A massive overbet... - Page 4

mythrilfox · #31 04-17-2005, 07:08 AM

There seem to be a lot of overbet threads lately. I've advocated calling in every one.

I'd call here, too. Villain has no reason to think you'd have a hand to pay him off. His bet makes no sense with a boat. His bet makes no sense with trip 5s. His bet makes a little sense with Qx[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. Not you and me sense, but crazy guy sense. And he is clearly crazy.

Rotating Rabbit · #32 04-17-2005, 08:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
say "you have no idea how powerful i am", and call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or Kevin Spacey Negotiator style "you have no idea what I'm calpable of" and call...But how stupid would it look if the kings lost!

Garland · #33 04-17-2005, 03:57 PM

I called.

There were two main issues that have come on this thread:

1. The obvious call or fold question on the massive overbet.
2. Should I bet the flop or not.

The first question, I was fairly convinced that he had an AQ or KQ type hand. If he had a 5 or better, I would imagine he would want to extract some coin for his hand. So I went with that read.

The second question is interesting. This has sparked some interesting thought. I fully believe there are times to check the flop on a big overpair, and this is one of them. This is the classic WAOWB scenario (way ahead or way behind), and I don't mind my opponent catching a Q with AQ or J with AJ, or making him believe his overpair is good. Meanwhile, I'll risk that he doesn't have a flush draw (and a key is, I have a flush redraw). This is not to say that checking this flop 100% is always right, but to vary your play with an overpair against a sole opponent has effects that last:

1. Opponents are less apt to bluff into you in future hands if they know you're capable of checking a monster hand.

2. You can get free cards with your AK, AQ type hands if you miss.

3. You extract more coin when they catch the wrong side of K on the turn or if they believe their pocket pair is good.

I, of course, would not pull this stunt with lesser pairs, but I feel that the strength of AA and KK offers type of flexibility for offering the free turn card.

Ah...but back to the results. I called. I was the sucker in this hand. I actually used up most of my time thinking about what my opponent had and had visions of a flush draw or Q-something. He had QQ, I lost and learned an "expensive" lesson: beware the massive overbet.

Thanks for all your thoughts.

Garland

Ultimate Bet No-Limit Hold'em, $4 BB (10 handed) converter

saw flop|saw showdown

Garland ($394)
CO ($170)
Button ($396.10)
SB ($321.30)
BB ($200)
UTG ($393.40)
UTG+1 ($387.20)
UTG+2 ($385.50)
MP1 ($214.60)
MP2 ($192)

Preflop: Garland is MP3 with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
UTG+1 calls $4, 3 folds, Garland raises to $19, 4 folds, UTG calls $19, UTG+1 folds.

Flop: ($48) 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG checks, Garland checks.

Turn: ($48) Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players)
UTG bets $374.4 (All-In), Garland calls $374.40.

River: ($796.80) J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (2 players, 1 all-in)

Final Pot: $796.80

Results below:
UTG has Qc Qd (full house, queens full of fives).
MP1 has (full house, queens full of fives).
Garland has Ks Kh (two pair, kings and fives).
Outcome: UTG wins $796.80.

mgsimpleton · #34 04-17-2005, 04:17 PM

i haven't read the rest of the thread but i would definitely auto-call. your flop check just screams AK or something like that which cannot call this huge bet. I think the Q is actually a better card for you as preflop it is harder to put someone on QQ (no reraise) then like 88 or 99 if one of those set cards had come.

because of the flop check (which i like in many cases, i think people on this site advocate extremely tight non-tricky, abc play too much), i would definitely call this bet here.

BobboFitos · #35 04-17-2005, 05:40 PM

hey garland, i like your analysis of why you checked the flop, and maybe i should incorporate that a little more, but here is some results oriented thinking:

if you bet the flop you can play a big(ish) pot when you ARE way ahead, and, you said you wouldn't mind a AQ type hand to catch so you can extract more, well, in this case if an A or K falls uou will lose all action

Just sorta parlaying this to the overall idea of betting the flop, I think the time for extraction from any pair (66+) is to bet the flop check the turn call the river. (obviously the plan could change depending on what falls but thats the idea)

mgsimpleton · #36 04-17-2005, 06:18 PM

some more results oriented thinking...

if you have been routinely checking behind with overpairs on the flop, or if you have been routinely been betting your missed AK...

it is quite feasible he read your check on the flop as an overpair (putting you on betting a missed AK) and thus thought you would pay him off because you think he puts you on AK and not paying him off if he actually had a hand, thus slow playing a huge hand, when really he puts you on KK thinking he thinks you have AK (because you checked the flop which to him was transparent) and for the reason of the overpair you have plus the fact that he thinks you don't think he knows you have an overpair, he will pay you off.

or maybe the thinking is much simpler - "AK will fold to any bet, AA or KK will pay off a massive overbet" (though i'd love to think there are as many levels of thinking going on as in my first thought process)

this is all easier to analyze after the results, but i actually thought about it after making my post and i think if i can put someone on inducing a bluff, when i made my "bluff" with a huge hand, i would make it HUGE just because as a bluff, it will get paid off (since bluffs theoretically have inverse value, as opposed to value bets, whereby the harder they are to call the better they are)

was that comprehensible?

Ulysses · #37 04-18-2005, 01:12 PM

I would fold. I put him on a five.