|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/3/2008 9:47:17 PM PACIFIC |
 $100-$200 Hand, Jim Brier, 10. Nov 2002 02:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is a 6-handed $100-$200 game at the Bellagio. I am in the big blind with the Kh-Th. The under-the-gun player raises and it is folded to me. Since the raiser may be on shaded values given the shorthanded nature of the game, I call for another $100. There is $450 in the pot and two players. The flop is: Kd-9c-7s, giving me top pair. I check. My opponent bets. I raise. My opponent 3-bets. My opponent may be 3-betting for a free card plus if I pair my kicker I might get another $600 out of him. I call for another $100. There is $1050 in the pot. The turn is the 3h. I check, planning to fold if my opponent bets. My opponent checks. The river is the 2s. What should I do? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Kevin J, 10. Nov 2002 05:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would tend to check (and call) . | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, jim grass, 10. Nov 2002 05:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Jim this limit is way out of my mind set at this level but hey let me take a shot and just say that i`d bet and get away from the hand if raised.. If i`m going to call a bet i`d rather be leading and give him an opportunity to fold. The power play ended on the flop and holding top pair with a decent kicker is quite worth the one bet to get him off the hand if he`s holding a smaller pair.. As your book I believes mentions a king is a card most players ignore and bet out against heads up.... The other factor is its a short handed game as you mentioned and he could be playing to suit the game conditions as mentioned where muscling the others is key..But plays solid from the turn on.. I feel he`s suited ( but no king) or has a middle pair.. jg on 10. Nov 2002 02:45 Jim Brier wrote: > This is a 6-handed $100-$200 game at the Bellagio. I am in the big blind with > the Kh-Th. The under-the-gun player raises and it is folded to me. Since the > raiser may be on shaded values given the shorthanded nature of the game, I call > for another $100. There is $450 in the pot and two players. > > The flop is: Kd-9c-7s, giving me top pair. I check. My opponent bets. I raise. > My opponent 3-bets. My opponent may be 3-betting for a free card plus if I pair > my kicker I might get another $600 out of him. I call for another $100. There is > $1050 in the pot. > > The turn is the 3h. I check, planning to fold if my opponent bets. My opponent > checks. > > The river is the 2s. What should I do? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, 3Kings, 10. Nov 2002 05:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| There was no real draw on the flop except for a possible straight draw. He might have QJ and 3-bet for the free card or A9 or A7. I would rather check and call picking off a possible bluff then bet and get raised and have to fold. Also, if you bet and he doesn't hit his hand or have something like 88, he won't pay you off anyway. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Andrew Wells, 10. Nov 2002 07:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| What do you think he thinks you have? You checkraised the flop, and with that board he should think it's doubtful you're semibluffing. He could be thinking of several hands you could hold with a king. By the turn he may also believe you could have slowed down with middle or bottom set intending to checkraise again. He could be holding AK or KQ and be trying to induce you to bet the river since the turn card doesn't let you pick up any sort of backdoor draw. If you bet the river, what lesser hands would he be inclined to call with? Would he have three bet you on the flop with a pocket underpair or A9? It seems there are more hands that he'll bet on the river than he will call a bet from you with. Maybe he completely missed with a hand like AQs and was hoping to pick up extra outs on the turn, and if so may bluff if you check. I would check again, hope he bets a worse hand, and call. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Lee Vaughn, 10. Nov 2002 07:33 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would check and call. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Jim Brier, 10. Nov 2002 11:11 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I bet the river because I thought my hand was good and I will get crying calls from many worse hands. My opponent called and won with A-K. I find it incomprehensible that my opponent thought his hand was good enough to 3-bet with on the flop but not good enough to bet the turn when a blank arrives. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Tony Martin, 10. Nov 2002 13:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Jim - that's how he got the last bet outta you ;) Otherwise, you fold on the turn. Tony on 10. Nov 2002 11:11 Jim Brier wrote: > I bet the river because I thought my hand was good and I will get crying calls from > many worse hands. My opponent called and won with A-K. > > I find it incomprehensible that my opponent thought his hand was good enough to > 3-bet with on the flop but not good enough to bet the turn when a blank arrives. > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, timmer, 10. Nov 2002 16:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think a slow play here with top pair best kicker is ill advised. But then again hold em and I have never been out on a serious date before. