Should I have raised? #2

[Blarg]

At the 11's I'll get more than occasional calls, and from far, far worse hands than AA. That's one of the main reasons for pushing so hard in the first place -- the risk is huge of course, but the pay-off has a greater frequency than I think you're taking into account.

I guess in the 11's I've seen everything when it comes to calling -- every kind of crap -- so I'm kind of immune to expecting people not to call with crazy holdings, or bet with them. I know my play wasn't a great one, but inherent in it was that at the 11's I'm getting a fair number of people who will call with one pair and double my stack. The very same people I see calling my AA flop bet when it's the first hand I've played all game, I raised from early position preflop 3x the BB, and the flop comes A8x because they have an 8 are also calling this flop too because they had QJ. The people who so often double me up by level 2 or 3 are very often doing it with hands you would be amazed to see coldcalling and overcalling raises preflop, like 44, or something that develops into the ignorant end of a straight draw.

I know terrible play by others doesn't make my play better in itself, but I'm not saying I would make this play against a crowd that was typically comprised of better players. I was just thinking that in the context of constantly surprising terrible play, my chances of either getting a quick few chips or, alternatively, doubling up, seemed fairly high. Whereas almost any card that hit the board after my flop looks nasty and like it will call just as many chips out of my hand.

Perhaps my read of the 11's is dead wrong or simply irrelevant because the coordinated board makes the play just terrible regardless of any situation or any read. I was wondering if the chance to either get a few quick chips or quickly doubling up was better than trying to extract value with two bottom pair street by street, which I'm instinctively feeling seems like a fairly low percentage endeavor better suited to ring games where you can afford to extract value and be wrong a few times, as opposed to SNG's, where bleeding off chips slowly in hands like these is hard to recover from.

I know it's a risky as hell thing. These guys are doubling me up calling with crap so much that I guess maybe I'm learning bad habits of mind. I wouldn't play like this in a higher level, but maybe I shouldn't adjust my play too much based on this level. Maybe winning 100, with the occasional chance of doubling up, isn't that much better than frequently losing 600 after all.

[TexInAtl]

I think someone needs to do the math on this, and I don't have the tools to do it.

What is the percentages that someone will call with a worse hand and lose?

What is the percentage that someone will call with a draw and lose?

What is the percentage that someone will call with a draw and win?

What is the percentage that no one will call and you win T90?

To me, the whole concept around POST-flop play is to maximize your winnings when you have the best of it and minimize your loses when you don't. This type of play to me seems to minimize your winnings when you have the best hand (T90 against good players) and maximize your loses when you don't. Seems -EV to me.

P.S. Forgot to add one:
What percentage of the time will someone call you with a better hand and win?

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
You're not giving away a free card though. You're setting up to take the odds for the draw away and to gather information. I didn't say to check the flop to give a free card. I said check the flop and RAISE your opponents bet in order to take away the odds of calling on a draw correct. If they take the free card, the 7 comes on the turn, and it's a greater possiblity that they've made their draw. What do you have invested at this point if they take the free card? T30 right!!! Not saying that it's correct, but then you could check fold the turn and you're out T30 instead of losing T1000.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you're still giving away a free card, but I guess this is because your valuing the hand differently than I am. And that's good to know, because I have been uncomfortable with my valuation of this hand.

I think the incredible draw-worthiness of the flop probably confused matters.

My basic problem was that yes, I don't fee comfortable post-flop playing bottom two pair. The draw potential in this particular case just made it even worse, which makes it such an exaggerated case and provoked such an exaggerated play on my part. I felt even less comfortable playing bottom two pair post flop when I could be looking at either a straight or a flush or both on either the turn or the flop or both, plus the potential of someone simply getting two higher pair or trips. Really, this hand can turn into a monster for the villains so easily, and how much money do I really want to have invested at that point? Because it seems like a born tourney-ender of a hand.

That's why I was saying this seems so much like a situation I either want none of or to make a quick killing at, rather than going through the painful process of getting outdrawn on. I know it's not inevitable and I need to sack up a little, but jeez, the chances are not slight.

