$100-$200 Tunica Hand- Pre-flop & River decision(s)

[Philuva]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact is, I might play a straight this way against a player like myself who could fold the more marginal spectrum of hands for a 3-bet, while assuring I collected another bet on the river while not losing more when the board pairs. Is that really such a terrible line?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is an awful line.

I was playing in the 100 - 200 in LV in December. Young guy and old guy went 9 bets on the turn on a 4TAK with 2 diamonds. Young kid had KK and old guy had QJ. The old guy with the nuts eventually stopped and said, "I know you have QdJd so I just call." River was the 2 d. Young kid bet and old guy just called and took the pot. Would have been even funnier if he stuck to his read and folded. Anyway, my point is with the nuts and one card to come you have to be willing to go a lot more than 3 bets before you can think the other guy is freerolling on you.

[etizzle]

yeah if he 3 bets the river, you're probably staring at KT. After the action on the flop though, I cant imagine him thinking you might fold to a turn 3-bet.

The problem here is that if he is bad enough to be playing KT in the BB for 3 bets, he may not understand that against most players this is not the correct line.

Against less agressive players, without specifically a set, this line wins 1 BB less then if he just 3 bets the turn. You're certainly not gonna raise J9 again.

So I would probably raise again against a bad player, but if he 3 bets it would make me wish he wasnt so bad. And yeah you have to call in this huge pot. Nothing could make me lay this down for one bet.

[etizzle]

I got it right first!

Bah

[Kevin J]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, my point is with the nuts and one card to come you have to be willing to go a lot more than 3 bets before you can think the other guy is freerolling on you.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this, but an exception might be if a). Your hand is vulnerable, and b). your opponent is good enough to fold some hands (for another raise), which you wouldn't want him to. When these two variables are BOTH present, I don't think it's an "awful" line. This is *especially* true when your failure to raise "one more time" will cause your opponent to misread your hand on the river and will now go off for even more bets.

[elysium]

hi kevin

you should not make this call pre-flop after the limp in. you need to consider your hand, what the flop action will be, and other factors influencing the odds and your relative position. right away, you should realize that you have a favorable solid betting into solid, with a loose tagging along. that's what you often have in these spots.

what you quickly need to figure out is whether or not the two solids will be able to contain the aggression of the loose. now kevin, no. the two solids aren't in collusion with each contemplating how to quell the loose tag along. that is not what is taking place. yet that is how you have to think in this 88 or 99 come over the top pre-flop spot.

if the two solids knew that you were trying to figure out how they were going to quell the aggression of the tag along; if they knew what you were thinking, rare info; these two guys would read you as knowing nothing about the game because they would both say to you,'that's the furthest thing from our minds pal. we don't give a chit about the tag along.'. and they really wouldn't give one kevin. but you kevin, you, go right on thinking, 'how can they do it?'.

in hold em, you never have ample time to make a correct assessment, never. there are too many factors involved. it is a fatally flawed concept to assume that conventional type reasoning will produce the most accurate response. during select specific strategic interludes during a round, factoring in how the decision presently being made will effect the several hands that you play in future rounds, and the carry over effect of previous hands that you either were or were not involved in, is, if you tallied its combined impact conventionally with pocket calculator, of sufficient weight to cause what we now know as 'hold em's thinking worm hole', but i'm sure that they'll come up with a better name for it, later. and kevin, this worm hole can actually put you into a seperate hold em universe from that one that your opponents are thinking in.

when in the twin, you can think faster, reason better, and arrive at correct hold em solution more oftenly, and with less effort than your opponents who are being held down by the gravity of time, and who are also dimensionally challenged.

if we turn and float back to your original post, we see two solids and a tag along. we need to try and figure out how the solids are going to contain the aggression of the loose, we aren't armed with very much information in this universe because we don't need to be. all we need know is whether or not we have reasonable expectation of seeing the turn for 1 bet. due to the poor placement of the loose tag along, we know that we do not have good reason to believe that we will see the turn for 1 bet. so we fold and return back to the game.

in this situation, the terrifying solid 3-bettor is capable of unleashing a horrifying opening salvo on flop that will momentarily tame the tag along aggression. the only other consideration is how the other two players will perceive this terrifying first volley, and i assure you that you will both be frozen with fear. you see kevin, you need to see that turn card to give you correct odds, and you are getting correct provided that you will see the turn for 1 bet. on the turn, due to crippled out that your opponents likely have, and the possibility of being in the lead, spiking on the turn, improving on the turn, and most importantly, the prospects of suppressed aggression conditions to the river, you might have a call. let's see how the two solids will contain the aggression of the loose tag along. whoopsie, in this situation, we see that they can't contain the aggression. the loose tag along has seen the closing action of the pre-flop, has had to endure the customary moment of meditation the dealer pauses for between the final call on the pre-flop and the deal of the flop; this moment of silence also allows the dealer to double check everything; the loose tag along will be brought to his amusement as he watches the dealer deal, and be held in utter amazement, kevin, by the play of cards on the board. all of this will take just long enough for the loose tag along to totally forget what transpired on the pre-flop, and he will revert back his monopoly years, cup 1 sb's worth of chips between his hands, shake em, and throw.

but if the solid reraiser takes out his whip and lands a gamely strike onto the loose, if the bet can reach the loose while he's still smarting, you have ample reasonable grounds to believe that you can see the turn for 1 bet.

so you must ask, 'how are the two solids going to contain the aggression of the loose tag along?'. it will open a whole new universe to you.

[KidNapster]

How do you come up with this stuff!?!?!?

[TStoneMBD]

KJ: there was a thread i started a little over a week ago that had the same discussion about calling 2 cold pf with 99 with money in the pot. everyone said it was a painfully obvious call including clarkmeister. you can search for it if interested.

[Kevin J]

I went over this hand with 4 players I respect. Three of them said they would have just called the river and one said he would have raised.

In the actual hand I just called and beat out QJ (again, I'm really impressed by how good some of you guys are!). I immediately regretted not raising and wondered if my failure to do so was because I was playing a limit 5 times higher than I normally play, or if I was just being results orientated.

My thoughts on the river were similar to three of my friends. I raised this guy at every opportunity and he yet still kept leading into me! I really thought it possible that the reason he didn't 3-bet the turn was because he didn't want me to fold and/or was waiting for the board not to pair.

Lastly, I weighed the benefits of gaining of one more bet in an already big pot, with how sick I'd become if he 3-bet. I decided it wasn't worth it. I now think I decided wrong. I think this hand speaks of the main difference between the thought process of a good player and a mediocre one. Gaining extra bets even if they are one by one, add up over the long term. Obviousely, I wasn't a good player.

[elysium]

hi kevin

after the pre-flop the hand is pretty basic with some value there on the river. whether you call or raise depends mostly on bankroll variance considerations. depending on your situation either raising the river or calling it are both credible lines.

much more importantly, the decision of whether or not to make that pre-flop call will have a far more reaching effect on your bankroll and game. you need to think ahead and try to figure out what you will do if you don't flop a set. you need to figure out if you will see the turn for 1 bet. your synopsis of turn action will tell you whether or not to make the pre-flop call.

[astroglide]

is the tunica 100/200 this good of a game?