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, timmer, 10. Nov 2002 16:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Jim, For the same reason MC likes the bet I like the check call . I dont want to be forced to pay off a raiser with my top pair mid(ish) kicker . But then again I dont know bubkis about hold em and you know that. However, I think the bet is a ok play if you think your opponent seems like he might possibly lay it down or just flat call. Do you think this was an example of the gap concept in ring play? Did your knowledge of this concept effect your thinking on the play? good luck and keep posting. thanks -timmer | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Charles Kincy, 10. Nov 2002 18:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would've played the hand the same way you did, except I would've invited a bluff with a check on the end. But that's not to say betting the river is wrong. Are you sure this is a 100-200 game? Sounds like my 4-8 game. I'd just laugh and be glad I saved $200. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Mike Caro, 10. Nov 2002 14:58 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Nov 2002 02:45 Jim Brier wrote: > This is a 6-handed $100-$200 game at the Bellagio. I am in the big blind with > the Kh-Th. The under-the-gun player raises and it is folded to me. Since the > raiser may be on shaded values given the shorthanded nature of the game, I call > for another $100. There is $450 in the pot and two players. > > The flop is: Kd-9c-7s, giving me top pair. I check. My opponent bets. I raise. > My opponent 3-bets. My opponent may be 3-betting for a free card plus if I pair > my kicker I might get another $600 out of him. I call for another $100. There is > $1050 in the pot. > > The turn is the 3h. I check, planning to fold if my opponent bets. My opponent > checks. > > The river is the 2s. What should I do? Hi, Jim -- That's a great post as usual, but we don't expect anything else from you. To answer your question, I would bet about 75 percent of the time and check-call the rest (barring a tell that might prompt me to fold). The chances are very strong that you have the better hand at this point, since the opponent made a check that would be irrational on the turn for most legitimate power hands. However, at issue -- assuming you do have the better hand -- is whether you will make more money by checking or by betting. There's all kind of factors in that context. If I bet and am raised, I'm going to call, because I believe (against many types of player)s a raise in this situation is about as likely to mean a daring bluff as a legitimate wager from strength. An opponent mght actually think I'm trying to steal at this point and risk a raise with nothing in order to grab the pot. I need to also consider that if my opponent has nothing and folds, I've wasted my bet and diminished his chance of bluffing at me (by checking and letting him bet directly). But, weighing these factors and not knowing anything that would assist me in the nature of tells or psychology, I would usually bet. One thing, though, I would usually NOT have reraised on the flop (although I sometimes would). More often, if this player has any history of flinging chips at pots heads-up, I'm going to just call, then check and hope he hangs himself. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Mike Caro, 10. Nov 2002 15:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I forgot to mention one other thing in my previous reply. If the opponent were someone who I consider subject to manipulation and who was unlikely to be inspired to bluff-raise (which I want, since I'm going to call), I would normally accompany my bet with something similar to these pure-profit words: "Another Mad Genius miracle on the river!" Those words would be chirped in an enthusiastic, mystified, and friendly tone. The purpose is to enjoy the power of the bet without fearing a raise from a moderately better hand -- which I'd probably have to pay off. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Charles Kincy, 10. Nov 2002 19:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Well, Jesus, Mike, that's why I usually won't make the bet in the first place. :) But you raise something I forgot to mention in my previous point...if my opponent was the sort who would give a lot of action with Kx and then slow down, I *would* bet the river because I'd expect +EV from the bet *when* I'm called. This is true no matter what kind of game I'm playing in and I'm first to act. I can very frequently bet this sort of hand in a soft game, for instance, because a raise means I'm beat (and I can fold) and I'll get called by Kx. