a9c analysis
Test Case - A9s. PartyPoker 2/4 10 handed table: I am dealt A9s in UTG+1, the UTG player folds to me. I raise to $4 and it is folded to the button who opts to make it $6 (~4.5 BB). The big blind calls and I call. The flop is 7h 7c 9c. I check, the button raises, small blind calls and I call (6 BB). The turn is the Ac - small blind checks, I raise, and both players call (9 BB). The river is the Kh. The small blind checks, I raise, and both players fold. I take down $35.50 net.
What happened here? Clearly my hand is too good to fold - if you are routinely folding hands as strong as this you are playing too few hands to make money at this limit. So my choice is between raising and folding, which is a perfect illustration of the concept of playing your hand according to the espected size of the field. This hand optimally plays with a large number of callers, making calling a tempting option. However, two large risks exist: the first is that not enough people will call behind you to make the hand profitable; the second is that there might be a raise behind you that kills the pot size and makes you pay two bets to see a flop that you will most certainly need to fold on if you do not connect (she will certainly bet.) So let's evaluate the raise. Your hand can play well in a shorthanded flop due to a number of factors: it may well be the best hand, you have drawing potential which still holds importance, and you may win simply by betting if nobody makes a good hand. Raising will not only make many of the players fold, but a player that might have otherwise raised (especially in late position as a steal) may interpret my early position raise as indicative of a very strong hand and might call and be on the defense or fold outright. So, since the expected size according to the above analysis is a smallish field, you should play your hand for the raise to maximize your EV.
The action from then on is fairly straightforward. The threat of either player having an overpair disinclined me to bet, but since I most likely just reverse dominated one or both of the players, even if I was ahead a check would probably be wise since they are both way behind. The threat of the flush is slim here, as you can tell by my willingness to bet on the turn when I made two pair. If the flush isn't a big deal, why not slow play the two-pair? My bet is for value. Remember, my most likely opponents are a dominated broadway hand or an overpair. The possible big broadway hand may not think that top pair with a good kicker is enough to raise me with on a paired board, but it is certainly enough to call me with, especially if the kicker is a club. The pocket pair will call if it thinks I may be betting the scare card, especially if it holds the 10-K of clubs, but it is somewhat likely this hand may make a smart fold (fortunately many of our opponents are not smart and will not release a big preflop hand.) Since the only realistic treat (making a set is not realistic at this point as a consideration) is the flush draw hitting, but checking will allow them to draw to it anyway, you might as well charge them a nice price for the chance.
The river is a bit scary since someone could realistically be holding AK, but if I check I will need to call a bet anyway since the pot is laying 9:1 odds. This risk of betting is the raise, however the 3-flush on a paired board is very scary for even top two pair when I am leading with a bet. AK might even goof and fold trying to make a "smart lay down" here against a boat or flush (hopefully you know that he should call if he thinks there is an 11% chance top two pair is winning.) So I bet my hand for value but I do not get any action. Oh well.
|
12-27-2005, 12:10 AM
Linear Mode
