Hand to Talk About - Page 7

bobbyi · #61 01-10-2005, 05:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I can't figure out who's worse, me for firing three barrels with an unimproved AQ or AK, or the other guy for calling down with 33.

[/ QUOTE ]
Against people like this, you should almost always fire two barrels and check down the river. In the games I play, at least, if someone calls with some sort of pair on the turn, they are never going to fold it for one more bet on the river, and worse hands than mine never pay me off.

Noo Yawk · #62 01-10-2005, 06:43 PM

From all the descriptions I see posted about this 80-160 game, it seems insane to me not to raise the river. We know nothing about the players from this hand, so I'll base my decision on what I know from other posts and a bit of personal bellagio 80-160 experience. The players in this game don't fold reasonable hands and are likely to play back at you. They don't have irrational fear of scare cards and only ocassionally they make a suprising fold with a decent hand. There is no draw out there, and since 2 aces are on the board, I could just as easily give him credit for K's, Q's, KJ, QJ, J-10,A-Q, or A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-x [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] as I could for A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], AJ, J's, 2's or maybe AK.
I just don't see any value in not raising alot of 2nd best's that will pay you off.

BarronVangorToth · #63 01-10-2005, 06:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If the opponent has AJ or JJ (or even 22) here AND he knows that Mason has a good A (probably is putting Mason on AK or AQ) then he is going to wait for the turn to bet at it KNOWING that Mason is going to raise right back at him.

In other words, instead of going for a C/R, he is essentially going for a 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if he knew Mason knew that, he also knew Mason wouldn't fall for it, so he would instead go for the check-raise -- or did he know that Mason knew that he knew that Mason knew that he knew what Mason was going to do?

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

Sqred · #64 01-10-2005, 06:55 PM

He has a jack. From what I have seen lately, thats about the only hand it could be. In today's environment there is a lot of fishy play out there. He took a card off to his second pair, bluffed when the top card paired, and decided to bet the river since he was calling anyway in an atttempt to fold QQ or KK.

In my opinion Mason let him off easy because a river raise probably would be called by this type of player.

If you are always fearing a monster when you have top trips with best kicker you are leaving a lot of money on the table these days.

FJM

Kevin J · #65 01-10-2005, 07:09 PM

I don't think the rule: "it is better to bet in first position as an underdog, than to check/call as a bigger underdog", applies to the bb here. In other words, I don't think betting a pair of jacks has much value, since there are more likely hands Mason would call or re-raise and win with (any ace, KK, QQ, JJ), than call and lose with (99, TT?).

I know there are bad players who play 80-160, but Mason is still risking 3 bets to win (maybe), 1 more. He would have to think the bb is betting a hand he shouldn't AND would pay off a raise.

FWIW- In trying to put the bb on a hand, I think it's likely he flopped a set of deuces and was going to c/r the turn, but became worried he'd miss a bet after he makes an under-full. Or.. If he has an ace, it's AJ or A2s, and he tried twice to go for 3-bets. Or.. He has some hopeless hand he wouldn't call a raise with anyway. Of course, I'm probably wrong and he could also have been betting a worse ace. But I'm hearing a lot about how strong Mason's hand is, but very little in the way of convincing arguments about what hands his opponent could have that would make raising the river such a +EV play.

tipperdog · #66 01-10-2005, 07:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
He has a jack. From what I have seen lately, thats about the only hand it could be.
FJM

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems highly unlikely to me that he has a jack other than AJ. But let's assume for a moment that you're right: He has TJ, QJ, or KJ. If Mason raises, do you seriously think the BB will call?

Mason is the EP raiser this hand. Virtually every legitimate PF raising hand (AJ-AK; AA, KK, QQ, JJ) has QJ-type hands totally buried. The BB knows this and would almost certainly muck to a raise. Given that reality, why would the BB bet a QJ-type hand on the river in this situation? There's no way Mason is laying down a better hand at this point, and he'd know it. If the BB holds JT, he's played the river very poorly.

My bottom line is this: even if you think he has a jack (but you can't be certain, of course), a raise has virtually no value. If he has a J, he'll fold. If you're wrong, you'll have to pay him off if he 3-bets, costing you two bets. Hence, a raise is a -EV play...if you read him for a J.

nolanfan34 · #67 01-10-2005, 07:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't figure out who's worse, me for firing three barrels with an unimproved AQ or AK, or the other guy for calling down with 33.

[/ QUOTE ]
Against people like this, you should almost always fire two barrels and check down the river. In the games I play, at least, if someone calls with some sort of pair on the turn, they are never going to fold it for one more bet on the river, and worse hands than mine never pay me off.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hear ya. Most of the time I'm firing that 3rd barrel, it's on a board where there was a flush or straight draw that doesn't come on the river. I think it's been a +EV play for me against most opponents that I peg as drawing, but once in a while they'll turn over their small pair, and I scratch my head wondering how they can call down in a small pot with a PF raiser betting with overcards to their hand on the board.

Of course in their head, they're probably just thinking "I'VE GOT A POCKET PAIR" over and over.

OK, where's Mason, I'm results oriented and I want to see them.

Kevin J · #68 01-10-2005, 07:13 PM

I think I had the wrong thread up and posted this somewhere I didn't intend to:

I don't think the rule: "it is better to bet in first position as an underdog, than to check/call as a bigger underdog", applies to the bb here. In other words, I don't think betting a pair of jacks has much value, since there are more likely hands Mason would call or re-raise and win with (any ace, KK, QQ, JJ), than call and lose with (99, TT?).

I know there are bad players who play 80-160, but Mason is still risking 3 bets to win (maybe), 1 more. He would have to think the bb is betting a hand he shouldn't AND would pay off a raise.

FWIW- In trying to put the bb on a hand, I think it's likely he flopped a set of deuces and was going to c/r the turn, but became worried he'd miss a bet after he makes an under-full. Or.. If he has an ace, it's AJ or A2s, and he tried twice to go for 3-bets. Or.. He has some hopeless hand he wouldn't call a raise with anyway. Of course, I'm probably wrong and he could also have been betting a worse ace. But I'm hearing a lot about how strong Mason's hand is, but very little in the way of convincing arguments about what hands his opponent could have that would make raising the river such a +EV play.

Bill C · #69 01-10-2005, 07:36 PM

[quote

mason doesnt do "tells".

[/ QUOTE ]

Does he do "crying calls?" [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Mason must have some kind of read on BB, else his play seems unreasonable. While it's hard to say what BB may be holding, Mason's hand isn't that hard to guess. Mason knows that, and knows BB knows that too, and if he didn't respect this player he almost certainly would raise turn and or river. Yet he calls down, which means to me that he has a way to KNOW that BB has a good chance of having him beat or tied. Maybe BB leaned over and said, "Boy, Mason, it's a bitch playing big slick, ain't it?" [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

bill

bobbyi · #70 01-10-2005, 07:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I hear ya. Most of the time I'm firing that 3rd barrel, it's on a board where there was a flush or straight draw that doesn't come on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your good ace is beating a busted draw. If you are out of position, I would much perfer to check and let the busted draw bluff, which it often will. He certainly isn't paying you off if you bet. With position, it's less clear since you can no longer try to induce a bluff, but I still think you get paid off by a worse hand (presumably a busted nut flush) too rarely and you aren't going to get someone to lay down a pair because he has to consider that you can be the one on the busted draw (although this may be less true with certain boards and action, as it's hard to put a preflop raiser on a baby straight draw). I really don't see this is as +ev. If your opponent is on a busted draw, this is a classic case where he isn't calling your bet unless he has you beat, and he is going to call if he does.