the hand from hell

[2283]

[ QUOTE ]
What hand other than a 6 will play that way?

[/ QUOTE ]

a hand with an ace figuring theres no way i would bet the flop with aces or a 6 therefore he is "raising with the nuts." or a hand thinking i cant call because i dont have an ace because i checked, i guess. i've already said i really doubt someone is bluffing.

[ QUOTE ]
If the chances are better than 1 in 4 that he has the 6 in this situation, you should fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

i understand the mathematical fundamentals.

[ QUOTE ]
It appears to me you think you'll only be shown a 6 1 in 15 or 20 times in this situation. You'll be shown that 6 much more often than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think i said 15 or 20 times 6 people see the flop of 666 and the player in question is NOT in the blinds. that's what i meant anyway, and i still think it's true. i understand that the odds of his having a certain hand change as the betting continues.

[ QUOTE ]
But let's say you're right about calling the last bet, that he's less likely than 1 in 4 to be holding a 6. Checking is still better. He doesn't know you'll call in all-in bet, so even if he's holding a 6 he may not bet all-in, so you save money whenever he doesn't go all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

what i said was "if i'm calling any bet at all i have an ace, so i'm calling his allin." i still think it's true that the vast majority of opponents will see this and go allin.

[ QUOTE ]
You also make money by checking whenever he decides to bluff a worse hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a pretty good point, but it seems really unlikely to me that that would happen. if he called on the flop, he almost certainly has some sort of a hand by now, and that being the case he would not feel compelled to represent the ace on a bluff, he would just show down whatever he had. i mean, if he has like pocket 8s and thinks i migh have pocket 9s-Js he might bluff, but this seems pretty remote.

but you are right, it may be a little better to check over a long term. i dont really expect to be in a situation quite like this again, though.

[ QUOTE ]
You're right that it's not a big deal here, but the principle is a big deal. It's important to know which situations are more profitable to play passively.

[/ QUOTE ]

well i understood the principle when i played the hand, the reason i didnt follow it is because it doesn't seem to apply.

[ QUOTE ]
When there's a scary board, and you have something, but not the nuts, playing passively is generally the best way to play. That's one principle this hand illustrates.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think this hand illustrates this because i dont think this hand could have possibly turned out any other way, but that's my opinion. if we'd been 100-150BBs deep i never would have bet the flop in the first place, and i would have thought about folding the river.

also, if it were, say, a 9 or 10 instead of a 6, that changes everything.

[ QUOTE ]
Another principle is that on the river, if your opponent won't call you with a worse hand and won't fold a better hand, then you should check.

[/ QUOTE ]

i thought there was a better chance that he would somehow call with a worse hand than there was he would bet with a worse one, that's why i bet myself. if he had a better one, i was screwed anyway because the ace gave him license to go allin.

now, if i check and he somehow bets less than my whole stack, obviously i just call.

[ QUOTE ]
When is a bet good? A bet is good when a worse hand will call you and a better hand will set you all-in anyway (and you're committed to calling that bet). A common scenario for this situation is when your remaining stack is very small in relation to the pot, so by betting you make a little more by not allowing your opponent to check behind you.

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks for going to all this trouble to explain this, i dont want to sound like a douche, but i am somehow making 10.5 BB/100 in my little games by generally playing by the principles youre talking about.

i post hands where i think i screwed up but i defend my play so that someone can argue me out of it. i dont mean to be arrogant, i'm just more likely to change the way i play if someone can convince me to change rather than just tell me to change.

thanks

[2283]

i guess you didnt make the connection between satan and the flop of "666."

[bdk3clash]

Touche. I am an idiot.

[tewall]

[ QUOTE ]
i thought there was a better chance that he would somehow call with a worse hand than there was he would bet with a worse one, that's why i bet myself. if he had a better one, i was screwed anyway because the ace gave him license to go allin.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he has a PP, you really think he'll call an all-in bet?


[ QUOTE ]
i post hands where i think i screwed up but i defend my play so that someone can argue me out of it. i dont mean to be arrogant, i'm just more likely to change the way i play if someone can convince me to change rather than just tell me to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you think you screwed up? Where did I just tell you to change? I made an argument which was based on the following:

1) You said you thought your opponent had a 6 or an Ace
2) If that's the case, then you should check, because he'll for sure call your all-in, but he might not put you all-in, so you may save a bit.

Other people besides you read these posts, so if I explain a basic point please don't take offence.

[2283]

[ QUOTE ]
If he has a PP, you really think he'll call an all-in bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, of course not. why are you talking about me betting allin? i just bet $3.

it might be true that he's more likely to raise a bet allin than to just go ahead and go allin himself, but i think the difference in the two is very minimal with the ace out there. at any rate, if it's true then maybe it is better to check the river.

[tewall]

Sorry, I got confused about how the hand went. You're right that there's very little difference between betting $3 and just checking.

I'm still interested in how you thought you screwed up. It doesn't look to me like you did anything wrong (unless screwing up means losing the pot).

[2283]

well i mainly meant that generally i post hands where i screw up, and then try to defend my play as best i can. i think if i check the river over the long run maybe i make a few extra cents or something, also my hand may not have been strong enough to bet into that many people on the flop. the cards being what they were, though, i was just going to end up allin once we saw the turn. i was genuinely shocked when i saw the 6 so i wanted to see what people thought.

[Daann]

On this table, he could have easily make a bet on the river with a low PP thinking it was good and you would call with 22 or something.

However as you think he is a reasonable player:
[ QUOTE ]
a lower pocket pair will almost always raise the flop unless it is maybe QQ, KK, or AA, which are hands that are almost never limped in LP.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right here, so I would discount all those hands. His worst hand then contains an A (if he hasn't decided to run a bluff). So your river bet gains nothing, apart from at best a split pot and at worst your stack.

[tewall]

I liked the flop bet because it could knock out some hands that might have paired up, so that your bare Ace could win. Your best way to make money on the river is probably to induce a bluff, so the question is whether a small bet or a check is more likely to do that. And as you point out, if somehow someone does have a small PP they might just call a small bet. So I've come around to your way of thinking except for the 6 showing up. I think given the action as you described it, you're often going to see the 6. I'd say that about scary boards in general. The scare card tends to freeze the action, so if someone lights up, there's a good chance he's got it.

BTW I don't know if this was mentioned somewhere along this thread, but betting the turn is something to consider. The idea would be to make it look like a bluff, as most people with an Ace wouldn't bet the turn when one came up, so someone with a PP might raise you thinking you're full of it.

[2283]

[ QUOTE ]
You are right here, so I would discount all those hands. His worst hand then contains an A (if he hasn't decided to run a bluff). So your river bet gains nothing, apart from at best a split pot and at worst your stack.

[/ QUOTE ]

we've been over this from all angles, i dont think the river bet makes much of a difference.