Heads-Up $30-60 Hand

[Andy B]

My biggest success in heads-up stud was taking $2 off of Carlos Chadha in a $.04/.08 game, so take this for what it's worth:

Third strikes me as standard. On fourth, I probably raise with the flush draw. I'm not crazy about the check-raise on fifth. How likely is it that the guy with the Aces is going to lay down, well, anything? I agree that the guy with Aces-up should just call on the river and the flush should three-bet.

[Michael Emery]

[ QUOTE ]
the flush should three-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? I was going to work out the math this morning but Roland beat me to it (ty Roland [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img], I hate math). As I stated yesterday in my post, given the range of hands B is going into the river with (remember hes calling open kings and a flush looking board with his blank board), its a clear call when you get raised on the end. Raising here in the long run will only cost you money.

Mike Emery

[bygmesterf]

[ QUOTE ]
As I stated yesterday in my post, given the range of hands B is going into the river with (remember hes calling open kings and a flush looking board with his blank board), its a clear call when you get raised on the end. Raising here in the long run will only cost you money.

Mike Emery

[/ QUOTE ]

Going back to something I leanred from Mike Caro, when someone raises with you with a trash board that doesn't show any obvious strength, they arent bluffing.

Raising with Aces up (Even AAKK) is rather dangerious facing a possible flush, which implies that B ought to have some sort of hidden boat. Reraising is silly even if in this case it would have been the right thing to do.

[CJC]

Hello All,

As I hinted in one other post, I actually was player A. I didn't want to mention it first cause I didn't want any 'skewed' analysis. ( I actually was thinking about posting this another way but...... )

I really do think this is an interesting hand, and it shows a lot of concepts that start to happen in the bigger stud games.

I really don't think my opponent played the hand all that bad. I however ( and no one mentioned this surprisingly ) HATE that he raised on 3rd with his pocket Aces. If I don't have anything, I am just going to fold. IMHO this is a time where you actually want to slowplay ACES and give your opponent a chance to catch something. We had been playing heads-up for actually quite some time and the game wasn't all that aggressive ( up to this hand [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] ) so he really wouldn't have been giving away too much..

His river raise was what I really thought made this hand interesting, and honestly, I keep changing my mind from thinking its a brilliant play to a foolish one.... and I probably never will.

I was chastized by the great Ray Zee for not raising the river. ( at least he said I was the better of the two players [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] )... but seriously.. in all honesty.. after showing that much strength all along, and given my board.. when I was raised on the river.. I thought there was a real chance I was against tens full, and if I wasn't there was a decent chance my re-raise wouldn't have gotten pad off anyway. I just don't see a re-raise being profitable in the long run there. I don't.. and if that makes me weak-tight ( which I was also recently accused of ) so be it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

A few other thoughts...

My check-raise on 5th wasn't a big hit with most.. MY thinking is 1) If my opponent only has a small pair or overcards, he most likely folds.. and I want him too 2) Check-raise disguises my holding

When my opponent 3 bet on 5th I actually put him on pocket Aces ( which is why I was a bit thrown by his river raise.. when I thought I diagnosed wrong )

I am still debating his river raise... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Later,

CJ

[Andy B]

In a heads-up game, you're going to be raising light so often that you're apt to get action whether you want it or not. I figure that I raise with dubious holdings often enough that I might as well raise when I have a real hand.

[Ray Zee]

then of course a reraise if you didnt have a flush was in order on the river, right.

i dont know about being weak tight but if it is possible, correct it as so be it will be the poor house.

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
then of course a reraise if you didnt have a flush was in order on the river, right.


[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think for that size pot that any superior hand to a pair of kings would fold for one more damn bet?

Plus, if I didn't have a flush, or a draw to it, the whole hand would have been played differently anyways..
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

The games are different now Ray.

CJ

[Bartholow]

You're the one who said a 3-bet on the river wouldn't be paid off a decent amount of the time that your opponent didn't have a boat.

[CJC]

[ QUOTE ]
You're the one who said a 3-bet on the river wouldn't be paid off a decent amount of the time that your opponent didn't have a boat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Forgive me, but I am not quite following what you are trying to say here.

CJ

[Ray Zee]

there is no differenc in the games nowadays. its the same stuff with the best players winning the most money. what may happen in some locations is that the best players arent very goo, just alot better than their opponents. that makes them big winners not great players.