Long shot hits, too passive?

[joker122]

I've only been posting here for a few months, but that's the most passive, and maybe the worst, played hand I've ever seen.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
Be in there betting and raising, not checking and calling. A set, especially one that small, is better off winning the pot immediately. Slowplaying is too risky

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm....

I'd be pretty pissed if I won the pot right there. You should be too.

scrub

[Tosh]

I don't think I've ever been pissed to win any pot.

[rivered]

I have to be honest. I should have bet the river. However, these players will call one bet forever with nothing and fold to 2 bets. I'm not going to bet people out, get heads up and win half as much money. It may be risky but if you think winning 76 bucks at a 2/4 table is leaving a lot of money on the table I really don't think that's the case and I'd love to know where you are playing. I don't understand that you don't change your style against bad chasers, raising people out who have almost zero chance of beating you just doesn't seem smart to me. If I was playing decent players or there were less in the hand I'd play it totally different.

[Bob T.]

I have to be honest. I should have bet the river. However, these players will call one bet forever with nothing and fold to 2 bets. I'm not going to bet people out, get heads up and win half as much money.

You never had to face them with two bets. You were acting right before the bettor, and you could have checkraised either the flop, or the turn. The turn checkraise was as close to free money as you will get at the table. When you say, you won $76 so you couldn't have left much on the table, you are just playing results, just like players who want to change the river card, or want their hand back after they see the flop. The fact is, you probably left at a minimum two or three bets on the table here.

You didn't like it, that people judged your play harshly, but you played the hand terribly, and they were doing you a favor by telling you as much. Following the advice you got in this thread will make you more money in the future when you are fortunate enough to flop a set.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[rivered]

My read on the player is that he would reraise, knocking everyone else out. I also feel that earlier talk about reraising the flop is a much worse way to play against passive players.

[bernie]

If you wouldve gotten your set cracked, which is very possible with the board on the turn as far as draws available, you minimized your gain on the hand when you had the best of it. But then youd probably say you saved money by playing it passively.

Again, this was a terrible play with a set. But it's your chips and your roll, play as you see fit. The consensus is about unanimous. Why is that? We're all out of our minds?

b

[pudley4]

Let's go point by point:

[ QUOTE ]
I have to be honest. I should have bet the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not the way you played it. After getting to the river, you should have check-raised.

[ QUOTE ]
However, these players will call one bet forever with nothing and fold to 2 bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you checkraise at any point in the hand, you are only facing them with one more bet. If they called the first, they'll call the second.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to bet people out, get heads up and win half as much money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is why you check-raise when the bettor is on your immediate left.

[ QUOTE ]
It may be risky but if you think winning 76 bucks at a 2/4 table is leaving a lot of money on the table I really don't think that's the case and I'd love to know where you are playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this hand, you left a lot of money on the table. You can't just throw out the number $76 and say "Look at this huge pot I won, I did good". You have to put it in context. Winning a $76 pot heads-up is huge. Winning a $76 pot when you flop a set after seeing the flop 7 ways, the turn 6 ways and the river 5 ways is terrible.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand that you don't change your style against bad chasers, raising people out who have almost zero chance of beating you just doesn't seem smart to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You said they'd call if they had any chance "Most of these players are drawing dead and if they aren't, trust me, they aren't folding." No one here was advocating betting out to get raised to try to knock people out.

[ QUOTE ]
If I was playing decent players or there were less in the hand I'd play it totally different.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, the more people that are in the pot, the more you should be betting and raising, to try to knock out the backdoor draws that are getting correct odds to call. The fewer players in the pot, the more you should be likely to slowplay; since there are fewer players, there is less likelyhood of those draws being out there.

One more point:

I know you're new here, but bernie usually posts about 6 different ways you could have played a hand - "you could do this, or sometimes you could do this, but other times you might think about this..." When he comes out and says you absolutely-100%-no-doubt-about-it played a hand wrong - you played the hand wrong.

[pudley4]

BTW, we're all assuming you won the hand. However, I don't see the results anywhere. What hands did your opponents have?