|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/21/2008 11:00:42 AM PACIFIC |
 another questionable play., mongi, 12. Jun 2003 10:51 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I have JQ offsuite on the button in an unraised pot. The flop comes TT9 rainbow. Everyone checks the flop. A king hits on the turn giving me a K high straight. I bet after everyone checks to me. By the way there were 6 players in the hand. One of the middle players now check-raises me; He is a pretty solid player who loves to slowplay. everyone folds and the action is on me. I think about reraising but visions of KT T9 99 flow in my head. If he has a fullhouse he will probably raise me again. If He has trip tens he has outs to beat me at the river. Of course there is the possibility that he thinks I am trying to steal the pot from late position and is making a move on me. If he is betting the king he only has five outs to beat me on the river. Well a king fell on the river. He bet; I folded, he showed me a king for the fullhouse. He then said that if I would have reraised on the turn he would have mucked his hand ( I am not so sure about this, I saw him earlier call two bets cold on the turn with pocket eights and two overcards on the board,catching an eight at the river. So do you think that I should have played this hand more aggressively or is this just a case of getting sucked out at the river? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., mongi, 12. Jun 2003 10:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I am sure you guys figured it out, but I forgot to mention that I just called his raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., 4 POKER, 12. Jun 2003 11:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think you just got unlucky(out-drawn) that is all. You see by him check raising you on the turn means he very well could have a full house and there is no reason to raise him back with your straight because if he does have you beat, more than likely you will have to call another bet plus the bet on the river. You lose 3 big bets by raising him back when he does have you beat but if he doesn't have the best hand you will win 2 bets from him because more than likely when he doesn't improve he will either check and call or bet out with an inferior holding anyway. You wouldn't be losing that much profit when you did have him beat by not raising him there, but you will gain money from him anyway when he does pay you off. And like you said, when the 2nd pair now hits on the river, you don't even have to pay him off if you think he's full. You gain absolutely nothing by raising him on the turn and I really don't think he would have folded his hand had you did choose to reraise him on the turn. He's more than likely going to pay to see the river card to see if he fills up and besides, he very easily could have put you on the same holding as him; especially because your bet on the turn was a bet in the button position when everyone had checked it to you. You're more probable holding if not a steal bet, was a pair of kings opposed to the nut straight. I woudn't have raised him back but I would not have folded it on the turn either; you just got out-drawn. 4 POKER | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., mongi, 12. Jun 2003 20:28 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think there is good logic in playing the hand both ways. If the pot was bigger, say there was a raise before the flop plus bets on the flop then I think a reraise would be mandatory to take down the pot now.Also if there were other players left to act then I would definately reraise. In this situation there was not. It does seem suspicious now that I think about it that he would carry his slow play this far, but it is possible he was going for the check-raise on the flop and just did not get any callers. Now on the turn he is praying somebody will try to still the pot so he could get his check-raise. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., noiseboy, 12. Jun 2003 11:17 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I don't think the reraise is in order with a board of TT9, if it were something like TT7, then you could do it. With the cards close like that, the chances of someone having the FH are too high. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., Schuster, 12. Jun 2003 11:54 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm going to disagree with the other 2 posters and say you should have reraised. Lets say you just call the raise and a blank comes on the river. Now he bets again, and you likely pay him off. You still have one more big bet in the pot. If he didn't have the full on fourth street, he's gotten a "free" card to fill up by not having to call your reraise. But if you reraise, he will only put in the fourth bet with a better hand (the full house). He will just call (or fold) if his hand is worse. He may think you have the full house. Then when the river comes, as long as it's a blank (and not a king!) you can check it down. You've put the same amount of bets in the pot, but you've given your opponent a chance to fold with a weaker hand, you've charged him more to draw out on you, and you've gotten some information. The key here is that if puts in the fourth bet, you have to be able to fold. Even if he thinks you were putting a move on the pot, a vast majority of players won't reraise bluff at it. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., mongi, 12. Jun 2003 12:16 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In this situation, I still think it was doubtful he would have folded if I reraised. If the board was less scary I would have thought about reraising. He had only 4 outs to beat me on the end. Correct me if I am wrong, but I figure he was an 11-1 dog to outdraw me. That being the case if this exact situation came up 12 times , I would win 11 times, so why not just let him pay me off when I am the winner and minimize my losses when he has me beat or hits his miracle card on the end. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., Mark, 12. Jun 2003 22:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| so > why not just let him pay me off when I am the winner and minimize my losses when he has me > beat or hits his miracle card on the end. Because you give him a free card - and a free chance to draw out on you. While his check-raise shows strength, it does not necessarily mean a full-house, lots of players make that play with trips. Since you had trips beat, why and were planing to call on the river anyway, why not raise? If you are beat, you'll know it when he 4-bets, and you can fold - losing the same amount of chips as if you simply called the turn and river. If you're in the lead, he'll flat call or fold. this way, he is less likely to get a free card. Also, if he does just call with a lesser hand, you will be making more money in the long run. Don't convince yourself that playing passive is the right thing to do, aggression is the key to hold'em. mark | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., PairTheBoard, 12. Jun 2003 13:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Some things to consider. It is very tough for someone to check again on the turn after everyone has checked the flop, holding the 3 nines. You say he likes to slow play, but the second check is a super slow play. Remember, when the flop or turn pairs the board and everyone has checked the flop it is such a standard bluff situation that whoever bets the turn is suspect, especially the button when it gets checked around twice. If he has the 3 nines his slow play is most likely to be done by checking the flop and betting the turn. He knows people will suspect his bet on the turn as a steal and he will get calls and possible playbacks. Someone cagey enough to slow play is probably also good enough to make your turn bet for a bluff or semibluff. His check raise on the turn with the pair of Kings is an interesting move. Why doesn't he just bet them out? Well, you did say he likes to slow play. Partly, he is afraid someone has a nine and partly, he thinks his Kings are good. It's almost like a SEMISLOWPLAY. he he - I don't think I've ever heard that one before. He may also think his Kings are good and would like to drive people out of the pot, but figures just betting it will not convince anyone and if he can get in a check raise he can win it right there as long as nobody has a nine. I believe these are the kinds of thought processes that top players work on to give them such uncanny ability to put players on hands and always know where they're at. Now, if you realize a strong probabilty that he is making that move, what do you do? I think you have to consider who else remains in the hand for a moment. How many called your bet on the turn and how many called his reraise? Is it just you and him now? Maybe it doesn't make any difference. Once you put him on the move with Kings, the reraise is probably automatic regardless of the other players. I don't know. I'm getting tired of thinking. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., mkpoker, 12. Jun 2003 17:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I would have reraised on 4th Street, using the following logic: Generally, if you think you have a better hand than him, you almost always want to bet as much as possible for value. The exception is if you think you've got him beat so badly that giving a free card is OK. So that's the first question: Do you have a better hand than him on 4th street? What could he have had that was better than your hand at this point? KK? Doubtful, or he would have raised pre-flop or on the flop. TT or 99? Doubtful for the same reason. T9? Possible, yes. But as Schuster noted, a re-raise from you would bring that information out. If you reraised, and he reraised again, it would have been a real a sign he already made his full house. But a call would have signaled he was on a draw. Of course, it's also possible he would have folded. By just calling his raise, you essentially gave him 1/2 a free card. It wasn't really "free," but you didn't make him pay *as much* as you could have to see that final card. I'm not sure any of this mattered though, because you just got outdrawn. Had you followed my advice, and he called your reraise (which he said he would have), you would have lost *more* money. So what do I know anyway! --matt | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., Schuster, 12. Jun 2003 19:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think he would probably have to throw his two pair away if faced with a reraise. Even if he doesn't, I'd be surprised if the pot was laying him 11 to 1, and he would be making a mistake in just calling, a mistake that earns you money, even though in this instance, he would have sucked out. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: another questionable play., shorn, 13. Jun 2003 07:29 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| This is a tough one and the correct decision depends a lot on what you know about your opponent. Depending on his position, he very well could have limped with TT or 99 or T9. KK is not likely however, due to no pre-flop raise (in fact, it is always more likely that someone limps with AA than KK or QQ because there is no fear of overcards). Therefore, you have to decide if this player is capable of making this play without a full house. What are the chances that he has At or KT? Those are also limping hands. After thinking about this a lot and reading all the posts, I have to side with the re-raise on the turn camp. Your hand cannot improve from its current position and there are hands that he could have that you can beat. So, if he is drawing, you need to make him pay and there is always that slight chance that he will muck his hand. If he makes it 4 bets, then you have to muck. Basically, you are putting in the same amount of $$ (two bets) to get to the showdown because if he doesn't improve on the river, he will most likely check and you can check behind him. If the board pairs again (as it did) and he bets, then you have to fold. And finally, if a blank comes and he bets then I think you have to make the call because he could be bluffing with AT or something like that. But, I think it is unlikely that if he just calls your re-raise on the turn that he has you beat, so you won't lose that 3rd BB very often. | ||
| 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 |
|