answering questions on this hand

Submitted by : thorladen

PokerStars Game #6941684662: Hold'em No Limit ($25/$50) - 2006/11/08 - 12:26:13 (ET)
Table 'Jugta' 9-max Seat #7 is the button
Seat 2: stinkypete13 ($900 in chips)
Seat 3: AJsxxx ($3397 in chips)
Seat 4: robert07 ($5000 in chips)
Seat 5: 53495 ($2532 in chips)
Seat 6: hazards21 ($6857 in chips)
Seat 7: MisterMOTOWN ($8186 in chips)
Seat 8: PAUTA ($950 in chips)
Seat 9: thorladen ($12413 in chips)
PAUTA: posts small blind $25
thorladen: posts big blind $50
H@££INGGOL: sits out

Holecards
Dealt to thorladen
stinkypete13: folds
AJsxxx: raises $100 to $150
robert07: folds
53495: folds
hazards21: folds
MisterMOTOWN: folds
PAUTA: calls $125
thorladen: calls $100

Flop (Pot : $450)

   
PAUTA: checks
thorladen: checks
AJsxxx: checks

Turn (Pot : $450)

   
PAUTA: checks
thorladen: bets $250
AJsxxx: calls $250
PAUTA: folds

River (Pot : $950)

   
thorladen: checks
AJsxxx: bets $1000
thorladen: folds
AJsxxx collected $947 from pot
AJsxxx: shows (a straight flush, Eight to Queen)

Summary
Total pot $950 | Rake $3
Board  
Seat 2: stinkypete13 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: AJsxxx collected ($947)
Seat 4: robert07 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: 53495 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: hazards21 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: MisterMOTOWN (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: PAUTA (small blind) folded on the Turn
Seat 9: thorladen (big blind) folded on the River

obv i cant i suck someone pm me please and tell me how

omg i can do it now weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

This answers the questions posed when I posted the hand
sorry I didnt transfer questions but you can work them out I think


Answers lie in the stack sizes:

Not deep enough that i need to lead to stack him I wanted raiser to bet to trap shorty in the middle and on that flop the raiser will bet 80+% of time

That laydown wasnt hard at all at any stakes

So in summary I would say my check was the aggressive play and leading would have been passive at these stacks and my position to raiser.

I put this hand down cuz I wanted it for my students I think the play is somewhat auto in this particular situation

question: why am i not one of your students yet

come on let's bind together with wonder twin power and then issue a challenge on P5's telling GP that he and bigballs are going down

it'll be great fun

question: what makes you say that leading the flop is passive?

i'm going to be leading this flop a lot, considering that the preflop raiser only raised 3bb, his range is definitely huge and can include lots of lower SC's, 9T, J9 (which are unlikely to c-bet), AJ, AT, and all underpairs

seems like a lot of hands in there are going to check through the flop and there are lots of really really bad cards for you considering the board. i'd almost always bet at this flop, what makes it passive? seems more defensive than anything, since it's too often that the preflop raiser didn't smack this board, as I would be more inclined to believe if he raised 4bb and would have AK/KQ/KJ/TT/whatever.

i dont think the pfr is going to c-bet on this flop with a hand like a pair and a gutshot very often against two coldcalls from the small blind and big blind, it's too likely somebody connected strongly with this board, so i'd lead.

and at these stakes is AK really going to pay you off to a checkraise? maybe you could induce a 3-bet ai by KQ or QJ, but it seems like this board is really too scary for lots of hands to pay you off except KJ sometimes, i guess, but even KJ is close to a fold when facing a checkraise on this board (i guess it's opponent dependent though, but you are still repping a LOT of strength c/ring from the big blind on this board). it's really dubious for him to put you on a flush draw checkraising on a broadway board, because you'd be generally inclined to believe that the PFR nailed this board and hence you'd have little fold equity (and it's not that hard for him to hold the nuts), so he will not be likely to believe that you're c/ring for fold equity because you'd be scared that the PFR hit this board unless you hit it with a nut-like hand (like JJ), so i don't know if KJ is going to pay you off here often. and JT especially not.

potting thrice may get more value from AK than a checkraise, which may induce him to pitch it ont he flop.

lol you have students? how the hell do you apply ;p

why didnt you pot it on turn?

