Did I screw this up?

[peterbirks]

Perhaps it's my weak-tight nature that makes me hate getting stacked off with just an overpair, but in this situation I nearly read everything right. But that doesn't mean that my reaction to the situation was right, because the maths were too difficult for me.


HOLD'EM NO LIMIT ($0.50/$1.00) - 2007/06/10 -
Seat #8 is the button

Seat 1: Hero ($101.50 in chips) (Big Blind)
Seat 2: Villain ($120.60 in chips)
Seat 3: x-Amadon-x ($106.75 in chips)
Seat 5: Kualun ($19 in chips)
Seat 6: TECOJOHORITA ($50.90 in chips)
Seat 7: ghostface89 ($96 in chips)
Seat 8: fifty_00 ($57.90 in chips)
Seat 9: liny262 ($15.95 in chips)

liny262: posts small blind $0.50
Hero: posts big blind $1

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Hero [A◊ A♣]
Villain: raises $2 to $3
x-Amadon-x: folds
Kualun: folds
TECOJOHORITA: folds
ghostface89: folds
fifty_00: calls $3
liny262: folds
Hero: raises $6 to $9
Villain: calls $6
fifty_00: calls $6

$27.50 in the pot

I'd really prefer just one caller in this kind of situation. Two callers when you are OOP with Aces is a recipe for disaster.


*** FLOP *** [T♣ 7◊ 6♣]

Well, I really feel compelled to continue here. Opponents are more likely to be drawing than on a made hand. If I'm informed that continuing here is wrong, then I will give up the game, because I clearly don't understand it. As for the amount of the continuation. Well, I don't want to give RHO odds, while LHO I have pegged for either a higher pair lower than mine, or perhaps AK/AQs. Of course, he could have 10s, but that's seeing shadows.

Hero: bets $19
Villain: calls $19
fifty_00: raises $20 to $39


Bollocks. I know for a fact that I am in deep shit here; my estaimte is that RHO has a set of sevens or a set of sixes. So, should I fold?

Well, this is where it gets difficult, because I still might have LHO dominated, and LHO has more money. So, if I flat call, I create the opportunity for a sidepot. I'm not quick enough to do the numbers while playing, but a quick glance makes me think that I'll be near to break-even if I can stack off LHO. Meanwhile, of course, I still have two outs against RHO.

Hero: calls $20
Villain: calls $20

*** TURN *** [T♣ 7◊ 6♣] [2◊]


Hero: bets $30
Villain: calls $30
fifty_00: calls $9.90 and is all-in

The fact that RHO had nearly $10 left was fucking annoying, actually. I'm a lot happier with my play if he is all-in with his flop bet of $39.


*** RIVER *** [T♣ 7◊ 6♣ 2◊] [9♣]

Since my gameplan is to stack off opponent, and since I now have him pegged for something like Jacks or Queens, my bet is forced, or at least, that's how it seemed to me.

Hero: bets $23.50 and is all-in
Villain: calls $23.50

*** SHOW DOWN ***

Hero: shows [A◊ A♣] (a pair of Aces)
Villain: shows [8♠ 8♣] (a straight, Six to Ten)

Fuck me. 88? Scumbag.

Villain collected $87.20 from side pot
fifty_00: mucks hand
Villain collected $171.20 from main pot

*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $261.40 Main pot $171.20. Side pot $87.20. | Rake $3

Board [T♣ 7◊ 6♣ 2◊ 9♣]

Seat 1: Hero (big blind) showed [A◊ A♣] and lost with a pair of Aces
Seat 2: Villain showed [8♠ 8♣] and won ($258.40) with a straight, Six to Ten
Seat 8: fifty_00 (button) mucked [6♠ 6♡]


Like I say, this is one of those situations where, worryingly, it's not that I annoyed at a bad beat. What is worrying is that I have no idea about the game. I'm still not sure if I played it right or not. I don't see how I can carry on playing NL if, when I analyze the hand, I have no idea whether my play is right. Hell, that's my problem at backgammon. I feel that what I did was right, and I read opponents' cards correctly. But, and this is the rub, if I don't know what to do, even if opponents' cards are face up, then I must be in trouble at this game....

Oh, BTW, I still finished up for the session.

Comments

[countingmyouts.livejournal.com]

Hi, Peter:

Someday I will make an attempt at NL cash games, so I have a question for you regarding this hand.

If you are sitting the BB with AA, you have the initial raiser raises 3xBB and is called by a mid-late position player, is your reraise of the (roughly) size of pot large enough against two players?