There seem to be a lot of good spirited answers here, but none of them seem to make me very happy about holding bottom two pair, especially trying to play in in the face of the blizzard of cards to come that could kill me.

I instinctually bet flops where I have a hand at least big enough to ruin drawing odds, and am faced with some intelligent but somewhat contradictory replies. One reply says to do that, one says not to, and one reminds me that standard play is standard play here too. Which still leaves me with the dilemma of cards that are tough to play and likely to lose me anywhere from a substantial portion to the whole of my stack.

Adanthar seems to suggest with his comment about AA versus a crummy T52 board that the risk of playing bottom two pair isn't so large that the reward isn't worth it, whereas I see six cards for a straight draw with half of them repeated again for a flush draw and we haven't even started talking about pairs yet, all waiting to see who uppercuts me first.

I guess the cumulative advice I'm distilling is to play them square and straight and be prepared to lose with them a hell of a lot, because that's what two pair will do in this situation. amd just accept that. It just seems like the chances of not getting hurt with this hand are small enough that I wonder if there's much point in committing chips in the first place -- if the overall win rate for bottom two pair, with or without facing a draw (or two) on board, is substantial enough to jeopardize a tournament for, whether your playing with either my skill level or the skill level of someone far better.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
This type of play to me seems to minimize your winnings when you have the best hand (T90 against good players) and maximize your loses when you don't. Seems -EV to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can't believe we're still talking about whether or not this was a good bet. of course it wasn't. there's no way there should even be a debate about it. at first i sort of assumed, because the OP had 5000 posts, it was some upper-level stuff that i didn't understand. but its just a bad bet. lets talk about something different.

[TexInAtl]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the cumulative advice I'm distilling is to play them square and straight and be prepared to lose with them a hell of a lot, because that's what two pair will do in this situation. amd just accept that. It just seems like the chances of not getting hurt with this hand are small enough that I wonder if there's much point in committing chips in the first place -- if the overall win rate for bottom two pair, with or without facing a draw (or two) on board, is substantial enough to jeopardize a tournament for, whether your playing with either my skill level or the skill level of someone far better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your reasoning of playing hands like this square and straight is correct, but NOT to expect to lose with them a hell of a lot. Two pair is a very strong hand, and the majority of the time it will win. My point was to not be so afraid of post-flop play and to allow yourself the opportunity to analyze the situation to best determine, based on your own knowledge and reads on your opponents, when your hand is good and when its beat. Then, to "sack up" enough as you say, when you're beat to let go of the hand. How would you have played it if you knew YOU were the one with the 8 out draw?

[Blarg]

Nah, I've been up all night and been getting over-aggressive in response to feeling over-timid because of a limp couple of weeks.

The real question was not how bad my play was, but whether the hand had enough going for it to make it look all that great if played differently. To which there seems to be some disagreement, but not enough to make two bottom pair seem much more of a glorious hand than I thought it was. As far as I can tell, playing this hand well doesn't seem to make it look too hot, either.

And please, no more assumptions that I'm not an idiot in SNG's just because I've made a lot of posts about movies in OOT. I only started playing SNG's in April and am thus far an admitted fool. That's why I'm posting here in the first place, to fix that. Everyone's got an opinion, but for me SNG's are mostly about asking, not telling. Getting some laughs from me is fine, but I'm no info source.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess the cumulative advice I'm distilling is to play them square and straight and be prepared to lose with them a hell of a lot, because that's what two pair will do in this situation. amd just accept that. It just seems like the chances of not getting hurt with this hand are small enough that I wonder if there's much point in committing chips in the first place -- if the overall win rate for bottom two pair, with or without facing a draw (or two) on board, is substantial enough to jeopardize a tournament for, whether your playing with either my skill level or the skill level of someone far better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your reasoning of playing hands like this square and straight is correct, but NOT to expect to lose with them a hell of a lot. Two pair is a very strong hand, and the majority of the time it will win. My point was to not be so afraid of post-flop play and to allow yourself the opportunity to analyze the situation to best determine, based on your own knowledge and reads on your opponents, when your hand is good and when its beat. Then, to "sack up" enough as you say, when you're beat to let go of the hand. How would you have played it if you knew YOU were the one with the 8 out draw?

