people get away from this dead hand? Is the K (or A or Q) a sure sign to play it slowly?

[NiceCatch]

AA also beats him, Richie, though that is obviously an unlikely holding. That being said, I agree with the poster that said villain played it fine until the turn. At that point, he's gotta shut it down. Creed doesn't call that much on a draw.

BTW felson, I don't have a problem with most of what Richie has said in this thread. Some other posts... well, that's another issue. But let's stick to the matter at hand.

[psuasskicker]

A related question, is there anyway I fold $85 facing an all-in player with $405 in the pot? I had (backdoor diamond draw, and a two outer if faced with a set).

If you think he's got a better hand - and he's telling you he does cause he's making a bet over a reraise that isn't enough to push you out of the pot if you're drawing at A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] or something like it - then you've got to fold. Yes, you're getting 4.76 to 1. You're also around 7 to 1 against hitting what you would need to win, and that's assuming your Queens are live outs for you (where in a hand vs 46 they aren't). Yes, you should be able to fold that hand.

Also, is there a different way I could have played this? I think a lot is read-dependent.

I'll say the same thing I did before, stop and go. The only problem here is villain's stack isn't nearly as deep. If you call, villain has $180 left with a pot around $160. Very tough for you not to double him up this hand without underbetting the pot somewhere. You could call the raise and bet $100 on the turn. If he moves in, it's virtually impossible he's bluffing at which point you can definitively fold (barring you picking up a Q on the turn).

do I always lose my stack here, if I have the 86?

How many people get away from this dead hand? Is the K (or A or Q) a sure sign to play it slowly?

IMO, you have to have an amazing read to get away from that hand. It can be done, but it's very tough.

- C -

[Richie Rich]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the point felson was trying to make was that there's a better way for villain to have played this if he didn't have a strong read that HERO was on a draw.

[/ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your input. It's easy to say that villian misplayed his hand on the turn, yadda yadda yadda, because we already know what each player was holding. Hindsight is always 20/20. If hero actually was on a draw after he called the flop re-raise, and villian checked the turn only to get unlucky on the river, then I think a lot of people would say villian was giving hero a free chance to crack his KK.

My point is, it's always situational based upon image, position, stack sizes, etc. I agree that a stop-n-go may have prevented villian from losing his entire stack, but it's much harder to make your decision in less than 30 seconds when you're in the heat of the moment. Here in this forum, we get to read and analyze the hand for as long as we like before posting our opinions. But the players in the actual hand have to act relatively quickly based upon their reads. Now villian's read may not be accurate 100% of the time, but if it's right more often than not, and he plays solid winning poker, then he should trust his instincts 100% of the time. That's why I say based upon what villian perceived hero was most likely holding on that draw-heavy board, I think he played the hand fine. That's what I was getting at.

btw- felson and I don't have any history together, but I can't respect the content of a quick one-liner, like "horrible move" or "bah". In fact, I don't mind if anyone disagrees with my opinion. But at least explain why. The purpose of this forum, imo, is to exchange ideas and reasoning...with a few smarta$$ comments along the way.

[psuasskicker]

Now villian's read may not be accurate 100% of the time, but if it's right more often than not, and he plays solid winning poker, then he should trust his instincts 100% of the time. That's why I say based upon what villian perceived hero was most likely holding on that draw-heavy board, I think he played the hand fine. That's what I was getting at.

I think it's fine to say that if HERO was holding a draw, then villain played the hand fine...it would in fact be true. IF the hand was actually a drawing one.

The problem is, we don't know how much villain trusted his read, and based on this hand alone I would suggest that villain either makes very little attempt to actually read his opponent, or he doesn't make accurate reads. I don't agree with you that if he's largely making correct reads he should trust them 100% of the time. If you're not reading people close to 100%, you can't trust your read 100% of the time cause it will let you down, and you'll wind up blowing off your whole stack to a full house when you think the guy's on a draw. That should never be acceptable.

it's much harder to make your decision in less than 30 seconds when you're in the heat of the moment. Here in this forum, we get to read and analyze the hand for as long as we like before posting our opinions. But the players in the actual hand have to act relatively quickly based upon their reads.

As true as this is, it doesn't mean you can't make the correct decision. We on this board (and other boards) get to break down hands and analyze them with very few time constraints. But we do so in order to make each other better at actually making the same sort of analysis in the heat of the moment. Just because we have time to reflect on this hand doesn't mean villain should be given a pass as having played the hand well. Making the statement "I blew off my whole stack, $1,050 of which I didn't need to lose, because I didn't have enough time to make the decision and my read was wrong" should never be acceptable. If you're making such dramatic misreads and basic fundamental mistakes of hand play, you shouldn't be playing at limits that see you with $1,500 on the table. You belong at much lower stakes tables...no matter what your bankroll.

You have to be able to look at what's happening in this hand as it happens, and react to it in a way that allows you to win the most when you're ahead, and lose the least when you're behind. You don't do that by simply mashing forward when a misread will cost you all your money. Villain should have looked at his hand and the situation in the following way, and should have been able to do so within the time limits he was allowed at the table (assuming he knew nothing about HERO, and is comfortable with his reads of people):
- HERO cold called a PF raise from an EP raiser with position. He could be on any reasonable holding, so I don't want to get trapped.
- On a flop that's draw heavy and either very good or very bad for my hand, HERO made a min-raise over my reasonable bet.
- If I'm ahead in this hand, and my read that HERO is drawing is correct, HERO probably has nothing less than about a 25% chance of catching up to and beating me...maybe as high as over 50% of doing so.
- If I'm behind in this hand, I'm a huge underdog to catch up.
- Therefore, HERO has a solid chance of winning this hand no matter what his holding based on his being either on a draw or on an 8. Because of that, I need to make sure that I extract money from him while I'm still ahead, but not lose all my money if I'm behind or he winds up catching up. How can I best do that?
- If I reraise now, and I'm behind, he's trapped me and I'm going to lose a huge amount of money.
- If I reraise now, and he's drawing, he's likely going to call anyway to see if he can pick up his card.
- If I wait for a card to come off, I'll know more about whether or not my hand has a chance to hold up. If one of his draws comes off, I can release my hand (perhaps after a probe bet) knowing that the odds of him being on a different draw and betting at it are highly unlikely. If one doesn't come off, I can bet a reasonable amount at him and force him to either incorrectly draw at his hand, or find out when he raises me that my hand is no longer good.

If you can't run through the logic in your head that quickly and determine the best play at a NL $5/$10 table, you shouldn't be sitting there in the first place.

- C -