|
|
#1
07-02-2004, 01:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
Typical 8-16 game at the Bike. Mostly loose players, with a couple who are solid.
I'm in MP with 2 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]. First 3 players limp, and I limp. 2 more limpers, SB completes, then BB raises. Everyone calls around to the CO, who makes it 3 bets. Button folds, SB calls, BB caps. The rest of us call, so 7 players to the flop. 29 small bets in the pot. Flop: Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Checked to me. I blink my eyes to ensure that I am in fact awake, and bet. Player on my left raises. He's fairly solid, a bit too loose. Everybody calls back around to me. I 3-bet. He caps. Everyone calls. Still 7 players, 28.5 big bets in the pot. Turn: 6 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Checked to me again. I bet. BB and EP limper fold, everyone else calls. 5 to the river, 33.5 big bets in the pot. River: 2 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Checked to me. I bet, only the player to my right calls. Obviously, MHIG. 35.5 big bets, which happens to be the biggest pot I've ever won. Yet, I feel like I left a few bets out there. Comments? 
|
|
#2
07-02-2004, 04:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
What could you have done differently except check-raise the turn instead of three-betting the flop? I suppose you could have gone for the check-raise anyway but I suspect you would have whiffed.
SpaceAce
|
|
#3
07-02-2004, 08:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
The turn seems like a good spot for a check-raise since the guy on your left capped it on the flop. Even if he had an OESD he should be the turn since he'd likely get 5 or 6 to one on his one on a 4:1 shot.
|
|
#4
07-02-2004, 08:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
No, you played it fine. You could be losing to another set at the turn and you can't rely on your 1 outer to fall [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Not betting the river would and having it checked around would have been even sadder!
|
|
#5
07-02-2004, 08:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
[ QUOTE ]
No, you played it fine. You could be losing to another set at the turn and you can't rely on your 1 outer to fall [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Not betting the river would and having it checked around would have been even sadder! [/ QUOTE ] Are you saying that he shouldn't try to check-raise the turn because he might be behind?
|
|
#6
07-02-2004, 09:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
With so many players in, solid players who capped preflop and flop, I guess I am saying to not be supra-aggro with a check raise. That said, only QQ, TT and 66 are ahead so maybe I'm wrong. But QQ and TT are very possible too, with the guy capping the flop like that.
We don't know what they had, does Seven of Nine? whoops wrong channel
|
|
#7
07-02-2004, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
The player on my left who capped the flop claimed afterwards that he had AA. I'm not sure whether to believe him or not, because he tended to be a fairly aggressive player pre-flop, yet he didn't put in any raises, even when he had the chance to limp re-raise.
The player to his left, the one who 3-bet before the flop, showed KJ after he missed on the river. The only guy who called me on the river said he had 77, which I believe. After I played the hand, I wasn't sure if I should have gone for a checkraise on the turn or not. I bet because I felt like it would have been a disaster to let it check around in a pot that size...not because I'm worried about free cards, but just because I want to get as much money in there as possible. How confident do I need to be that the player to my left will bet in order to make checking the right play?
|
|
#8
07-02-2004, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
Hmm, so you're limping with those small pockets pairs, just watch your variance [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
A long time ago, way before Al Gore invented the internet, I read an article, I forget by whom, which addressed the issue of never slow playing bottom set. I have, over the years, followed this advice, and I believe it to be sound. I think you played the hand just fine (not counting the pre-flop limp). Jim
|
|
#9
07-02-2004, 01:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
Jim,
I don't often play 22, but I was 4th to act and the first 3 players limped. In that spot, I'll call with a lot of hands, including any pair. With just 2 out of 3 limpers, I may or may not call depending on the table, and with just 1 ahead of me I definitely fold. I was grumbling internally by the time it got capped, but obviously that stopped when I saw the flop. Scott
|
|
#10
07-02-2004, 01:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Enormous pot - but should it have been enormous-er?
[ QUOTE ]
I think you played the hand just fine (not counting the pre-flop limp). [/ QUOTE ] Are you advocating a preflop raise with 22 after 3 limpers or a fold? Please advise and explain your reasoning. edit: my point is that flopping a set is a little over 8/1 and his pot odds are already 6/1 assuming the BB checks and SB calls. the implied odds are huge after that if he flops the set and his opponents skill is considerably less than his, plus he can so easily toss the hand away for any flop that doesnt include a 2 or a straight draw.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
