5-5 NL at Foxwoods - very deepstacks

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
Even questioning a call here means that you're probably playing too high above your limit/bankroll. When you get in for the minimum, people are going to assume that you are wary of losing it and will try to bully. If he turns over the straight, at least you got the river to try and fill up.

[/ QUOTE ]

To correct you -

1) I posted this hand because I am questioning how I played the hand as a whole (i.e. not raising preflop) and to get the thought process of other posters when deciding how to play this hand in this game.

2) I am also questioning a call here because Villain has bet $900 into a $160 pot.

3) If you re-read my post you will notice that Villian has no idea how much I bought in for as he just recently sat down. All he knows is that I have $1K in front of me. For all he knows I bought in for $3K and have lost $2K.

[thabadguy]

The following advice is based on what i have seen about the avg play at the FW game, and only the FW game.
1)Raise pf.
2)The reason he fired that bet into you on the turn is because of limp preflop, the villain is not putting you on TT here at all..almost always he is doing this with nothing and trying to take it away.
I would raise preflop..overbet flop, either pot/cr all in on turn.
With 1k here its a nobrainer about getting ur stack in here.

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is, by buying in for the minimum in this game, where people are routinely sitting down w/ 1000 BBs+++, you might as well hang a sign around your neck that says, "weak-tight nut peddler: raise me at will."

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you saying that I can't use that to my advantage?

I did in an earlier hand which is how I doubled up.

I raised to 30 with AKo.

Got 2 callers behind me - flop KK9.

I make a continuation bet of $70, get one caller.

Turn T.

I check, Villain checks.

River 8 - I check Villain bets 250, I CR all in and double up.

I fully expect these guys to try and push me around. A lot of people would criticize me for checking the turn and river but wearing the "weak-tight" nut-peddler sign around my neck I thought it was the best way to get my money in the middle.

I was right.

So do you think that hand made it more or less-likey that they would try to bully me later on?

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was up at Foxwoods for the weekend and decided to try out the 5-5NL game there.
I bought in for the minimun ($500) and ran it up to $1K when this hand came up. With $1K I was still the shortstack at the table. Stack sizes ranged from $1K to $12K.

No real read on Villian in this hand as he just sat down. I did see him show down T7o in a recent hand. So basically he could be playing any 2. But with stacks this deep, that is to be expected anyway I guess.

I pick up TdTc in MP and limp. 3 other limpers.

Flop ($30) - Th 7d 5c

Checked to me, I bet $30, Villain on my immediately left calls, everyone folds.

Turn 4d - I bet $70, Villain raises to $900.

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero calls.

Hero wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero calls.

Villain has 76o.

River 8.

Hero loses.

[LuvDemNutz]

Does your answer change if the turn is the 4s, completing the rainbow?

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]

So you would advocate open-limping in MP w/ 1010?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Mix it up (especially when you are opening), but mostly I would limp with TT here. The reason is that you have described the game as people way overbetting their hands (not to mention the pot).

[ QUOTE ]

And only raising w/ AA-JJ and AK?


[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't say "only", because you have to mix it up. Sometimes I would raise with 67s, but barely ever in this game (which sounds like a fish pond). Sometimes I would limp with JJ or even QQ. I mean, there are people raising more than twice the pot with nothing, remember?

[ QUOTE ]

Hero may be the shallow stack, but he's still got plenty of room to manuever w/ 200 bb's in front of him.


[/ QUOTE ]

You would think so. This would be the case in a normal game; however, you have described this game as being full of LAG fish who routinely over bet/raise the pot by massive margins, even when they are up against weak-tight nut peddlers.

[ QUOTE ]

I think not raising here is incredibly weak-tight,


[/ QUOTE ]

You have to adapt your strategy to differing game conditions. If that means playing like a weak-tight nut peddler, then so be it. Some games you should play tighter than normal (and vice versa). This is one of them.

[ QUOTE ]

and makes for all kinds of uncomfortable situations when the flop comes 8-high, for example, and gives us what amounts to a marginal overpair, which will often be the best hand but that we probably won't feel comfortable playing for our stack with . . .


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, playing for your stack with a marginal hand is not good. We both agree there is no need to do that. Imagine if (gasp) a real fluke occurred and an OVERCARD to your precious TT hit.


[ QUOTE ]

I think you are missing out on some serious value by not raising here. I'm not trying to be a dick, but have you ever played in this game? 'Cause if you're only raising w/ five hands in this game, you're gonna get slaughtered.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're not being a dick at all. Explain to me how I would get slaughtered. Even if I took it to the extreme and only set mined, apparantely there are LAG fish who will raise me when I finally come out betting the flop. They won't run
me off of any strong hands. They can keep the $5 blinds if they want them. What I want is for them to make one of their intimidating 2X pot raises when I finally come alive. Can they really be that clueless (again, this is how the game has been described in response to OP's post).

[ QUOTE ]

You're right, folding is not ridiculous, especially since it's an unraised pot, and villain very well could have the straight.


[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds like these guys call raises with garbage too.

[ QUOTE ]

Yet he could also have a smaller set, two pair, a pair and a flush draw, or a straight draw/flush draw combination. He could also have absolutely nothing.


[/ QUOTE ]

So why is it wrong to set mine in this game?

[ QUOTE ]

The point is, by buying in for the minimum in this game, where people are routinely sitting down w/ 1000 BBs+++, you might as well hang a sign around your neck that says, "weak-tight nut peddler: raise me at will."


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, this makes no sense. I WANT them to raise my bets (or should I just say "sets"). Nut peddlers love LAG fish who think the proper thing to do is aggressively raise a nut peddler who is sitting with a short stack.

