AA hand, missed bets?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah but if I bet the flop it is correct for weak hands to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I agree w/ Uston that if this is a joke, it's a pretty funny one. And you did a great job setting it up w/ your posts in the "not raising w/ KK" thread. Well done.

But just in case you're serious....

You're way too focused on this concept of making your opponents make mistakes. Forget about them and concentrate on playing correctly yourself. In the "who made the biggest mistake" contest, you came out squarely in front on the flop w/ AK a close second. You took all the correct calls (getting x:1 odds) and made them way more correct by giving them infinite odds to call. Nice work. Remember, opponents can make mistakes by folding as well. You don't think there's a reasonable chance 43s will fold rather than consider that he has 5 likely clean outs getting 15:1? Think about that the next time you're considering checking the flop.

You cited S&M's advice about doing everything possible to win a big pot in the other thread. This is exactly the type of situation where they would recommend betting the flop w/ just about anything, much less Aces, to maximize your chances of taking down the pot. Instead, you check, which does just about the opposite.

You also complained in the other thread about your AA losing to 46. Playing like this is exactly the way to maximize your chances of "beats" like that happening over and over again.

[Joe Tall]

Flop: Why check the flop? Bet.

Turn: Nice 3-bet.

River: Checked around?

I don't get it.

[mojolang]

Okay the cats out of the bag, this post was a joke.

Now for the bad news......

The joke is on you.


I wanted to see how you would lamblast me if I posted a perfectly played yet very sophisticated hand. I thought it would be misunderstood by many, if not all of you. This wasn't a hand played by me at all. It was played by a professional player, and one of the finest theorists on the game. Maybe you've heard of him, his name is Mason Malmuth This was a test to see how much of you truly understand the concepts of LL hold'em. The check on the flop was correct like I said because it would have been correct for bad draws to call AND make teh pot even bigger. However (and I left this part out cuz I'd hoped you'd maybe catch on) someone who has undervalued your hand might bet into on 4th st allowing you to raise. You might say I slowplayed this post. Well I'm done with all you immature goofballs and I hope to see you live ones across teh table from me real soon. If you would like to learn more about the game of poker, might I recommend the 2+2 Catalog. It has great information about poker that would probably be very useful to all of you. In fact this hand was from Mason Malmuth's wonderful Poker Essays Volume III. It was called "Checking aces"

Goodbye and Good luck 2+2 posters, you're gonna need it

Joe

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
I wanted to see how you would lamblast me if I posted a perfectly played yet very sophisticated hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
A hand is perfectly played just because Mason played it? Obviously you haven't seen the many lengthy discussions on the Mid-High Stakes forum debating a number of his plays.

[ QUOTE ]
Well I'm done with all you immature goofballs and I hope to see you live ones across teh table from me real soon.

[/ QUOTE ]
Bring lots of money.

It's clear that you are much more concerned about "being right" than actually improving your game. Rather than blindly trying to follow examples from books that you don't fully understand and don't necessarily even apply to the situations you're in, you should consider actually trying to understand and take the advice of a number of experienced winning players who have responded to your posts.

[Your Mom]

Bring lots of money.

It's clear that you are much more concerned about "being right" than actually improving your game. Rather than blindly trying to follow examples from books that you don't fully understand and don't necessarily even apply to the situations you're in, you should consider actually trying to understand and take the advice of a number of experienced winning players who have responded to your posts.


Preach on, brother Ulysses!

[Dynasty]

For those of you who don't own Poker Essays Volume III by Mason Malmuth, here is the essay:

Checking Aces

Here's an unusual play (for most people) I made wiht a pair of aces. It is another example of "correct," but uncommon strategy when the pot becomes large. I'll also give my reasons for making the plays that I did. It also needs to be pointed out that some of the decisions you are about to read are highly debatable, and if the parameters of the situation were changed just slightly, proper strategy may be quite different from what is presented below.

The game was $30-$60 hold 'em (played at the Bellagio). The blinds were $20 and $30, an early position player raised, a middle position player called, I held AsAd and made it three bets. The player on the button called, the player in the big blind called, and the two players already in called. So far nothing unusual in my play. However it is a little unusual to get two cold callers fro three bets each.

The flop came: Kh,6d,4s

Everyone checked, including me. I suspect that most of you will think that this is crazy. Surely the two aces appear to be the best hand. But betting has its drawbacks. The problem with betting is that there are 15 2/3 bets already in the pot, and becaude of the size of the pot, it is correct for many weak hands to call. This could even include a "pocket pair" because of additional bets that could be made on the later streets, in case the trip card comes on the turn (Note: With 47 cards not accounted for, it is 45-to-2 or 22.5-1 that the pocket pair catches the trip card. Therefore, since you can expect to make some additional money if you hit your hand, a call should be correct. Exception: Your call might not be correct if one of your trip cards puts a possible flush on the board. But that is not the case in this situation).

But there is also another reason to check. Someone else might bet into you on fourth street with a weaker hand than your aces- and this could include an outright steal- and your subsequtent raise might knock out a hand behind you which would have drawn out on the river.

The turn card was a complete blank. It was checked to me, I bet, the player on teh button called, the player in the small blind raised, and the other two players folded. This raise created a dilemma for me since a likely hand for the raiser would be a set. However, it is also possible tht my check on the flop would make him think that I had a hand like a pair of queens or jacks and would now bet, beig less fearful of a king. If this was a the case I could easily be against a hand like ace-king or king-queen which of course loses to a pair of aces. Furthermore, given the size of the pot it becomes important to reraise. This way i might be getting in more money with the best hand (against the turn raiser) and force the player behind me to fold, not giving him the opportunity to draw out on the river. This I did, and the player on the button folded and the player in the big blind called.

Another blank hit on the river and I checked after my lone remaining opponent checked. The reason for the check was that it seemed to me the most likely hand for my opponent was indeed a set, meaing that he would win the majority of the time that my bet is called (Of course, a bet would have been forthcoming if an ace appeared.)

In fact, he did have the AdKs and I won a very large pot.

Recapping, there are two plays in this hand that most of you would not make. They are to check on the flop and reraise on the turn. Typical players would bet the flop, assuming they have the best hand, but only call the raise on the turn, being correctly fearful of being up against a set (or perhaps a hand like kings-up).

What they would not do is take into account the size of te pot. In fact, in most situations there is no question that betting the flop and just calling down are the correct plays. But sometimes when the pot gets big, correct strategy can call for some very strange plays. In my mind this was one of those situations, and I was fortunate to have my hand hold up.

[JTG51]

This was a test to see how much of you truly understand the concepts of LL hold'em.

LOL, now that is funny! I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Mason didn't play this hand at a low limit table, so even if he did play it perfectly it woudn't say a thing about correct low limit play.

That said, I'm also willing ot bet that if Mason posted this hand on the mid to high stakes forum he'd get roasted for the river check.

[Dynasty]

A few interesting lines from the essay:

[ QUOTE ]
...if the parameters of the situation were changed just slightly, proper strategy may be quite different from what is presented below.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The game was $30-$60 hold 'em (played at the Bellagio).

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, in most situations there is no question that betting the flop and just calling down are the correct plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

[JTG51]

Not to pile on here mojo, but you don't even see why Mason's ideas in that essay don't apply here, do you?

Mason checked the river in large part because he didn't think he'd get called by a worse hand. I think he made a mistake, but at least it is debatable. That will simply never, ever the case at a 4/8 game. You will ALWAYS get called by a K, and often by any pair in a low limit game, so betting is without a doubt correct.

[Tosh]

Anyone think his 'joke' has failed ? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]