|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/2/2008 6:20:16 PM PACIFIC |
 Hand Decision(s), RamDannyboy, 22. Apr 2003 04:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is a low-limit holdem hand where I think....well, here is the hand. The table was loose passive. Six limpers (including button and SB) to me in the BB with 6s 7h. I check my option. Flop: Qc Qs 5h Gets checked around. Turn: 6h Checks to Button who bets. I'm the only caller. River: 7d I check. Button bets. Now what? Do I have sufficient reason to call? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), Tommy waggoner, 22. Apr 2003 04:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would say that you have a clear call in that spot. With the flop being checked, it is possible for the button to try and represent a queen on the turn, or he might have a five or six, which you can beat both of those hands. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), Paul Stine, 22. Apr 2003 06:01 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 22. Apr 2003 04:09 RamDannyboy wrote: > This is a low-limit holdem hand where I think....well, here is the hand. > > The table was loose passive. > > Six limpers (including button and SB) to me in the BB with 6s 7h. I check my > option. > > Flop: Qc Qs 5h > > Gets checked around. > > Turn: 6h > > Checks to Button who bets. I'm the only caller. > > River: 7d > > I check. Button bets. > Now what? Do I have sufficient reason to call? > You are getting 6:1 on your call and you call closes the action (i.e., there isn't anyone to act after you) I think you should call. You only have to win 1 time in 7 to break even. Essentially, you are risking 1 hours' win for 6 hours win. If your opponent shows a Q then you gain information about how he plays, same thing if he is bluffing or betting a naked Ace. Call and make him show you a winner. In short, the situation is safe. You aren't in a position to get trapped for more bets. Paul Stine College Station, TX | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), stdioh, 22. Apr 2003 07:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I agree with the others that a call is warranted in this situation, but I don't think you should be in this situation exactly. I believe that it is necessary with the small pairs like that to play hard. Now nobody bet the flop,so if anybody has a queen then they are slowplaying it. I would say that the turn is the time for an exploratory bet with your small, but not terrible, pair. You might take all the money now. If you get just a caller then you almost certainly have the best hand and if you get raised then you can make your decision then and there to call or muck (I'd probably still call). By playing the hand hard, you're liable to fold out players with overcards to your pair, which you must do in order to win this hand on the river. That said, when the guy bet on the turn, if I hadn't led, I would checkraise him. That is essentially screaming that you have a queen and you might get him to fold a pair higher than 7's. Then if he reraises you should almost certainly give up now, but if he calls you, press him on the river. If he calls you here, then he is essentially telling you that he is beat. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), Andrew Wells, 22. Apr 2003 14:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Both betting the turn, and playing for a checkraise from a late position bet are reasonable choices. Someone slow playing a queen is almost certainly going to need to get more in the pot on the turn, so with this many players I would tend to see if someone tries to steal and gets raised. There's still a lot of room between the queen and six for someone to continue with a medium pocket pair, and a checkraise against a single late position bettor is very likely to lose those hands if they decided to check again. If one of these hands bets from middle position and it gets folded to the blinds, then a checkraise from the big blind may be all they are looking for to let it go. I'd rather not lead out into a large field from the blind with a fragile hand, as either a call or a raise from behind are going to be a problem. Here is a hand that was going to get mucked on the flop if someone bet, so why risk getting trapped for a large bet? The checkraise has so much more going for it because it is from the blind and could legitimately have played trips this way. It also takes away implied odds for the oddball draws like 87 where a lead bet does not. Furthermore if you check, and someone bets with a caller in between, you can get away from the hand for just the cost of the big blind. You really do not want the hand to go to the river, so with fewer opponents I'd be more inclined to bet the turn. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), stdioh, 22. Apr 2003 15:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| > Here is a hand that was going to get mucked > on the flop if someone bet, so why risk getting trapped for a large bet? Don't take this the wrong way Andrew as I certainly respect your educated opinion and you make good points, but the above statement is one that really bugs me every time I hear it. It doesn't matter how weak you were on the flop - nobody bet and now you are stronger. The important thing is to make good decisions, +EV decisions. We can argue about what the correct or more appropriate move may have been, but I'll never be convinced that I don't deserve to be holding the hand I have at any given moment and I'll never softplay a hand because I hit an unlikely out. I'm there to fight for all the chips any time I can reasonably do so and if I happen to catch running quads, dammit I'll raise the river any chance I get. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), Andrew Wells, 22. Apr 2003 15:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Point taken. I should have said, here is a hand which nobody bet on the flop... I know better. It's still somewhat cheesey on the turn, and I think it's easy to get trapped for a bet anyway. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 07:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Fair enough...it *is* a dangerous holding, after all. Something that if you are going to run with you have to be willing to lose a lot of bets on. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), NiceFella, 23. Apr 2003 10:23 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| When you called on the turn, what were you hoping to accomplish? If the button had a queen, then you were already beaten and drawing dead. If the button had a 6 with a better kicker, then you were also already beaten unless another Q or 6 falls to let you chop the pot. In short, by calling on the turn you're hoping that the button is bluffing, and so you must also call on the river. I must admit that if I had been on the button in this hand I'd have bet with anything to try and buy the pot. In your shoes I'd have bet out on the turn to try and buy the pot, or I'd try raising the button after he bets out. If I met any resistance, I'd assume I was beaten and give it up. In short I don't think you have anything at all to gain by calling on the turn, and if you don't also call on the river then you're just throwing money away on the turn. Just my .02 NiceFella | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), NiceFella, 23. Apr 2003 11:20 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thinking about this further, I'm convinced that calling on the turn is a losing play, and calling on the river is throwing good money after bad. You failed to show strength on the turn by calling, and checking the river just makes things worse. If the button has any kind of hand, you've failed to slow him down or make a play to take the pot away from him. If the river is bluffing, your check on the river induces him to bluff again, because it's the only way he can win. So whether the button has a hand or not, the river bet is coming. On the turn you've got to make a commitment to put at least 2 more big bets into this pot or get out. Play aggressively or not at all. It's better to bet than call in this case, and even better to raise. This is an example of how passive calling is how you lose your money in poker. A bet costs the same as a call, but has an additional chance to win the pot. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), 4 POKER, 23. Apr 2003 11:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| On 23. Apr 2003 11:20 NiceFella wrote: > Thinking about this further, I'm convinced that calling on the turn is a losing play, and > calling on the river is throwing good money after bad. > > You failed to show strength on the turn by calling, and checking the river just makes > things worse. If the button has any kind of hand, you've failed to slow him down or make a > play to take the pot away from him. If the river is bluffing, your check on the river > induces him to bluff again, because it's the only way he can win. > > So whether the button has a hand or not, the river bet is coming. On the turn you've got > to make a commitment to put at least 2 more big bets into this pot or get out. Play > aggressively or not at all. It's better to bet than call in this case, and even better to > raise. > > This is an example of how passive calling is how you lose your money in poker. A bet > costs the same as a call, but has an additional chance to win the pot. I agree, 100%. If you're going to call on the turn why not at least raise the button now. All you have is a small pair so why let another player or the button draw out on you on the river? If he did have you beat then you can't do anything about it anyway, but if you're going to call you have to raise, no question about it. You either check-raise the turn or throw your hand away once he leads at it. I agree, Nice Fella, passive loose calling only allows you to lose the pot and gives you no advantages of winning it unless you are holding a monster. You must give yourself the best chance of winning the hand right there or don't bother at all. A ton of money is lost that exact way you played this hand, and it has no positive expectation whatsoever. 4 POKER > | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), stdioh, 23. Apr 2003 11:36 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think you hit the nail squarely on the head there NiceFella. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Hand Decision(s), RamDannyboy, 23. Apr 2003 14:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the great feedback everyone. The main reason I posted the hand was that I thought I missed an opportunity on the turn......which you picked up on. As I knew the outcome, I wanted to ensure my analysis wasn't "results" orientated. In the end I called and split the pot with 67o. Thanks again. | ||
| 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 |
|