On November 08 2006 10:09 Pokerintheface wrote: question: what makes you say that leading the flop is passive? i'm going to be leading this flop a lot, considering that the preflop raiser only raised 3bb, his range is definitely huge and can include lots of lower SC's, 9T, J9 (which are unlikely to c-bet), AJ, AT, and all underpairs seems like a lot of hands in there are going to check through the flop and there are lots of really really bad cards for you considering the board. i'd almost always bet at this flop, what makes it passive? seems more defensive than anything, since it's too often that the preflop raiser didn't smack this board, as I would be more inclined to believe if he raised 4bb and would have AK/KQ/KJ/TT/whatever. i dont think the pfr is going to c-bet on this flop with a hand like a pair and a gutshot very often against two coldcalls from the small blind and big blind, it's too likely somebody connected strongly with this board, so i'd lead.

You are reading way to much into amount raised and not enough into his position(at these stakes few people vary their raises based on hand)

I would lead this flop often on draw, bluff, and made hand into raiser if his stack is deep.check raise i dont want to go into when i do it and how often(too much info)

The reason I think this check in THIS situation is the aggressive play is that if preflop raiser bets and on that flop I have every reason to think he will I am then drawing in possibley the real short stack and creating a bigger pot for the first guy to try to win( I might very well flat call flop and hope for blank to stack him or I might raise,see interview for reasons)


Thor

edit: baal originally asked "why not cr the turn"
because the 4 didn't improve anyone's hand obviously, and the PFR has shown no strength, so there is no reason to believe that he will bet on the turn, and he wants to get money to compensate for the flop which was not bet.

checkraising the turn might work sometimes if he has a bare hand like J9 or complete air, but with an underpair or J9/T9/whatever, he'll be checking behind fairly often and you'll get to the river with a set in a 9bb pot.

No longer reason to believe I would get that opportunity but is definately a possible play

The problem I see besides not getting it as an option is that the guy didnt bet flop on flop I expected him to bet so he got nothing or alot of something usually and I would rather get that info by betting the turn(sort of like controling the doubling cube in backgammon)


sorry this quote should have been why i didnt check raise on turn

On November 08 2006 10:42 Baal wrote: why didnt you pot it on turn?

On November 08 2006 10:43 thorladen wrote: Show nested quote + On November 08 2006 10:09 Pokerintheface wrote: question: what makes you say that leading the flop is passive? i'm going to be leading this flop a lot, considering that the preflop raiser only raised 3bb, his range is definitely huge and can include lots of lower SC's, 9T, J9 (which are unlikely to c-bet), AJ, AT, and all underpairs seems like a lot of hands in there are going to check through the flop and there are lots of really really bad cards for you considering the board. i'd almost always bet at this flop, what makes it passive? seems more defensive than anything, since it's too often that the preflop raiser didn't smack this board, as I would be more inclined to believe if he raised 4bb and would have AK/KQ/KJ/TT/whatever. i dont think the pfr is going to c-bet on this flop with a hand like a pair and a gutshot very often against two coldcalls from the small blind and big blind, it's too likely somebody connected strongly with this board, so i'd lead. You are reading way to much into amount raised and not enough into his position(at these stakes few people vary their raises based on hand) I would lead this flop often on draw, bluff, and made hand into raiser if his stack is deep.check raise i dont want to go into when i do it and how often(too much info) The reason I think this check in THIS situation is the aggressive play is that if preflop raiser bets and on that flop I have every reason to think he will I am then drawing in possibley the real short stack and creating a bigger pot for the first guy to try to win( I might very well flat call flop and hope for blank to stack him or I might raise,see interview for reasons) Thor

well i mean i understand why you would checkraise with a big hand, that's kind of obvious, but will he really pay you off with a worse hand on this board? and it kind of seems like he DID vary his raise based on his hand; he raised 3bb with Q8s from MP...

