United Poker Forum  

Server Time: 9/4/2008 10:13:18 PM PACIFIC  
two LL HE hands, Schuster, 14. Apr 2003 19:48
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
I'm playing at the 2/4 tonight and the table is rather loose passive in general, although 1 or 2 were a bit overaggresive in the time I was there. I had 2 hands that I wanted some thoughts on.

The first, I was 1 off the button with 6h 9h and there were 5 callers before me. I called, and the button raised. Both the blinds folded and the rest called, so we take the flop 7 handed. The flop is

2d Jd 6s

So far, everytime the button had raised preflop, he would bet or raise after the flop, regardless of position. A lot of times it worked out to be a good semibluff play, but most of the time, he'd continue betting the turn whether he hit or not. His raising requirements were mostly solid though. It's checked around to me. I have second pair and the button probably does not have a jack. I bet, and to no surprise, the button raises. The rest fold around to me, and I call. The turn is a 10. I figure it's time to find out if he has that jack. I bet, and he just calls. At this point, I figure he was trying for a free card with something like AK, AQ, or the like. I also noticed that he would almost never lay down a hand when he raised preflop. The river is a blank that didn't finish the flush. I bet again and he calls me with AK and I take the pot with what I admit was a pretty big hunch (him having AQ or AK).

Of course, I was ready to fold to a raise on either the turn or the river, but it didn't come. I realize this play would never work at a higher limit game, but given the nature of the game and the limits involved, what do you think?

The second hand, I held 10c Jc in the big blind. 6 or 7 people called for 1 bet each. The flop is

Ac 10h 8c.

Hmm I like this flop a lot! I check, and the button (same guy as above, a bit over aggresive) bets out. 3 people call, and I raise when it comes back around to me. Everyone still calls. The turn is 7d. At this point, I figure I have 16 outs (9 clubs, three 10's, and four 9's) as long as no one already has the straight (and 13 of those outs will beat or tie the straight), which gives me a little worse than 2:1 against making my hand. Since there's 4 others in the pot at the moment, I bet out and get 3 more callers. The river is 8c. I bet out again, the button raises, and the next player reraises! The reraiser was very weak, and I figured she may very well have had the 9 for the straight, or a weaker flush. In any case, I just call, and the button folds. She has the 9 for the straight, and I take down a pretty big pot.

Thanks in advance for the help!

Lee
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Andrew Wells, 14. Apr 2003 21:07
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Even with all those limpers in front, 96s just isn't worth playing here. If you flop a draw it's often going to be vulnerable, and it almost always isn't going to make the nuts. This makes it difficult to play aggressively. If you flop trips, you usually have the best hand, but you can be outkicked or outdrawn enough to lose in the big pots. Okay, you flopped middle pair. Now what? You need to be concerned with all those checkers in front of you since a jack is a very likely card they would be playing, and would even call a raise with. So while betting into the raiser is often a better play than checking, your only real hope is to get raised and find yourself heads-up on the turn. That isn't likely with so many bets in the pot, a possible flush draw out, and someone besides the button who could have top pair. So I would have check/folded. If no one calls a single bet on the flop you still have odds to see if you improve on the turn, and you might also bet there if a blank falls like you did. You also can see if anyone checkraises and get away from the hand cheaper.

Your play of the JTs is not bad. I probably would have just bet on the flop, but your checkraise is a reasonable alternative. Don't count the 9c twice for an out here, and definately discount your outs as you are aware you can split the pot or lose to someone who fills up on the river when you catch.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Snorbolus, 15. Apr 2003 05:21
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
It seems to me that you are playing too loose. Even if you have absolutly no respect for you opponents poker ability you should nevertheless consider the posibility that they may be holding good cards.

My thoughts are:

Hand 1: Never pay anything to play 96s, not even in the small blind. On the flop second pair with an undercard (to the flop) kicker is a pretty terrible holding, don't bet it. Personally I wouldn't even call with it.

Hand 2: Ac 10h 8c is not a great flop for Jc 10c. Essentially you are drawing to the 3rd nut flush. You had the odds to continue but I wouldn't like it much.