Michael

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Michael:

Is the reraise large enough? By this I assume you are asking whether I am giving my opponents too much in the way of implied odds, and the answer might well be; yes, I am. Perhaps a larger reraise would be better. The call by the player in late position at this level often indicates a mediocre pair looking to "trap".

My problem here is that if I get one caller, I usually get two (because the first caller gives the second guy value). If I want to take down the pot there and then, I can simply push all-in. And if they call, I have the best of it.

So, clearly, I DO want a call if I put in any bet less than a push. The aim is to make the bet small enough for them to call and large enough for them not to have implied odds.

The fact that one of the opponents has a smaller stack complicates this somewhat, as I am already potentially looking at a main pot and a side pot.

But a big raise (say, to $20), has the downside of narrowing my range to my opponents (and makes it harder for me to get away from the hand post-flop). The reraise to $9 leaves them less sure, so I might get a raise from an overpair on a raggy flop, or calls from AK on a Kxx flop. Indeed, in many situations I would fold to this raise by the third player on the flop, which serves to cut down the implied odds for my opponent. It was that fucking sidepot that did for me.....

So, my answer is, yes, in retrospect and for future reference, I would probably raise by more. I might even push, given that I've seen opponents call with amazing hands in that kind of situation (putting the raiser on AK, I guess).

The problem with the big reraise is that it cuts down on the implied odds that opponents are getting, but makes it easier for them to play the hand post-flop. One could argue that, since they have made a mistake pre-flop, they will have to make up quite a bit post flop to compensate for that.

Sometimes the "oh fuck it. Push, and take the pot down" has its appeal....

PJ

[countingmyouts.livejournal.com]

The implied odds things was what I was getting at. Now, when I see the second player cold call the 3xBB raise, I think "set farmer". My reaction (which may not be correct, due to my inexperience in NL) would be to raise large enough that I push him out and his short stack in order to get heads-up with the initial raiser. If it pushes out the original raiser, too, so be it. I was thinking $15 to $20 for a reraise preflop. With AA I would really like to not face two runners.

If I get heads up after a larger reraise, I would think that I could actually be easier to get away from it post flop. Of course, that may be my NL naivete speaking again.

I am enjoying your NL hand posts and learning a lot from them. Any chance this was a hand on iPoker? One of my players was telling me how the play is there and your hand seemed to be a fit to his description.

Michael

[(Anonymous)]

Raise more preflop.

Why do you think that a bigger raise narrows your range, but a smaller raise does not?

In cashgames I just raise the pot (or allin) preflop if I choose to raise. So the actual amount does not carry any info.

Aksu

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Michael: I'm glad that you are finding them useful. I think that relating the "learning experience" is helpful, because areas crop up that the books either do not cover, skip over, or simply address incorrectly.

For example, I'm ploughing through the Miller/Sklansky book again (with new eyes) and one thing that strikes me is that it often says somthing like: "If you bet $500, you think there will be a 60% chance he will call with x, a 30% chance he will fold with y, and a 10% chance that he will reraise with x. However, if you bet $1500, you think.....".

To which my answer is "well, no, I don't. At the moment, I have no idea what the percentages are here and I have no idea how the change in raise size impacts on this". The only empirical evidence I have so far is that the people I play are far more likely to fold inappropriately than they are to call inappropriately. Therefore, if the object is to give your opponents the opportunity to make mistakes.... (complete this as you think fit).


Now, having said this, let's look at what little thinking I put into the hand at the time (my conclusion now is that I should have reraised $20, but I will come back to that).

Basically, even though I am giving implied odds, the normal situation here is "reraise $9, fold, fold". What this hand doesn't show is that it is not unknown for me to put in this kind of 3x reraise with QJs, 65s, etc. Most times (against decent stack sizes -- I don't make the play against minimum buy-in players because their raise effectlvely pot-commits them) I elicit a fold. If I don't, I continue the flop as above and, most times, I take down the pot on the flop. If I am flat-called on the flop then I prepare to check-fold the turn (unless I hit enough to beat an overpair). If I am reraised on the flop, I give up.

The other part of this reraise is that I do not justify optimistic calls. If you look at the "set farmer" in late, he is relying on stacking me off to get the odds for his hand. Usually I would fold to this flop raise (unless I had opponent marked as someone who might make a move -- but these are few and far between at this level during the daytime). So, most of the time this reraise by me preflop takes it down. When it doesn't, it usually wins on the flop. In addition, when my opponent hits, I don't pay them off, so they only get about 5-to-1 for their set, and they will only hit that set one time in nine. Net result for me, happiness.