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Mike Caro, 11. Nov 2002 12:49 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 10. Nov 2002 19:03 Charles Kincy wrote: > Well, Jesus, Mike, that's why I usually won't make the bet in the first place. :) > > But you raise something I forgot to mention in my previous point...if my opponent was the sort > who would give a lot of action with Kx and then slow down, I *would* bet the river because I'd > expect +EV from the bet *when* I'm called. This is true no matter what kind of game I'm > playing in and I'm first to act. > > I can very frequently bet this sort of hand in a soft game, for instance, because a raise > means I'm beat (and I can fold) and I'll get called by Kx. Hi, Charles -- Good points. Just to add a thought, though... The problem with betting and folding to a raise against a sophisticated opponent is that most serious players (even pros) do this too often. I would bet anything that the cumulative profit/cost of winning players folding after a bet in such circumstances is a significant loss. It shouldn't, but it is because they fold too frequently -- tempting wise opponents to take shots. You need to call most of the time, unless you know the player well enough to be almost certain he wouldn't try a raise-bluff, or unless you witness a tell that implies strength. Game theory itself (which is pretty useless in analyzing sophisticated poker situations accurately, because it's impractical to formulate all the factors), dictates that you have to call the vast majority of the time. And practical poker makes it even more mandatory that you usually call. Of course, if you do fold, you'll usually be right in that instance, which can make you proud and enhance the illusion that you made money. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, WhiteLightning, 12. Nov 2002 23:04 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I cannot imagine that you could really fold to a turn bet in a shorthanded 100-200 game with top pair and a ten kicker. Wouldn't you just get run over in the typical loose agressive nature that these games take on? If players begin to realize that you are capable of laydowns like that, you could be facing some real tricky play. Although I am quite shocked to hear that your opponent checked the turn with AK. A bet-call and a check-call are the only two options in this situation (although some might argue a check-raise with a good read against the right opponent). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Roy Cooke, 13. Nov 2002 06:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Jim Good question (as usual)......I would generally be tthis hand as I think the player has a weak hand and is trying to get tot he river cheap. I think his likely hand is a pair higher than 9's and smaller than kings. In those scenarios you gain a bet. If he is on a King stronger kicker you are calling anyway and that scenario equals out. I would only check if I thought the player would fold a pair under Kings in that spot (unlikely)! Roy Cooke on 10. Nov 2002 02:45 Jim Brier wrote: > This is a 6-handed $100-$200 game at the Bellagio. I am in the big blind with > the Kh-Th. The under-the-gun player raises and it is folded to me. Since the > raiser may be on shaded values given the shorthanded nature of the game, I call > for another $100. There is $450 in the pot and two players. > > The flop is: Kd-9c-7s, giving me top pair. I check. My opponent bets. I raise. > My opponent 3-bets. My opponent may be 3-betting for a free card plus if I pair > my kicker I might get another $600 out of him. I call for another $100. There is > $1050 in the pot. > > The turn is the 3h. I check, planning to fold if my opponent bets. My opponent > checks. > > The river is the 2s. What should I do? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: $100-$200 Hand, Aaron, 13. Nov 2002 11:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Okay, this is my first post ever on any forum, and I've never played anywhere near the 100-200 level, but from what I gather of hi-limit shorthanded games, aggression is key. Here is the way I believe I would play this hand, and everyone please attack my thought process however you feel, because in my very limited poker career, I'm way down playing holdem and way up playing Omaha/8. I tend to do better at the higher limits (HE), however. So anyway here it goes. I check-raise the flop just as you did. But I tend to think a check raise from the blind on the flop is a very basic move that many would try, especially at this limit. I would tend to check-raise from the blinds here (even from un UTG raiser, b/c it's shorthanded) with any top pair and maybe a pair better than middle pair. His 3-bet says very little to me other than he's trying to take control of this hand and maybe gain a free card on the turn if he has some straight or flush draw. I would think of re-raising here, and then folding to a 5 bet, because I think a 5 bet would represent AK, AA, or any set. Now if he just called the fourth bet, then I have no idea how I would play the rest of this of this hand. With a blank coming on the turn and him not 5 betting the flop, I may have a propensity to bet and not give a free card on the turn, but what if I check and he bets, (should I fold?). That's part of the problem with playing out of position with hands like this. It's interesting to me that your opponent did not bet the turn here anyway, so I'm thinking that he would not bet the turn if you had 4 bet flop. So if the turn goes check-check, I would check the river expecting him to also check, if he does then I saved myself an extra $100 on the hand. The interesting thing about this situation is would I call any turn or river bets? This would probably be 100% opponent dependent. I feel that a player at this level would be less likely to bluff a busted draw after 4 flop bets, since now the pot is larger, and he would probably get called more times than bluffing at a small pot. This is why I would assume that any bet is top pair with better kicker at worst. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|