Interested to see what others think.

Snorbolus
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, shorn, 15. Apr 2003 06:11
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
on 15. Apr 2003 05:21 Snorbolus wrote:
> It seems to me that you are playing too loose. Even if you have absolutly no respect
> for you opponents poker ability you should nevertheless consider the posibility that
> they may be holding good cards.
>
> My thoughts are:
>
> Hand 1: Never pay anything to play 96s, not even in the small blind. On the flop
> second pair with an undercard (to the flop) kicker is a pretty terrible holding,
> don't bet it. Personally I wouldn't even call with it.
>
> Hand 2: Ac 10h 8c is not a great flop for Jc 10c. Essentially you are drawing to the
> 3rd nut flush. You had the odds to continue but I wouldn't like it much.
>
> Interested to see what others think.
>
> Snorbolus

I wouldn't go so far as to say 96s is a "no way no play" hand all the time, but I think the amount of games/spots where it is playable is questionable. From your analysis on the button's play, I think your first call was very questionable here (since you knew he liked to raise on the button) and I would have asked myself "Given the button's propensity of raising, do i want to play 96s for 2 bets?" My answer would have been no. I also thing that you should have checked the river as you should only bet when you think you will have the best hand WHEN YOU ARE CALLED. Be careful marrying yourself to a read of an opponent and never changing course. Would he not raise on the button with A9s or AJ?

The second hand you played better until the river, but I agree with Snorlbus that your hand wasn't that great for the flop (you are essentially drawing to "perfect perfect" against two likely hands, KQc and AT). So, you may not have as many outs as you think. But, I like the CR here as a limit the field play. On the river when the flush card hits and you bet, it is raised and re-raised, you have to consider mucking your flush. As SB points out, you only have the third nut, and you have to think that the original raiser might cap it. Unless I would had a great read here or the pot was enormous relative to the 3 bets that will likely have to call, I would maybe have thrown it away.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 09:24
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
I think that you played these hands well, in general, but I think that a couple of questionable things went on.

> I'm playing at the 2/4 tonight and the table is rather loose passive in general,

Then you should be playing tight and agressive.

> The first, I was 1 off the button with 6h 9h and there were 5 callers before
> me. I called, and the button raised. Both the blinds folded and the rest
> called, so we take the flop 7 handed. The flop is

I'm going to disagree with my colleagues here and say that 69-suited is playable one from the button with 5 limpers in an extremely loose passive environment, simply because you will get paid off most handsomely if you hit your hand and it is easy to throw away if you don't. Even still, I think that this is a very marginally plus EV play, so don't think I'm saying that you should always play it here in any game - opportunities to play this little porker here are few and far between...but in this case I wouldn't say that it was necessarilly wrong.

> 2d Jd 6s

At this point I would chuck the hand. Lots of players have overcards to your pair to draw to or already have a jack or at least a pocket pair higher than sixes. Yes, it's possible to play the hand out and win it, but there is just too much risk in being taken for a ride. If you get callers you can get sucked along. What happens if your maniac raises, but gets other callers? Now you really have to slide in one more bet to see another card. You also know that anybody with a flush draw will hang on, so your outs go into the bucket too.

> So far, everytime the button had raised preflop, he would bet or raise after
> the flop, regardless of position. A lot of times it worked out to be a good
> semibluff play, but most of the time, he'd continue betting the turn whether he
> hit or not. His raising requirements were mostly solid though. It's checked
> around to me. I have second pair and the button probably does not have a jack.
> I bet, and to no surprise, the button raises. The rest fold around to me, and I
> call. The turn is a 10. I figure it's time to find out if he has that jack.

Do you really want to know that badly? He's married to the hand so what is the point of throwing money in? If you're sure that you are good, then by all means stick a bet in, but in this case I think that you should be checking and folding to a bet from him.

