Need a line check in the BB

[tinhat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't get the flop check - what's its purpose? Are you trying to build a bigger pot or trying to win this already humungoid pot? (For all you know utg limped a mway hand and 3-bet pf to maximize implieds and pairing 2's could beat it.)

IMM you should not be trying to tie 4 others to the pot - you should be trying to win it because it was already huge...

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the preflop call was marginal, but I made it, and I'd make it again at an unknown 6max table. 'nuff said.

On the flop I was going for building the pot with the anticipated agressor to my immediate left. The worst possible play would be to bet and have UTG blow everybody else out leaving me with no value. I have 15 outs, only 3 of which I'd even consider discounting (the 3 non-spade 9s)! I want every single one of those effers tied to the pot, as the chances are very good that at least 2 of them are contributing dead money.

Also, with 2 preflop aggressors, my chances of winning this huge pot without showing down the best hand is somewhere in the neighborhood of zero, if not less than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

When I see large flop pots I think of sshe/hepfap; "large pots" pg 148 sshe #2: "Sieze opportunities to knock out players..." So when I saw 16sb and a c-r on the field, it didn't seem like trying to knock anybody out.

I understand your rationale; and the way it played out is pretty cool. I'm just wondering, technically, what's "correct" here...

Mike

[milesdyson]

yeah you should try to win pots fast, but you can't win this pot without improving. so we keep everyone in to basically pad the pot for our draw.

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I do. 95% of the time a two-card flush (i.e. a flush that uses both of your hole cards) is going to be good, so until that third [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] falls and somebody's still going hard at the pot, I'm figuring all 9 spades in the deck to be good for me. I suppose I over-stated the worrying about the 9 falling...if it falls and makes my hand, I'm still losing to AJ, which I'd be losing to on the flop, so I guess all 8 9s and aces should be counted as good, too, so in reality I have 17 clean outs, here, until one of them falls and somebody is still hitting me hard (if the ace falls, of course, I'm not slowing down).

[ QUOTE ]
When I see large flop pots I think of sshe/hepfap; "large pots" pg 148 sshe #2: "Sieze opportunities to knock out players..." So when I saw 16sb and a c-r on the field, it didn't seem like trying to knock anybody out.

I understand your rationale; and the way it played out is pretty cool. I'm just wondering, technically, what's "correct" here...

[/ QUOTE ]

What's "correct", of course, depends.[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] However, with this big a pot and this number of players at this limit, you're not going to be able to knock anybody out most of the time, so instead you go for building the biggest pot possible with a couple of strong draws and hope that (a) you make your hand, and (b) it holds up.

[tinhat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This seems fairly sensible; but you said you had 10 hands w/them (IIRC) so really you have no idea what your worst outs are (IMO).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I do. 95% of the time a two-card flush (i.e. a flush that uses both of your hole cards) is going to be good, so until that third

[/ QUOTE ]

W/all due respect, IMO no you don't; I'm not sure you're following what I'm getting at: I have one and only one overriding thought here - the flop pot was plenty large to try winning right from the start. And that's all that's on my mind

So as simply as I can put it, IMO c-r flop means you have now virtually guaranteed that you MUST hit the fl to win. You have foregone what was already a great pot and (I'm assuming) tossed out any other options, locking yourself into a must-hit draw by tying everyone to the pot.

Consider the unk but assumed 3-out gutshots; betting into utg and praying for a raise, folding any of them is huge because if you hit your J's you're now not losing to their str. Tying them to the pot means that option is gone.

Consider the 45o idiot that isn't going anywhere now because he's put so much in the pot; he could conceivably hit a 4 or 5 and win; IMM ANY hand is a threat with a pot this large; folding them is an option now gone.

What I have the problem with is instead of having the fl as a backup if you cannot win the already large pot w/a lesser hand, IMO tying everyone to it right from the start makes hitting the fl your ONLY option.

I'm going to catch a lot of [censored] for this but IMM helps demonstrate my point; we're not talking about highly skilled, extremely clever players here; they're morons and I don't discount anything happening at $1/2 (and I expect to be called a moron after posting this hand):

Party Poker 1/2 Hold'em (6 max, 6 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx

Preflop: Hero is MP with 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Button 3-bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">SB caps</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Hero calls, Button calls.


Flop: (13 SB) 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, Button folds, SB folds.

Final Pot: 7 BB



Some ppl (maybe most/all) think betting flop is stupid; but IMO there is no other option on a 3-way pf capped pot - it's too big. I can either give up w/o even trying, get cute, etc., but I had 0 chance to win by checking and IMO is easily worth a 1 sb stab.

So the chance of folding pf aggressors is not 0; it isn't high, but it's not 0. My point is that assuming you're against awesome hands and fl is only alternative is I think a mistake. And, IMO, the likelihood of a lesser hand for you winning a 10bb+ flop pot by playing aggressively to eliminate instead of trying to make a huge pot even larger is FAR from 0.

What hands can be eliminated? Who knows; but my point is that you have thrown out right from the start any other possibility other than the flush. All I'm getting at is locking yourself into a must-hit draw is too extreme when the pot was big to begin with...

Mike

[MrWookie47]

There is a big, big difference between the flop in your hand and the flop in the OP. The flop in your post has only a K. It completely missed people who don't have a K, and QQ-TT may be scared of it. In the OP, the board surely connected with whatever villains have here. They have a pair or a draw to a gutshot or better every single time. As you said, the pot is gigantic. They're not folding, certainly not everyone. Every now and then you find people who fold incorrectly, but the overwhelmingly largest mistake you find in poker is people going too far with the wrong hands. Seriously, let's say you manage to fold all the aces because you bet and someone raised. Do you think that person is folding, ever? Do you think that person can beat a pair of J's every single time? Her's a hint. The answers are no, and yes. On a board like this, you have zero chance of winning by folding everyone. Additionally, you have to hit your flush or a straight to win. A crappy pair with the crappiest possible kicker is never going to do it.

The words "win the big pots now" are sound. However, they don't apply here. They apply when you have a strong hand and are considering slowplaying. Hero's hand here is uttter trash right now, but it has a huge chance of improving to be the best hand at showdown. The other place it applies is if the board and your hand reading suggest that you can fold better hands. I challenge you to name two hands that typical internet opponents would play this way preflop and then fold the flop.

[bozlax]

[ QUOTE ]
W/all due respect, IMO no you don't; I'm not sure you're following what I'm getting at: I have one and only one overriding thought here - the flop pot was plenty large to try winning right from the start. And that's all that's on my mind

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I get that. How, exactly, do you propose that I do that in an enormous pot that hit at least a couple of my 4 opponents? That was a rhetorical question; the answer is it's not possible to take this pot down on the flop, leaving as my only option playing to hit one of my draws, and if that's what I'm going for the pot might as well be as big as possible.

The remainder of your discussion is predicated on the idea that you might be able to take this down on the flop. As I believe that's patently impossible, I'm going to stop talking about it, now.

Your example hand is night-and-day different from the OP hand. First, you're the first aggressor preflop; second, you don't have any other draws; third, the pot is nowhere near as big. In your case, I think betting the flop is correct.

[DCWildcat]

Yay for a flop cap. Uberequityfuntimes. Yay for the rest of the hand as well. As for getting 3-bet with two cold back on the river...yikes...fold? There's a sickening amount of hands improving here (KK, KQ, KJ, QJ, humdiddly hum dum dum...)