[/ QUOTE ]

I generally don't play draws very much in SNG's, and rarely heads-up. If I play a draw heads-up, it is because I have overcards or a pair as part of it, or a backdoor straight to go along with my flush draw, or such. Additionally, I tend not to play the bottom ends of straights, or play for a straight when flush cards are on board, or play inside straight draws, and I'm a little less likely to play a straight when one of the cards I need is likely in someone's hand(like I have QJ and need a King that someone probably has). And, there are other situations in which I'm really picky about playing draws, like the odds aren't right.

If I were the one with the draw in that hand, where the flop came up QT8, I would throw the cards away instantly unless I had AQ probably, or straight flush cards. I'm thinking of a likely straight draw as KJo and forgetting about the flush part for a sec. That would give me an open-ender to either the nut or second nut straight, with bonus points if I put my opponent who just made a huge raise on a pair of queens that my King might trump if I pair that even while missing my straight. But he could already have two pair or a straight himself too, so I would discount my chances of a pair of kings doing anything for me. Someone forcing me to call my whole stack on a draw isn't give me the odds I want. I'm out of there with a draw that doesn't have strong potential for both a straight and a flush, if draws are my only option. If I had AQ or something, I'd have pushed my money in the middle as fast as I could.

[RobGW]

[ QUOTE ]
here's an example of what the action might go like normally: you pot it, he raises to 300-400. you now have two moves: you can reraise to try and push out any draws, or my line (right or wrong) would probably be to smoothcall and push a brick turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is one more move you are forgetting about. Fold. With a bet, a raise, and a reraise I would think that my 2 pair MAY NOT be good. You seem to be insisting that it is still good. If you want to risk most of your stack here then go ahead. Just ignore all the info on the flop and just assume that villian is an idiot.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
here's an example of what the action might go like normally: you pot it, he raises to 300-400. you now have two moves: you can reraise to try and push out any draws, or my line (right or wrong) would probably be to smoothcall and push a brick turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is one more move you are forgetting about. Fold. With a bet, a raise, and a reraise I would think that my 2 pair MAY NOT be good. You seem to be insisting that it is still good. If you want to risk most of your stack here then go ahead. Just ignore all the info on the flop and just assume that villian is an idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

what reraise are you even talking about. i bet and was raised. you are playing way too scared if you are folding two pair in a limped pot to a raise in the $11s. like, WAY too scared.

[TexInAtl]

[ QUOTE ]
If I were the one with the draw in that hand, where the flop came up QT8, I would throw the cards away instantly unless I had AQ probably, or straight flush cards. I'm thinking of a likely straight draw as KJo and forgetting about the flush part for a sec. That would give me an open-ender to either the nut or second nut straight, with bonus points if I put my opponent who just made a huge raise on a pair of queens that my King might trump if I pair that even while missing my straight. But he could already have two pair or a straight himself too, so I would discount my chances of a pair of kings doing anything for me. Someone forcing me to call my whole stack on a draw isn't give me the odds I want. I'm out of there with a draw that doesn't have strong potential for both a straight and a flush, if draws are my only option. If I had AQ or something, I'd have pushed my money in the middle as fast as I could.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhhh, now I think we're getting to the root of the problem. The ability, or inablity as the case may be, to correctly value your hand. You're saying that you would make the same play with AQ on a draw heavy board, and therefore you are assigning the same value to TPTK as to bottom 2, when in essence, bottom 2 is the much more valuable hand. Say the board was Q-4-8 rainbow. Which hand would you rather have: AQ or 48? Also, which hand do you think has a higher value: 4-8 on a Q-4-8 board, or 8-10 on a Q-10-8 board? Also, why would you play a hand that had both straight and flush possiblities so strongly? Because you have greater potiential of having the best hand at showdown.

I think overvaluing hands could potentially be a huge leak in anyones game, and I know that I struggle with the same issue at times. You might try to play hands like the one in the original post as trying to outdraw a draw rather than forcing out other draws. Maybe that will allow you to better value your hand.