> I bet, and he just calls. At this point, I figure he was trying for a free card
> with something like AK, AQ, or the like. I also noticed that he would almost
> never lay down a hand when he raised preflop. The river is a blank that didn't
> finish the flush. I bet again and he calls me with AK and I take the pot with
> what I admit was a pretty big hunch (him having AQ or AK).

Now I take real issue with this river bet. You were very lucky to get called here. In general this is the sort of a case when you only get called if you are beaten. Now this guy was a total dip so he called you, but what if he had raised? Now you're stuck losing 2 bets...maybe he had AJ? Maybe he had 99? I think that anything but a check on the river here is an incorrect play.

> Of course, I was ready to fold to a raise on either the turn or the river, but
> it didn't come. I realize this play would never work at a higher limit game,
> but given the nature of the game and the limits involved, what do you think?

If you're prepared to fold to a river raise then you should not be betting the river - period. The exception to that is if you are making a stone cold bluff. But here, you are expecting to win by virtue of having the best hand. Check and then call if you feel you are good.

> The second hand, I held 10c Jc in the big blind. 6 or 7 people called for 1
> bet each. The flop is
>
> Ac 10h 8c.
>
> Hmm I like this flop a lot!

It's a good flop, but not a bag of wonderful. You've got a third nut flush draw and middle pair. The problem is that the board is very dangerous. It is rank with straight draws. What happens if you hit your jack and make 2 pair? Now KQ, Q9, and 97 all make straights...chances are somebody at a fishy table will be hanging around with one of those. So you've lost all your 2 pair outs. What if you hit another ten? Somebody could easily have you outkicked there. Unimproved you have to realize that *somebody* has an ace. So really the only way to win squarely is for you to make your flush in which case it *is* still only the third nut flush. And because there were enough limpers preflop, it is not impossible that somebody is hanging in there with KcXc and paddles you when you make that.

> I check, and the button (same guy as above, a bit
> over aggresive) bets out. 3 people call, and I raise when it comes back around
> to me.

Why a raise here? You have to assume that you're likely not going to win this hand unimproved. You want to draw to your flush and that means you want people in the hand paying you off. By calling the maniac you can be sure that anybody with any piece of that flop stays in to see another card and pays you to draw to your flush. By raising you will chase out players who are on legitimate straight draws and such - that is great in terms of protecting yourself if you improve, but now you're taking away your own outs to try to improve.I think that a call here is really the correct thing to do.

> Everyone still calls. The turn is 7d. At this point, I figure I have
> 16 outs (9 clubs, three 10's, and four 9's) as long as no one already has the
> straight (and 13 of those outs will beat or tie the straight), which gives me a
> little worse than 2:1 against making my hand. Since there's 4 others in the pot
> at the moment, I bet out and get 3 more callers.

YIKES! Now this is a real problem. First of all, you are not calculating your odds right. You have 9 clubs that will help you. There are only 2 tens left though, not three ( you have one and there is one on the board). If a ten hits, you are quite possibly not good...what were all those players calling with? There can't be that many aces out there - somebody could well be on QT or the likes. As for the four nines, one of them is already counted, since it is a club, so you only have 3 nines. Now, since the 7 is there, your straight draw is a little legitimized, but again it isn't the nuts. You could be facing somebody with JQ very easily. So nomatter what, if you make your hand, you are in a tenuous position, so your implied odds go out the window then and there - I would say that they are negative. You have 14 outs, not 16. And there are 46 cards left in the deck. So you've got a 1 in 4.5 chance of hitting your hand and *maybe* being good. There is certainly enough money in the pot for you to hang on, but betting out here is a bad bad bad idea. Check and call, period.

> The river is 8c.

At this point I would throw my cards off the table, shout the MF word and call the floor man. There are two 8c in the deck. :)

I assume that some other club fell, making your flush.

> I bet out
> again, the button raises, and the next player reraises! The reraiser was very
> weak, and I figured she may very well have had the 9 for the straight, or a
> weaker flush. In any case, I just call, and the button folds. She has the 9
> for the straight, and I take down a pretty big pot.

