Is there a point where I stop raising here?

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I would lose my stack here if he never stopped raising.

[/ QUOTE ]

How big would the stacks have to be for you to not lose your stack? What if you both had a grand in front? 10 grand? I assume at some point there is a correct place to stop, and that from a probability standpoint you can estimate where it is.

[Punker]

If I have that money on the table, its all going in. No matter how much it is. If I can't put it all in in that spot, I should have left the table already.

[Pog0]

Well if we take just the turn, he called your bet for 36. If he had one out, he'd be 47:1 to win so he'd have to win about $1700 from you on the river to show a "profit" from his turn play. Turns out you were in worse shape, since his AA only has to make up about $850, but that's offset by the bet or 50 bets he loses on the river when he doesn't hit.

With 33 on the flop he was a 2256 to 1 dog if he held 33.

For the 24 he paid to see the turn, assuming he only continues if a 3 hits and only calls your bet for a total of 27, it looks like he needs to make about $60,000 from you to make it worth his while. I think you're safe to put that last $100 in there.

[stigmata]

If I played the hand now I would just put all the money out there.

If I was a begginer/on a limited bankroll I think I could see an argumant for puting in another $50-80 or so. If he doens't slow down again and keeps going beyond the point at which he slowed down on the flop/turn, it might be reasonable to think the river helped his hand.

I really expect to see overplayed aces though.

[jman220]

Results:

Well, a few of you got it right. I believe we went about 50 or so bets on the river, and I was down to $100ish left in front of me, when I decided to stop raising, he could have 33, I was a beginner, and I didn't want to blow the entire night's winnings on one hand. (Back then I didn't really have a correct concept of the poker "long term.") So I called the 50th bet or somewhere around there, and he triumphantly tables (results in white <font color="white">pocket aces </font>. I've always wondered about this hand, what good players would have done in my situation, and what I would have done if I knew then what I know now. I doubt I'll ever have a hand like it again.

Edit: Since I remember having about $100 in front of me, it might have been closer to the 40th bet when I called, I can't remember exactly.

[2+2 wannabe]

LOL awesome

hope I run into him somewhere [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[stigmata]

Although you obviously should of put all your money in, what I was getting at is you shouldn't really be to harsh on yourself becuase you were a begginer/on a limited bankroll. Although there was only a very very miniscule chance you were beaten, getting stacked would of hurt so frigging bad at that stage in your poker career that it was worth avoiding.

What went on with the banter after you tabled your hands? I bet he fealt really stupido [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]

How big would the stacks have to be for you to not lose your stack? What if you both had a grand in front? 10 grand? I assume at some point there is a correct place to stop, and that from a probability standpoint you can estimate where it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say your hand is good here an extremely high percentage of the time against virtually any opponent (e.g. you would have to be pretty stupid to play AA this way, but a complete and utter moron to play 33 this way). Therefore it is a good gamble, period. I think how much you put in should actually be a function of your bankroll. If I figure there is a 1% chance he has pocket 3's I probably stick 25-30% of my bankroll out there. This would be equivalent to a 300BB downswing, and whilst it would be a total kick in the teeth, it wouldn’t be a complete &amp; utter disaster. (But considering I would never ever be sitting at a table with 1/3rd of my bankroll, I would just shove in everything in front of me -- I was just addressing the theoritcal issue of a "non-table stakes game" (in which case I might be scared the hand was rigged)). Phew. Not sure that this makes any sense at all.....

I'm not sure what the correct way is to approach this mathematically, but that’s my gut feeling.

[jman220]

Table chatter was interesting, I gathered he really didn't understand poker. He thought he had a winning hand (obviously), something along the lines of he had two pair, I couldn't have a higher two pair, and there was no way I had a 3, so he must be a winner.

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
something along the lines of he had two pair, I couldn't have a higher two pair, and there was no way I had a 3, so he must be a winner.

[/ QUOTE ]
Amazing.

I will admit, being weak tight by nature, I could not have gone to the felt here. I would like to think I could have gone as deep as you did.

I wouldn't have stopped betting. By your description I had him on AA. (Since that is the best hand and it can't be beat ;-) or so a new player would think. or at best 88 for trip 8s or 55 for trip 5s on the flop.

No way would I have even thought running 3s would give him quads.

I bet now you would have a) have a read on him and b) taken all his money.