#1
|
|||
|
|||
PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
I just sat down a round or 2 ago, and I was reading this forum mostly so no real reads. The opener in the pot seems pretty solid from the few pots i noticed.
This hand sort of confused me. Not really sure where I could have improved , help me out. PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $4 BB (8 handed) converter Hero ($411.60) SB ($332) BB ($330.20) UTG ($356) UTG+1 ($340.50) MP1 ($195.80) MP2 ($339.50) CO ($281.25) Preflop: Hero is Button with J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP2 raises to $12</font>, <font color="#CC3333">CO raises to $20</font>, Hero calls $20, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP2 calls $8. Flop: ($66) 3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font> MP2 checks, CO checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $40</font>, MP2 calls $40, CO folds. After the flop I feel like hes gotten stubborn with a pocket pair most likely/or he flopped nines full, and is setting a trap. Turn: ($146) 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> MP2 checks, Hero checks. Im checking behind because either he has 2 outs, or I do most likely right? So if a safe river card comes I can put in a big bet if he checks, or just call any bet that I have induced him to make if he does fire at the river. River: ($146) J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font> MP2 checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $120</font>, MP2 calls $120. Dream card- but my bet will look like a bluff. The bet flop when checked to, then bet river but not turn-- always looks like a bluff. So whats the best ammount to bet here? Final Pot: $386 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
Go $160 on the river. If he's calling $120, he'll call $160, and it looks even more suspicious.
Standard whole way through IMO. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
The PF action is confusing, and CO's min-RR is indicative of a poorly played big PP or an isolation raise of a bad player. Only you can tell us which it is likely to be. Also, they might be scared of your cold-call, which makes a river value bet the best option if that is the case.
I actually like an underbet here. The kind of bet that you might make with a 88 here, trying to figure out if it is good. This might induce a raise from QQ. -T |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
[ QUOTE ]
I actually like an underbet here. The kind of bet that you might make with a 88 here, trying to figure out if it is good. This might induce a raise from QQ. [/ QUOTE ]?? pretty easy for 88 to figure out if hes good, check. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I actually like an underbet here. The kind of bet that you might make with a 88 here, trying to figure out if it is good. This might induce a raise from QQ. [/ QUOTE ]?? pretty easy for 88 to figure out if hes good, check. [/ QUOTE ] I think you misread this one, OP rivered the 2nd nut and I think he wanted to know how to extract max value when it was checked to him. That being said I think that he has a 9 or an underpair I see a overpair minraising that flop, hard to put him on anything but mb a9s. I'm surprised he called I'll prob just bet 80-100 on that board hoping for a reraise or a call from a small pp. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
[ QUOTE ]
Go $160 on the river. If he's calling $120, he'll call $160, and it looks even more suspicious. [/ QUOTE ] Uh, a bit result oriented, eh? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
You played this hand perfectly.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PS 2/4 NL 3 way pot with overpair of jacks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Go $160 on the river. If he's calling $120, he'll call $160, and it looks even more suspicious. [/ QUOTE ] Uh, a bit result oriented, eh? [/ QUOTE ] indeed |
|
|