Important that you call here and not raise. She may have a weaker flush. She may have a better flush. Now because of that 8c fiasco I don't know if the board is paired or not. If it is, make a crying call, if not make a confident call. Nonetheless, you see why you can't three bet this river and that is important.

OK. So all said and done, you got the money, but that is not the important thing. The thing that I don't like is that you put in too much money when you didn't have the winner. There is a time and place to bet on the come, but early position is not that time. You're in an extremely dangerous spot here. Were I sitting on the button I would love to play these cards with this flop, but in the big blind, it is a dangerous dangerous hand - especially against a fishy table. This is a hand where I would be sitting in the weeds hoping to get lucky and ready to throw away my cards to too much overaction.

I hope that helps. And don't take the volume of my criticism the wrong way. I think that you played this hand well nonetheless...I just think that it could have been played better.

-Dook
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Snorbolus, 15. Apr 2003 10:54
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
You and Shorn both say that 96s can be a playable hand. I have to say that I am surprised by this. Nevertheless, based on your previous posts, I respect both of your opinions. My question is then, what would be a good flop for 96s, played from late position after 5 limpers?

Snorbolus

on 15. Apr 2003 09:24 stdioh wrote:
>...............
> I'm going to disagree with my colleagues here and say that 69-suited is playable one
> from the button with 5 limpers in an extremely loose passive environment, simply
> because you will get paid off most handsomely if you hit your hand and it is easy to
> throw away if you don't. Even still, I think that this is a very marginally plus EV
> play, so don't think I'm saying that you should always play it here in any game -
> opportunities to play this little porker here are few and far between...but in this
> case I wouldn't say that it was necessarilly wrong......
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, shorn, 15. Apr 2003 11:06
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
on 15. Apr 2003 10:54 Snorbolus wrote:
> You and Shorn both say that 96s can be a playable hand. I have to say that I am surprised
> by this. Nevertheless, based on your previous posts, I respect both of your opinions. My
> question is then, what would be a good flop for 96s, played from late position after 5
> limpers?

Something like 872 with 2 of your suit or 962 rainbow. No doubt, this hand is VERY marginal and you need the flop to hit you once if not twice. However, with 5 limpers in a vry passive game, you can take a shot and see what falls. If you sniff ANY hint of a raise from the blinds, then chuck and duck. However, I just don't like to say that any hand is always unplayable (OK, maybe 72o and 92o may be examples) = becasue it depends on the situation.
>
> Snorbolus
>
> on 15. Apr 2003 09:24 stdioh wrote:
> >...............
> > I'm going to disagree with my colleagues here and say that 69-suited is playable one
> > from the button with 5 limpers in an extremely loose passive environment, simply
> > because you will get paid off most handsomely if you hit your hand and it is easy to
> > throw away if you don't. Even still, I think that this is a very marginally plus EV
> > play, so don't think I'm saying that you should always play it here in any game -
> > opportunities to play this little porker here are few and far between...but in this
> > case I wouldn't say that it was necessarilly wrong......
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 11:38
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
You're basically looking for a flush draw, two pair, an up/down straight draw, or to flop a made hand. It is a *very* weak and crapulent hand, but sometimes you have pot odds to play garbage like that.

Funnily enough, I would rather play a hand like 96 suited than something like 8Q suited. A lot of beginners would scream at me for this, but quite simply, if you hit your two pair with 8Q you are more likely to be beat than if you hit your 2 pair with 96. If you hit your straight with 8Q you are more likely to be beat than if you hit your straight with 96. If you hit your flush with either then your chances of being beat by a bigger flush are slim either way - seldom will two of you be drawing for a flush and make it - unless a 4-flush hits the board in which case the 96 is in trouble.

Basically 96 suited is a hand that is really easy to play on the flop and beyond - Q8 is something that is too easy to hit and still lose. You also tend to get trapped in situations where you say, "I have a gutshot, but maybe my overcard is good too," when it isn't.

All that said, 96 suited is a bad bad hold'em hand, for sure. I'm just saying that there are times when playing it is excusable, just as there are times when playing Q8 suited is excuseable.