(con'td below)

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Now, since I duck and dive and I am not repeatedly facing the same opponents, I think that I can afford to deviate from my standard Big/Small Blind re-raise strategy, when and only when I hold AA, without my opponents spotting this pattern (not for a while). It's not like a B&M game with the same opponenets all the time. I can put in the bigger raise (still hoping for a call from one opponent).

This is where the assessments come in and where I am unsure. Would LHO call the $20 reraise and RHO fold? With KK, would LHO reraise all-in pre-flop? (an added point on this hand is that if my $9 reraise generates a three-bet from LHO with something like KK, I am in the best position possible).

Still, let's allocate the hands "as are" and assume that LHO calls and RHO folds.

This gives me $80 behind and a $40 pot. I can then bet $30 on the flop and $50 on the turn. I think that if I bet the $30 on the flop LHO (with his 88) will either fold or reraise me all in. But I do not have Nostradamus-like powers. I'm not sure of this and I am not yet sufficiently inside my opponents' heads to know what the probabilities are.

If that is the case, I cannot get away from the hand with AA (and neither should I) and I have to call. The bigger raise forces the bigger continuation and makes it easier for opponent to raise all-in on the flop and harder for me to fold. After all, he could have any overpair!

Now, move back to the $9 bet. I now bet $20 and it's much harder for LHO (indeed, his call here is rather weak, given the player sitting behind). If LHO folds (as he should) and RHO puts in the raise he did, then I can get away from the hand. The failure to three-bet by RHO pre-flop makes this look like a middle-pair that hit.

So, overall, although I do like the bigger reraise, I don't think that the $9 bet is as bad as it looks.

Oh, and this was a Stars hand, rather than IPoker. Perhaps I was in IPoker mode rather than Stars mode. The former seems to have tightened up badly the past few days, which has been "good" for me. I've been robbing them blind and then moving on before they start loosening their reraise standards. On the downside, it restricts the number of hours that I can play there, in case they catch on.

PJ

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Aksu: See my just-posted comments above.

People at this level perceive any big reraise from the blinds pre-flop as Aces or Kings. So it narrows my range from their point of view. In this case, unfortunately, it narrows their range accurately.

It doesn't narrow my range. But it narrows their perception of my range. If I had been shorter-stacked, an all-in would have been great, because opponents always read that for AK.

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

I think you have to re-raise more pre-flop here. In earlier post I suggested 3X the raise to give the raiser approx 2-1 but here you have two callers and are out of position. Both factors indicate a bigger raise. The short stack is going to be getting odds of 7-2 to call (if UTG calls) so that's a mandatory call and, knowing this, the UTG can be pretty sure he's getting 7-2 too if he calls.

If raising like this gives away that you have AA/KK then that's fine as long as you don't always them! Lindgren recommends (under certain circumstances) playing AA/KK and AK identically pre-flop even as far as putting in a 3rd raise with AK. So you can use AK as your bluffing hand in these spots.

Suppose in another hand you make this raise with AK, miss the flop, bet out on the flop of rags and elicit a fold. Think how sick they're going to be when you flash AK. You'll get action with AA next time.

matt

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Matt:

I think I cover most of these points in my (long) reply to Michael.

Ha ha! Exceptions post hoc! The typical case of Hold 'em, (and understandable) where you get the "Ah, I know I said this but...." (it's okay, I understand that the situation is different here).

The strange thing is, I usually actually practise a larger raise when OOP, but normally with ropier hands when there have been four or five limpers (as well as with the good big ones). If I had followed this normal strategy with the reraise as well, then things probably wouldn't have turned out better in this particular case, but likely would turn out better in the metagame.

I'm still undecided about whether to put in the three-bet with "good" bluffing hands such as AK, or "bad" ones such as 65s. I think that it depends on the size of opponents' stacks. But, what if there's one big stack and one small stack? This is a tough one. Or perhaps I should save the big bets from the blinds for limped hands, and use AK for the hands where there has been a raise.

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

Of course the other reason to raise more is the Miller reason - you want a bigger pot. I'm with aksu on this one.

gl

bdd

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Dave:

Yes, I'm coming round to this view and I practised it a bit yesterday with a range of hands, building up larger pots pre-flop (or taking down the pot there and then) and then putting out a biggoer flop bet. I lost, but, then again, I picked up lots of crap post flop.

PJ