10/20 hand

[Ikke]

It's shorthanded, 5 people, with whom I have all played before. It's a mix of two good players, 1 mediocre and two bad.

I have JsJh UTG+1 and open-raise. The button 3 bets, SB and BB both coldcall, as do I.

OK, some player info now.
Button is a very good heads up player; I rarely see him play shorthanded though. I've played with him some time HU, and I think we both respect eachother play. Also, I have been running good in this game, made some succesful moves a good player would recognize, so my image is strong.
SB is a weak player. Too loose preflop and does bluff, but in a rather straight forward manner. I think I have a good read on him.
BB isnt too important in this hand, but is generally weak and bluffs too much.

The flop comes and gives : Qc Qs 4s

It's checked to me, and I bet into the button and preflop raiser. He just calls, as does the SB. (BB folds).

Turn: 5h

SB checks, I check, button bets and we both call.

River: Ts

SB checks, I bet.....

Comments?

Regards

[The Gift Of Gab]

To encourage the short-handed forum I'll post here instead of in mid-stakes.

I'm intrigued by the button's failure to raise on the flop. A middle pocket pair or a flush draw (which would have to include an overcard) should raise here to knock out the weak players in this already large pot. His call suggests to me either a very weak hand or a strong one -- AA, KK, AQ, e.g. -- that doesn't mind giving a cheap card.

On the turn, it seems you were wary of a strong made hand or a semi-bluff raise from the button, though I might have bet anyway to avoid giving a free card. When everyone checks to him, the button may have decided his Ace-high is best and fired to fold out undercards.

I like the bet on the river. The pot is protected by the presence of the weak SB and by the scare card. It should be obvious to the button that you don't have a queen when you don't checkraise the turn, but your hand was played like a flush draw and a better hand will have a hard time raising you. Even with a queen, the button would probably go for the overcall from the SB instead of risking a three-bet from you. I think a weak player would probably bet out on the river with a flush, so I'm not worried about the SB. Betting the river when the scare card hits also gets you calls from suspicious weak hands, so I think you get the best of both worlds.

Would you call if the button raised and the SB called? What if the SB folded?

[Ikke]

OK to recap:

"I have JsJh UTG+1 and open-raise. The button 3 bets, SB and BB both coldcall, as do I."

This is straightforward, although a case could be made for capping at four bets. It doesnt matter too much IMO; nothing interesting yet.

"The flop comes and gives : Qc Qs 4s

It's checked to me, and I bet into the button and preflop raiser. He just calls, as does the SB. (BB folds)."

With the bet I hoped button would raise the remaining two players out in this big pot. But, I wasnt suprised when he just called me. Here's why:

The button is a good player, and I'm sure he's aware that both SB and BB were weak. In this 13SB pot, if either the SB or the BB would have some kind of hand they would most likely not be intimidated
by a raise anyway. Furthermore, from buttons perspective he might get an excellent opportunity on the turn to make a play if I bet into him again. When he just called me, two things could happen IMO. Or he would
make a play at me on the turn with an inferior hand, or he's just trying to squeeze the max out of his opponents by letting the SB and BB in cheap.

Then :" Turn: 5h"

This is a total brick. The SB checks. He's a straightforward and weak player. The button, as said, is capable of all kind of moves. I suspected that if I bet I would likely get raised, and I didnt like that prospect.
Also, because IMO the button would bet almost any time if I checked; first ofcourse because he can't give any kind of free cards in this big pot with apparent draw, and by betting he can get a strong read on straight forward SB. Also, my play seems like a flushdraw or hands like AK.

He bet and SB just calls. What a relieve. I was about 95% sure he would raise here if he holds a queen, so in all likelyhood I have SB beat.

On the river the situation changes drastically with the Ts. The flushdraw got there. But SB checks. SB would have bet a flush here. No need to go for a check-raise. Even he knows that it will often get checked around and people have to call here when he bets. So I like it. But now we get again into the mind of the
button. OK, he might also know that SB is not likely to have a flush, but hey, that damn player on my right comes out betting again, who could very well have been on a flushdraw all the way. Furthermore, he knows that SB will overcall liberally. With what would it benefit him to raise here? Only a flush or full IMO. As Gift of
Gab remarked at the shorthanded forum, the pot is protected by the scare card and the weak SB. I very much doubt that he will raise a queen or worse here, but he would pay off a lot of worse hands, because he knows I can make moves (for instance with an AK hand if I thought I had SB beat, and there was a chance he
would fold).

So, coming to the results; the button just called and SB folded. I table my jacks and they are good.
Reviewing the hand history shows that button had pocket 3's.

I was suprised about the responses at the mid stakes forum who didnt give any reasons why betting might be preferable over check-calling. We should try to get more action in the shorthanded forum ;-)

Regards

[Ikke]

Great post!

Please read my results and thoughts post. I used exactly the reasoning you pointed out when I played the hand.

"Would you call if the button raised and the SB called? What if the SB folded?"

Tough questions. First, let me state that I think the chances of button raising are very small. If he still does so, I
would most likely fold if SB calls and call if he folds.

Regards

[The Gift Of Gab]

Ikke,

Interesting hand. Well played by you, though you can make a good case for betting the turn and calling the button down. I don't like the button's preflop play at all, especially with loose blinds that are liable to call a 3-bet. Since he can't beat a five, I think his plan of calling the flop and making a play on the turn is best. I would fold his hand, knowing that you're a strong player who's not going to meekly roll over and die on the flop. Since he has less than he's promising, as one noted poster would put it, he'll end up putting in a lot of money to protect a hand that is either extremely vulnerable or drawing almost dead, a problem well illustrated by your post. I've tried small pair isolation, both short-handed and in ring game blind stealing situations, and I would only use it against weak-tight readable players who don't understand what's happening to them. You seem to play a lot of short-handed -- what's your take?

[J_V]

damn....good post. The play of waiting to a later street to use a scare card to protect yourself from a raise, doesn't get near the press it should. It's a very good and advanced play.

[Ikke]

IMO small pocket pairs can be played aggressively, but you have to be sure the circumstances are right, and that you play them right.

First of all, you really need position on the player you try to isolate (an exception might be made in steal situations against a really weak tight opponent). Second, you have to be near certain that your isolation attempt will succeed. In this situation, with these players in the blinds, I agree with you that this second criteria is not met, and your postflop play will often be troublesome.

When I play small pocket pairs aggressively, it's almost always against weak tight opponents, where I will often win the pot with a bet on the flop. The idea behind playing these pocket pairs is that you are a small favourite against almost all of your opponents hands (except if he holds a bigger pocket pair), and that you can either let him make incorrect laydowns or that he will passively chase you with overcards.
But to be a small favourite it's very important that you get to a showdown in a +EV way (duh ;-) and that your opponent won't play back at you with lesser hands (often forcing you to fold).

So I would basically play small pocket pairs aggressively in a tight game where I'm in position and have control over my opponent. These are IMO slighly +EV situations that can quickly become -EV when used wrongly (and by quite a bit).

Regards