and even with an open ended straight flush draw, he didn't bet the flop :x

also how often do you think a hand like T9, AJ, AT, complete air are betting the flop?

personally, and obviously you'd know better than me, but personally I think that a flop like K82 would be more likely for the PFR to c-bet than KJT even though a lot more hands are going to hit KJT than K82 that are in the PFR's range, it's easier for NOBODY to hit K82 and for the PFR to represent having hit on K82 than for nobody to hit KJT and for the PFR to bet and win the pot. if that makes sense.

so i don't think he's going to bet this flop 80% of the time. obviously i'm not stating this as fact, i'm looking to be refuted.

I dont think what u present is any evidence at all that he varied his raise based on his hand

I expect him to bet around 80% of the time on this flop

I agree with you on the krag flop is more likely i make that abt 90% to be bet

On November 08 2006 10:02 Pokerintheface wrote: question: why am i not one of your students yet come on let's bind together with wonder twin power and then issue a challenge on P5's telling GP that he and bigballs are going down it'll be great fun

I agree it would be fun but have to pass for now

eh, i dunno... do you think he'd bet the flop with an underpair? with T9? with AT?

what hands do you think he'd be likely to check back on the flop with?

betting onto an extremely coordinated board into 2 callers from the blinds after raising EP, in a 3-way pot, i don't c-bet anywhere near 80% of the time...

is it just the increasedly aggressive dynamic of the game or is it standard to c-bet very often in 3-way pots?

and what would you do with a strong but vulnerable hand on this board like JTs? would you lead it? still c/r? shut down if your c/r gets called? or do you have to make sure your line is consistent for your big hands and medium hands, so you have to do the same thing?

also, you seem to not have responded to this post, could you offer some thoughts real quick?

On November 08 2006 10:11 Pokerintheface wrote: and at these stakes is AK really going to pay you off to a checkraise? maybe you could induce a 3-bet ai by KQ or QJ, but it seems like this board is really too scary for lots of hands to pay you off except KJ sometimes, i guess, but even KJ is close to a fold when facing a checkraise on this board (i guess it's opponent dependent though, but you are still repping a LOT of strength c/ring from the big blind on this board). it's really dubious for him to put you on a flush draw checkraising on a broadway board, because you'd be generally inclined to believe that the PFR nailed this board and hence you'd have little fold equity (and it's not that hard for him to hold the nuts), so he will not be likely to believe that you're c/ring for fold equity because you'd be scared that the PFR hit this board unless you hit it with a nut-like hand (like JJ), so i don't know if KJ is going to pay you off here often. and JT especially not. potting thrice may get more value from AK than a checkraise, which may induce him to pitch it ont he flop.

If you dont bet that flop Pokerintheface I think you are making a big mistake.

At lower levels especially raises get called by setminers or gamblers or flush draws etc, etc.

Bet the flop in this situation in my opinion at lower levels 100%

There now your my student

On November 08 2006 10:59 Pokerintheface wrote: also, you seem to not have responded to this post, could you offer some thoughts real quick? Show nested quote + On November 08 2006 10:11 Pokerintheface wrote: and at these stakes is AK really going to pay you off to a checkraise? maybe you could induce a 3-bet ai by KQ or QJ, but it seems like this board is really too scary for lots of hands to pay you off except KJ sometimes, i guess, but even KJ is close to a fold when facing a checkraise on this board (i guess it's opponent dependent though, but you are still repping a LOT of strength c/ring from the big blind on this board). it's really dubious for him to put you on a flush draw checkraising on a broadway board, because you'd be generally inclined to believe that the PFR nailed this board and hence you'd have little fold equity (and it's not that hard for him to hold the nuts), so he will not be likely to believe that you're c/ring for fold equity because you'd be scared that the PFR hit this board unless you hit it with a nut-like hand (like JJ), so i don't know if KJ is going to pay you off here often. and JT especially not. potting thrice may get more value from AK than a checkraise, which may induce him to pitch it ont he flop.