[ QUOTE ]

If I'm sitting there in that game w/ only a grand in front of me, I feel pretty good about getting my stack in with top set here, and if I lose, then so be it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

[ QUOTE ]

And one more thing: if OP had popped it up to $35/$40 or so preflop (standard open for the foxwoods 5-5 game), then the straight would be at least somewhat less of a concern, and hero's hand becomes a bit easier to play, imo.


[/ QUOTE ]

If the standard open is 8X the BB, then I would advocate playing very tightly preflop.

Is hero looking to double through or play easy hands? My main source of confusion is this; you describe the hero as probably being way ahead, but you want him to make the hand "easier" to play.

What can be easier than set mining in this game? It really sounds like a great place to buy in for $800 or so and double through the LAGs who are playing very deep stack no limit with each other. From all the descriptions we have read, they just love to put the "short" stacks all-in with all kinds of holdings. Sign me up...

Just to return to one of my earlier points...

How do you reconcile these two ideas (both of which you seem to espouse, if I am not mistaken):
1. you need to raise PF with TT to start building a pot
2. people will raise you all-in for many times the pot
with semi-bluffs or pure air

Is it because you think LAGs playing with 1000BBs will fold to a MP opener who routinely raises all kinds of hands? They may all fold if they have nothing and you are the only one in the pot with them. I rather play the TT for set value against these hyper aggressive fish, rather than take their blinds. The reason I am calling them "fish" is because that is how they are being described.

[LuvDemNutz]

Frankly, I am disappointed with most of the responses in this thread. I think Post-Oak, neon and Thabadguy are the only ones that had anything remotely worthwhile to say at all.

I think that those of you (and this is most of you) that are arguing that this is an “insanely” easy call, are idiots.

Rounding off a bit – I have to call $900 to win $1100. So I am getting about 1.22 to 1 on my money.

1/1.22 = .82 – so for this to be a “correct” call in the long run, I need to be ahead about 82% of the time. Now, of course if I am behind I will catch up about 25% of the time so, that 82% is reduced to about 60%. But there are also the times where Villain is semi-bluffing, I AM ahead but HE catches up and I lose. But anyway, to be conservative let’s just stick with 60%.

No one has really bothered to put my opponent on a hand. To me it is pretty simple – either he has the nuts or is semi-bluffing with a pair + diamond draw or 8d9d.

I would be really, really, really surprised to see 44 or 77 here. I cannot think of a single time I have seen someone play a set like that. Smooth-call flop, massive overbet on the turn just seems like a completely moronic way to build a pot with a set. Also, what possible two-pair hands could he have? T5, T4 are not likely for obvious reasons and 75 likely raises the flop. Also, is Villain making a $900 turn bet with any of these?

Remember also, that the only read I have on my opponent is that he limped with T7o. So, I know that he is loose – but I know nothing about his aggression.

So with that as my ONLY real read, do you all really think I am ahead here more than 60% of the time?

Against a “loose” unknown what is more likely?

a) He smooth calls the flop with an OESD and makes a massive overbet with the nuts on the turn (possibly playing with scared money and not wanting to be out-drawn himself), OR
b) He calls the flop with 8d9d, or pair + backdoor flush and makes a $900 semi-bluff into a $160 pot?

I am curious – how many of you routinely make huge semi-bluffs like this?

Thabadguy – I know you’d love to have me in your game because I’d even contemplate a fold here but if you were the Villain in this hand, given that I know you are LAG (the “AG” being the important part) of course I am much more likely to call. But against someone who I only know to be loose, I think it’s a different story entirely.

This game is about the RELATIVE strength of hands and what odds you are getting on your money.

----------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, in the actual hand there was just no way I could make myself fold. I called, Villain showed 86o for the nuts. The river didn’t pair the board.

As far as not raising pre-flop goes, I didn’t raise for many of the reasons Post-Oak cites in his post. For one, I was “mixing it up”. Secondly, with stacks this deep, I didn’t think raising to $30-$35 would do much to “narrow” the field.
It is hard to say if this particular hand would’ve played any different had I raised. I do think that whether or not to raise with TT in these game conditions makes for interesting discussion.

[HiatusOver]

WOW u called a bunch of people idiots and then displayed your idiocy by completely screwing up the numbers. And I mean COMPLETELY

U Said
>>>>>>""Frankly, I am disappointed with most of the responses in this thread. I think Post-Oak, neon and Thabadguy are the only ones that had anything remotely worthwhile to say at all.

I think that those of you (and this is most of you) that are arguing that this is an “insanely” easy call, are idiots.

Rounding off a bit – I have to call $900 to win $1100. So I am getting about 1.22 to 1 on my money.

1/1.22 = .82 – so for this to be a “correct” call in the long run, I need to be ahead about 82% of the time. Now, of course if I am behind I will catch up about 25% of the time so, that 82% is reduced to about 60%. But there are also the times where Villain is semi-bluffing, I AM ahead but HE catches up and I lose. But anyway, to be conservative let’s just stick with 60%. ""<<<<<<


U realize when u have to call 900 to win 1100 u have to be right LESS THAN 50 PERCENT of the time...NOT 82 percent!!Actually a lot less than 50 then with the board pairing it is less than 40 I think. Anyways, thought this was pretty funny. Be careful when u call people idiots.

[Rabid_Hippo]

I'm thinking that Villain has put you on the flush draw and is betting $900 to destroy your odds and get you to lay down.

[Hoopster81]

[ QUOTE ]
Villain showed 86o for the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tough.

He lucked out because you had basically the only hand that would consider calling that bet. Most of the time someone who takes your line has AT/KT etc.

I think it was Aggie who said:

If you have 100 BB
Get it in when you hit your sets

If I have 200 BB, I am definately trying to get it in if I have top set.