Hand to Talk About

[J_V]

Mason seems to think that when players flop and ace that they bet it out or check-raise it. The most common action from a typical 80-160 player in a heads up flop with a weak ace, check call. The idea of way ahead or way behind isn't new to most players.


Check-raising is the ace is this spot is a great way to win the minimimum and lose the maximum, unless you can back it up w/ a vigorous counter-balance where you are often dry bluffing the ace. In my experience, this is something that very few people are willing to do.

[jeffnc]

[ QUOTE ]
the only way to put your opponent on a range of hands was to look back at the play on the flop. With 2 Aces out there why wouldn't Ace-x not bet the turn when he thinks he may not get a bet out of you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Right.

[ QUOTE ]
Why wouldn't he bet a J or some other big pair on the turn now that he could account for two Aces?

[/ QUOTE ]

An early player raised. What do you think he raised with? If it's an ace, it's not likely A9 or worse. If it's not an ace, it's probably KK, QQ, JJ, or possibly TT or a couple other less likely hands. JJ is far less likely than Ax (that would account for all 4 jacks). Even if AK, AQ become less likely because of the 2 aces on the board, that does nothing but make KK or QQ more likely. So why bet a lone J on the turn?

No, the most likely hands for the BB player are AQ, AJ, AT, some other ace, or a set (the combination of AQ, AT, Ax are much more likely than AJ). Out of all possible hands, a hand with an ace that you can beat is most probable IMO. But not a jack. It's possible, because all players have seen early players raise hands like 88, but not likely.

[ QUOTE ]
Why wouldn't he bet the river for value with a big pair and call a raise or bet the Ace and either call or re-raise? All of these hands you beat are consistant with his flop play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right.

[J_V]

Yes, the inconsistencies in how his opponents are thinking/playing are glaring, IMO.

For example, Mason insinuates that a player might lead the turn out with a full house. However, in many threads very similar, Mason has said something to the effect of "Wouldn't he wait until the turn if he had that hand?"

[Turning Stone Pro]

I'm not familiar with that.

TSP

[David Steele]

he called it down! a rare thing even discussed here at 2 + 2

You must get on here more, calling is all the rage now.

a pro responding to the conflicting answers would be great.

Many pros did respond, more won't hurt although the score is about 20 to 1 against Mason so far.

D.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that this post got so many replies(and the nature of them) is a pretty good indicator of the direction that the forum is heading. If this was made by some guy as his first post, he would have gotten maybe 1 response saying "raise the turn or the river" and then it would have went off into oblivion.

[/ QUOTE ]
This isn't a "indicator of the direction that the forum is heading". Mason's Hands to Talk About have always gotten the most responses of any posts, by far. There may have been individual hands that got less than others, but this is still true. The phenomen you cite above is no more true now than it was four years ago.

[amulet]

i of couse believe in tight aggressive play. however, as i mention i think many here at 2 + 2 go too far with the aggression. whenever i post something saying, "do not bet", "check", "with that board how card you be ahead", i get a flood of posts telling me how wrong i am, and that beting, raising, or check raising is correct, and they seem angry . the idea of discussion, or the idea that sometimes you call or fold seems to offend many here.

[Philuva]

So you admit that you misplayed this hand by not raising the river?

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi bobbyi:

You're right. The hands I have posted over the years have always gotten a lot of response. Part of the reason for this is that I usually pick hands that are often debatable and the decisions are sometimes very close.

What this means is that the thought process behind the play is more important than the play itself. If you think about strategy correctly, there will be other situations where these thinking exercises will be very beneficial.

best wishes,
Mason

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
The hands I have posted over the years have always gotten a lot of response.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speaking of which, in recently rereading Poker Essays III, I was thinking about I found the Hands to Talk About section to be by far the most valuable section of the book and how awesome it would be if you wrote a whole book of annotated hands like those. Given the strong response to all of the hands you post here, I am sure that such a book would be very well received. Although I understand that you are busy with many projects now and probably don't have the time to start also working on something like that.