An interesting 80-160 hand - Page 8

#71 09-07-2005, 11:16 AM

i dont like the way henry played it. in such a weak posistion, the raise can only make the pot larger, it will not narrow the field. i think that henry should have checked the BB and if the flop came favorable he could have played his AA accordingly. However, with three limpers and a flop like that, he's in dangerous waters. I like the call he made on Peters raise, however, i dont know that the DG didnt possibly flop a small flush, with a suited connector. I think that it was bad timing for AA in the blind, and i think Henry should have disguised the strength of his hand rather than advertise it by four betting pre-flop.

Gabe · #72 09-07-2005, 12:11 PM

I don't know the people in the hand, as you guys do, but I would agree with Tommy, except that Tommy doesn't seem to like Henry's tempo, and I do.

haakee · #73 09-07-2005, 12:34 PM

I am curious as to who DG was...

Anyway, I think Henry's decision to just call the flop 3-bet, see what the turn brings and presumably check-raise a non-heart is fine. It looks almost certain that Peter or DG is going to fire at the pot on the turn. Then, when DG bets and Peter raises, your two choices are call or 3-bet. 3-betting opens the door to Peter 4-betting which he will surely do with a set, any flush, and sometimes with an ace-high flush draw + a pair. If you just call, DG may go all-in right there and... this is important... Peter can't 4-bet, he can only complete the 7 chips. Also, if you 3-bet Peter will fold some hand that was trying to make a ridiculous play at the pot, but might bluff on the river. So I would play this hand the same way that Henry did.

Like you allude to, there are certainly meta-game aspects here which would push me in favor of being more aggressive here against Peter to prevent him from constantly trying to toy with me. However I think the presence of all-in guy pushes my decision in favor of Henry's actions.

Ulysses · #74 09-07-2005, 12:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it's clear he's trying to mess with me (if im bb)

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
the guy who raised the turn is clearly likely to be getting out of line.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are these things so clear?

mike l. · #75 09-07-2005, 02:04 PM

"if I though I might actually make DG fold"

DG will never ever fold. he is almost all in and has a history of going all in. he will never fold the turn almost all in having liked his hand enough to already bet the turn.

mike l. · #76 09-07-2005, 02:10 PM

""I definitely have an overpair here and you better have a real hand to pump me back here as I have pot committed myself.""

why is everyone in this thread so concerned with trying to define to your opponents what your hand is? it's like you dont want them to get out of line because you might pee your pants when you get raised again? hell with it man. youve got pocket aces and they are loose and aggressive. but forget what i think.

the question is not "what's the best way to make sure they are afraid of you and slow down and play honestly?"

the question is "how many bets and raises should *you* pump the pot with before you finally slow down and call down given all the factors present?"

andyfox · #77 09-07-2005, 03:31 PM

First time through this thread, I agreed with you and Tommy on the turn. And I'm afraid I too would have just called in this spot. But looking at it again, I like the 3-bet on the turn.

Peter's pre-flop and flop play say "draw" to me more than they say monster. I don't think Henry's "sick" look on the flop was an act; if Peter noticed this, his turn raise makes even more sense as a semi-bluff (i.e., a hand that he suspects might have DG beat and/or is a draw but is definitely behind Henry's obvious big pair) than as a monster.

So I'm not saying "I wont back down, I can't let this guy run over me"; I'm saying in this particular case against these two guys there's a better chance my hand is good than in a "typical" situation where two guys have shown strength on a 3-heart flop.

James282 · #78 09-07-2005, 04:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
why is everyone in this thread so concerned with trying to define to your opponents what your hand is?

[/ QUOTE ]

We are concerned about defining his hand because what his hand is makes a difference as to whether we win the money in the pot or not.
-James

vmacosta · #79 09-07-2005, 04:21 PM

"We are concerned about defining his hand because what his hand is makes a difference as to whether we win the money in the pot or not."

Don't mean to be mean, but this is silly. Henry is going to showdown no matter what so how the other players "define his hand" is unimportant. Furthermore, as other posters have mentioned, the hand was defined on the flop (DG doesn't care what Henry has and Peter knows he probably has a huge pair).

James282 · #80 09-07-2005, 04:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"We are concerned about defining his hand because what his hand is makes a difference as to whether we win the money in the pot or not."

Don't mean to be mean, but this is silly. Henry is going to showdown no matter what so how the other players "define his hand" is unimportant. Furthermore, as other posters have mentioned, the hand was defined on the flop (DG doesn't care what Henry has and Peter knows he probably has a huge pair).

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not silly. Have you ever played in a high limit game?
-James