I sort of answered it but you had to read into what I said I guess.(heres some hints)

AK might pay me off if I check raise and third player is in as there is great odds
Who says Im check raising???????

well i play 3/6, does that count as a low limit?

i don't quite understand when you say if you don't bet the flop you're making a big mistake, do you mean to checkraise the flop is a mistake? or to not checkraise is a mistake? or what?

kind of confusing; are you saying checkraising is good at 25/50 but leading is better at lower limits?

Im saying that when you raise and this is the flop and you get 2 callers(from any position for simplicity)

BET THIS FLOP ALWAYS

oh... :x i tend to check a lot in 3-way pots on coordinated boards like this if i miss, since i'm not an avid 2-barreler. maybe i should start doing that more.

so basically you're trying to say that you're trying to represent isolating the shortstack with a hand that is possibly worse than AK? but still it seems kind of dubious, since the hands that he beats with AK he only has like a 60% edge over (pair+sd type hands), and there are a lot of hands that he's behind also...

if the player in the middle were fullstacked, how would you play the hand differently?

On November 08 2006 11:05 thorladen wrote: Im saying that when you raise and this is the flop and you get 2 callers(from any position for simplicity) BET THIS FLOP ALWAYS

whats the reasoning behind this?, its a very coordinated draw heavy board, your very likely to get a call or a raise, as pokerintheface stated. if so how would you plan to play on turn & river if:

1 caller, he checks blank turn (do you second barrel or give up?

if you give up with the hand if u get a call i think its ev- since i think u will get a call/raise over 50% of the time on that flop 3 way.

daemonicus read the thread or don't post

your statement has nothing to do with anything that anybody is talking about

and you didnt, you were totally lost, im saying why as a pf raiser u should bet 3 way in this coordinated board if ur extremely likely to get called, and u wont know if its either by a draw or a made hand so 2nd bullet sux vs draw and 3rd bullet sux vs made hand.

I guess he is saying it's a very bad flop for set miners?

yes its very reasonable to assume this flop will be bet. i think i probably lean towards check calling too. it clearly represents having a draw and creates a much larger opportunity to stack a the pfr. if a crappy turn comes its a small pot and if it doesnt work out thats ok too - not too much invested. even if pfr checks flop its not completely unreasonable to assume that you can get near his whole stack in on river if he has any kind of hand since hes short enough

Gross.. its like when u get to 5/10 and above you have to do everything backwards.

I'm pretty confused by the recommendation of c-betting this flop 100% of the time in a mw pot too.. at stakes like 1,2 and 2,4 you're very likely to get action....

i guess a double barrel on a safe turn will fold out most draws.. and the really strong hands like KJ and 1010 are likely to be check-raising on such a dangerous board. but there are alot of stations that are sticking around to the river with qj and k9, and KQ is a possible calldown hand as well. in fact at 1,2 there are so many stations that im pretty certain that cbetting/2barreling this board is -ev.

2 barreling wont make draws fold wtf..

do you seriously think a draw check/calls check/folds? no -.-

well if you opponents have a certain # of hands in their range. If they call with more hands then they fold with doesnt that make cbetting -EV? I guess the reason to cbet here would be because hes last to act. If he has a low pp and cbets flop he might be able to check down vs a draw, or if he has a draw and cbets he might be able to bluff out a weaker made hands on the turn/make draws fold. But I dont rly see the point in cbetting unless you have a pair or a draw.

On November 08 2006 18:31 Baal wrote: 2 barreling wont make draws fold wtf.. do you seriously think a draw check/calls check/folds? no -.-

1 card to come and a very transparent line?
ya i think they just might.