Actually, I'll tell you about a giant pot I once won and it was with Qc8c. I limped on the puck to a family pot only to have a blind raise and a late player 3-bet, but there were so many players in that I got sucked along looking for a really nice flop. I flopped a flush draw and a gutshot so again I got sucked along. Of course I rivered the gutshot for the nuts and another (not terribly honest on the whole) player claimed to have a better flush draw after he mucked. Nonetheless, I took down an $850 pot in a 10-20 game with this hand. The main reason why I think that my flush was good is that all the aces were spoken for and the Kc would have to have been with a king or another ace to be raised where it was and played in the way that it was. There is no way that my opponent had KX suited in this hand.

Anyhow, the point is that if you can play the hand really well, you can play some questionable hands from time to time. The trick is to *not* play a flop of 982 with your 96 suited unless you think you'll be able to take the pot down then and there.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, JunglingS, 18. Apr 2003 10:16
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
I agree with your assesment of Q8s, but with an additional bit to say. I am really careful about hands like Q8s, or even up to K9s or KT, as these are what I feel to be "trouble hands". They make just enough to keep you in the game, but are frequently beat. Personally I really prefer low suited connectors with max. stretch, something like 67s, because they get me into trouble a lot less, and when they hit, they play.

Don't misread this, now. I do play hands like KT when I feel it is appropriate, but this is a hand I play more heavily based on the person than on the hand itself (although that is important to). This is the kind of hand that I really push my reads. This is the kind of hand to be careful with.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Schuster, 15. Apr 2003 13:08
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Gah! The river was the 6c, not the 8c. The final board read:

Ac 10h 8c 7d 6c.

The reraiser had a 9 for the straight. Sorry!

That said, thanks for the input. I think I've been trying to play a little too fancy lately; definately not a good thing.

Suppose, on the first hand, I checked, the raiser bet, and it was folded around to me. Should I call and continue to do so, figuring he's trying to run me over?
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, stdioh, 15. Apr 2003 13:31
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
> Ac 10h 8c 7d 6c.
>
> The reraiser had a 9 for the straight. Sorry!

That's ok...I do that sort of thing all the time when I'm trying to rehash hand histories after the fact - you're only human.

> That said, thanks for the input. I think I've been trying to play a little too fancy
> lately; definately not a good thing.

Yup...there was an article in the last online Cardplayer about "playing backwards" ... I went through that phase in my play and wish I had readay the article earlier. When you get a little too smart for yourself it gets easy to start putting in money when you don't have a hand and not putting in money when you do have a hand. There are times when this is a good thing, but most of the time, putting in money when you have the best of it and not when you don't will pay you off.

> Suppose, on the first hand, I checked, the raiser bet, and it was folded around to me.
> Should I call and continue to do so, figuring he's trying to run me over?

Depends on so many things I can't possibly answer it here. When you're playing heads up it is all about bluffs reads and agression.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Schuster, 15. Apr 2003 14:59
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Thanks for the tip, I went and found that article. Big help!

If I were to check, he were to bet, and it were folded around to me, I think I'd call and then bet the turn if it were a blank. If he called, I'd certainly check the river and see what happened from there. This player did have a thing for trying to run people out of pots. If he's doing it at least 50% of the time, I make money in the long run, eh?
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, Andrew Wells, 15. Apr 2003 19:28
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
That's exactly how I feel about it too.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, stdioh, 16. Apr 2003 08:13
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
Indeed. A lot of players want to play back at maniacs too much. You'll make money calling somebody who overplays, but maniacs are also entitled to their fair share of aces and *more* nut hands on the flop than good players are allowed.
        Return to Thread List
 
 
Re: two LL HE hands, STEPHEN ROWE, 15. Apr 2003 09:35
    View ( Message | Thread )       Return to Thread List
IM CONFUSED . HOW CAN THE 8 OF CLUBS BE THERE ON THE FLOP AND THEN AGAIN AT THE RIVER? BETTER RETHINK YOUR STORY.
        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