77 in the CO

#1 10-25-2005, 09:32 AM

SB is a calling station. BB is a maniac. I hate how I played this hand. What's YOUR line?

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (7 handed) converter

Preflop: Hero is CO with 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
3 folds, Hero raises, 1 fold, SB calls, BB calls.

Flop: (6 SB) K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, SB calls, BB raises, Hero calls, SB calls.

Turn: (6 BB) 3[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, BB bets, Hero calls, SB calls.

River: (9 BB) 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, BB bets, Hero calls, SB calls.

Final Pot: 12 BB

dopp16 · #2 10-25-2005, 09:43 AM

i think that its likely the SB has a 3 and maybe the bb is overplaying his aq. I may put three-bets in on the flop to push the SB out of there. if I get capped, Im in trouble if he calls,, then call down

#3 10-25-2005, 10:18 AM

why do you think SB has a 3. Wouldn't he either bet or c/r the turn if he did. I don't see him checking turn and river with a 3 because he is afraid of us having a K. Hero raised in CO first in, SB could put him on huge range of hands

#4 10-25-2005, 10:27 AM

Considering the reads you posted, this looks standard to me. I don't see a fold anywhere against the maniacal bettor. By calling down you make the most when you're ahead and lose the least when you're behind.

#5 10-25-2005, 11:02 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Considering the reads you posted, this looks standard to me. I don't see a fold anywhere against the maniacal bettor. By calling down you make the most when you're ahead and lose the least when you're behind.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I didn't give BB credit for anything. He had jammed the pot more than once with air. He LOVED to bluff. But would you consider raising the turn or the river to try to knock SB out? Or that too risky?

I don't know... Maybe I didn't misplay this hand so badly after all? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

W. Deranged · #6 10-25-2005, 11:11 AM

Do you think that either three-betting the flop or raising the turn would encourage SB to fold?

If so, I think there's a lot to be said for one of those lines. Raising the turn is super high-variance, as villain might have a 3 that just pulled ahead of you, and very often you're going to get three-bet anyway by hands like 44 or A-high, and you cannot fold to a three-bet.

So I think three-betting the flop is the way to go. Villain may have a K, but he's a nut, so he's as likely to have air. SB could have anything here as well. So a flop three-bet is as much for value as it is for the potential protection we might get by getting SB to fold. We should note that it is very likely that SB has 6 clean outs against us and we'd really like him to fold.

So I think this was a case of putting the breaks on a little too early against the maniac. Use the early, small bet streets to make tactical maneuvers against such players and to extract max value.

W. Deranged · #7 10-25-2005, 11:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Considering the reads you posted, this looks standard to me. I don't see a fold anywhere against the maniacal bettor. By calling down you make the most when you're ahead and lose the least when you're behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against calling stations and maniacs who can be playing basically anything, calling down seems quite likely to win less than the max when ahead.

I don't think the question here is where hero can find a fold. It's where hero can find the correct opportunity to put in another raise. I don't think a kind of wa/wb approach really applies here because:

1. We are against players who are sort of incapable of folding.

2. I think that, at least on the flop, we are ahead way more often than way behind.

3. Our hand is very vulnerable, and hence we are never "way ahead," but need to play aggressively early to at least try to protect our hand/makes opponent's with weak holdings pay the max.

#8 10-25-2005, 11:15 AM

Considering SB is a calling station, it probably is a bit risky. Anyway, what do you think he has that is beating you? Let him call down with a 3, 4 or even A-high. If he has a higher PP, well, them's the breaks.

EDIT: oh man I misread the board. Didn't see the 3 repeat. Ignore me please!

#9 10-25-2005, 11:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Considering the reads you posted, this looks standard to me. I don't see a fold anywhere against the maniacal bettor. By calling down you make the most when you're ahead and lose the least when you're behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Against calling stations and maniacs who can be playing basically anything, calling down seems quite likely to win less than the max when ahead.

I don't think the question here is where hero can find a fold. It's where hero can find the correct opportunity to put in another raise. I don't think a kind of wa/wb approach really applies here because:

1. We are against players who are sort of incapable of folding.

2. I think that, at least on the flop, we are ahead way more often than way behind.

3. Our hand is very vulnerable, and hence we are never "way ahead," but need to play aggressively early to at least try to protect our hand/makes opponent's with weak holdings pay the max.

[/ QUOTE ]

All good points. I guess I had a brain explosion and thought we'd somehow know the board would come with undercards to our pocket pair.

droolie · #10 10-25-2005, 12:09 PM

Change seats. Being stuck between a maniac and a station can be tough.

Calling stations call. Maniacs raise. You have the best hand often enough here to see a showdown but not often enough to push it. You cannot protect your hand but want to get to a cheap showdown. I like calling down because when you call the river you have no way of knowing whether the station has been calling with nothing or something and because he's a station you have little fear of being raised by a worse hand.