this one nags me a little

[elysium]

average 10-20 with decent opponents, especially after a raise is put in. i'm on the button with black JJ. the UTG raises in and is called by the MP who reraises. she would do this with A9s or 77; i call and the UTG 3-bets.

the UTG may raise in with QJs, but he will only 3-bet with AA or KK. then, the MP caps it.

i know that i perhaps should have folded right here. but, i reasoned that i was getting good implied odds because these opponents are heavy on the calling side, and also might allow a turn card for 1 bet. they had this tendancy.

so i called. well, the flop lands with a mighty T79r; well, of course it's raised by the MP, i call and the UTG reraises, and the MP caps it. i couldn't decide what to do, call or fold.. there was no quick answer. i just casually called it, but i was not at all sure that this call was correct. does anyone know?

just then, when i didn't think things could get any worse, the turn rags putting two diamonds on board. i wasn't concerned about a diamond flush draw as much as i was the MP raising. the UTG bet-out, and the MP called. whew.....but still, i wasn't sure what to do.

i thought i was ahead of the MP, who might have ATs or other such holding, but i knew at the highest level of certainty that i was behind the UTG. he had AA or KK and nothing else. i couldn't decide, but in any case didn't want to become analytical. so again i just casually called. was this call correct? i had only 6 clean outs.

the river) the 8d.....weeeeeee!! oh, i know i'm always on everyone's case about one card draws, and this was an inside one card draw. but my read was so strong that i knew my straight would be good, and my raise on the river would be called by both opponents. this would have been true too had a J fallen on the river. the third diamond on board runner, runner was no problem because the MP would have raised the turn. she had this tendancy with draws. and i could tell by how she put the chips in on the turn. the diamonds were safe for me. and i knew that if i hit my 6 outer that i'd get in the raise on the river.

but was my turn call correct? it nags me. if my turn call was correct, was my flop call of 2 cold correct. that nags me a little. i still don't know.

[vkotlyar]

no, your turn call was not correct under the conditions that you described. You had 6 outs, semiclean. There was 6 BB in the pot, and you called 1 BB cold, getting 11-1 on your draw. i dont see how they can both pay you off on the turn and river w a 78910 board, so the implied odds werent there. You played like a passive fish, elysium, and that is something that you are gonna have to deal with. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
vitaly

[RydenStoompala]

Good post, elysium. We've all been there, or we're people who wont admit it. The call on the turn was iffy although you seemed to have a "feel" for what your opponents were up to, playing big pairs into each other. This is why, under the same cirumstances, I get really nervous when there's a third player along passively calling while I'm in a war with someone. I would almost want the third J rather than the 8, but I assume it turned out OK.

[elysium]

hi vk
there were 8 BB in the pot when i called. the implied odds made it 12 BB. all my outs were very clean. i do agree though that it was razor thin and required a very good read. i had to know that on the river the UTG would betout and that the MP would call and both would call my subsequent raise in the event i hit my 6 out. i knew this.

basically, i guess my question is ' can we take our reads this far, into the implied action?'. i did need the river action to be perfect. so my question is, 'can we be so sure about how clean our outs are and the implied action? this is what i'm not sure about.

and then, i might as well say it now, if we can't be so sure about our read, can i then be not so sure that i'm not in the lead. i did have the over-pair. does my read 'wash-out'; in other words, if i'm wrong about the implied action, should i attach a measure of doubt to my read that i'm not in the lead until i hit the 6 out. also, given all these factors, was the river raise correct? i needed to raise the river to make the turn call correct. i just didn't know. i called like a fish rather than making a play or folding because it was not clear to me at that time, and i didn't want to muck a hand that i couldn't determine was sub-optimal.

[Kenshin]

[ QUOTE ]
hi vk
there were 8 BB in the pot when i called. the implied odds made it 12 BB. all my outs were very clean. i do agree though that it was razor thin and required a very good read. i had to know that on the river the UTG would betout and that the MP would call and both would call my subsequent raise in the event i hit my 6 out. i knew this.

basically, i guess my question is ' can we take our reads this far, into the implied action?'. i did need the river action to be perfect. so my question is, 'can we be so sure about how clean our outs are and the implied action? this is what i'm not sure about.

and then, i might as well say it now, if we can't be so sure about our read, can i then be not so sure that i'm not in the lead. i did have the over-pair. does my read 'wash-out'; in other words, if i'm wrong about the implied action, should i attach a measure of doubt to my read that i'm not in the lead until i hit the 6 out. also, given all these factors, was the river raise correct? i needed to raise the river to make the turn call correct. i just didn't know. i called like a fish rather than making a play or folding because it was not clear to me at that time, and i didn't want to muck a hand that i couldn't determine was sub-optimal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Elysium,
I believe you can extrapolate your implied odds from your reads in this specific situation. Obviously reads and odds have a very tenuous correlation; however, against truly ABC players, you can indentify hands with sufficient accurracy to predict future action. Thus, I consider both your flop and turn plays correct. You made a lucky and, more importantly, good play. Just remember that long shots result in dramatically increased variance

Kenshin