A hand

[peterbirks]

Did I misplay this?

$100.00 USD NL Texas Hold'em -
Seat 7 is the button
Seat 1: Deanna87 ( $111.50 USD )
Seat 2: gregson01 ( $38.00 USD )

Gregson is 50/4 1.4. A sort of standard loose-passive player who is increasingly rare on Stars and Full Tilt, but not uncommon here.

Seat 3: fish ( $254.81 USD )

Fish is 88/26 Agg 2.1. He had a lot of money when I sat down, some of which had found its way into my pocket. He might have won the jackpot rather than won it in actual play.

Seat 4: miquimi ( $127.90 USD )
Seat 6: alen1986 ( $100.00 USD )
Seat 7: Hero ( $204.12 USD )
Seat 8: zindinono ( $108.73 USD )
Seat 9: MrNomrcy ( $103.48 USD )
Seat 10: rekcut ( $97.10 USD )

zindinono posts small blind [$0.50 USD].
MrNomrcy posts big blind [$1.00 USD].
alen1986 posts big blind [$1.00 USD].

** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Hero [ J♡; A♡; ]
rekcut folds
Deanna87 folds
gregson01 calls [$1.00 USD]
fish calls [$1.00 USD]
miquimi folds
alen1986 checks
Hero raises [$3.00 USD]

This style works for me at these tables. I'm probably something like 14%/14% in open play. It's exploitable, of course, but not many players in these games seem to know the correct way to exploit it.

zindinono folds
MrNomrcy folds
gregson01 calls [$2.00 USD]
fish calls [$2.00 USD]
alen1986 folds

What we got? About ten bucks in the pot. Note that this is already an unusual hand in that it's deep stack.

** Dealing Flop ** [ T♠, K♣; 3♡; ]

gregson01 checks
fish checks
Hero bets [$5.00 USD]

Once again, a style that's working for me. Range of 40% to 60% of pot as a Continuation Bet. Theory is that bigger bets in this game seem to help opponents make fewer mistakes. These smaller bets get calls from hands that are behind with either five or six outs. The important thing is that I have to get way from the hands sufficiently often when opponents hit these outs.

In this particular case I'm drawing. Against two opponents I'll probably CB in a ratio of 50:50 or thereabouts for balance.

gregson01 calls [$5.00 USD]
fish calls [$5.00 USD]

I'm ready to walk away from this hand now if I fail to hit on the turn and anyone bets. Gregson is unlikely to call this CB without a King. Fish could be any pair, or even less. Obviously I check behind on turn if I miss and it's checked round.


** Dealing Turn ** [ Q◊; ]

Gives me the nut straight.

gregson01 checks
fish bets [$11.00 USD]
Hero calls [$11.00 USD]

Rainbow board, gregson had called the flop, and I'm happier having him in than out (he is the short stack so my vulnerability to him is not enormous).


gregson01 raises [$29.50 USD]
fish calls [$18.50 USD]


Hero?????

A DAY LATER:

Answer below the cut




Hero raises [$185.12 USD]

One of the perils of multi-tabling is that sometimes you forget precisely of how much a shove consists. If I had realized how much of an overbet an all-in was (given the fact that opponent is a fish and deept-stacked as well) I suspect that I would have bet less (about half his remaining stack, in fact.

Then again having said that -- if fish calls the shove and loses, then I can pretend I'm a genius.

Fish folds.

Bollocks. Presumably either an open-ender with a pair or even less.

** Dealing River ** [ 2♣; ]

gregson01 shows [K♡;, Q♡; ]

Hero shows [J♡;, A♡; ]

Hero wins $277.62 USD from main pot (($74 net))

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'd raise around $45. He of course most likely has 2 pair, having put in around 30 to make his house, he'll play another 45, added to that it will look like you're trying to get it hu. Of course you could also push, depending on how you figure he will play j9.

Ballyregan Bob

[ribmeister.livejournal.com]

To be fair, we're not scared of anything at all at this point. Rainbow board, probably got opponents crushed. This is a case of making money from the complete range of hands opponent could have.

If greg is bluffing he is giving up due to being called already by fish. So the question is will they call a reraise. Greg will likely fold unless he has 2pair at worst should we shove, fish wont fold any draw at all. A small reraise might set off more alarm bets than a "fuck it shove" bet which would also happen from people with sets.

[hectorjelly.livejournal.com]

Well its an interesting decision. Before I get to that I think your bet sizing is slightly too small. Id raise more pre-flop and bet a little more on the flop. I don't think it makes a huge amount of difference though.

I would probably check that flop, its a bad board to c-bet against too loose players. The T and K means there every broadway hand is at least a gut-shot, so you are going to get called a lot. Again I don't think betting is terrible, but given that you can take the free card I prefer that line.

On the turn I'm in two minds. One part of me wants to say raise, because when a loose passive guy check raises here I think he is stacking off close to 90% of the time. You may lose the fish (strange to think that in this context the 50/4 is not considered the fish), but then you may lose a lot of action if the river is an ace or a jack. That said it is almost a perfect slow-playing opportunity. You are in position and the stack sizes are such that you can easily get all in on the river, and its a rainbow board. So all in all I think both are pretty close.

gregson

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I should point out here that gregson has check-raised all in. Although that is deductible if you add up his bets (he only started with $38) I didn't make it explicit.

PJ

Re: gregson

[hectorjelly.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, I should of noticed that. In that case perhaps a small raise is in order, as it looks like the fish doesn't have that great a hand, but players like that never fold for small bets when they have any piece of the board. You don't have to worry about leaking information to an 88/22! I don't like just calling now because the fish doesn't have the initiative, there's no reason to think he is going to put a lot of money in on the river

Re: gregson

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Did I say "deductible"? I am writing too much about insurance these days....

PJ

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Referring to your earlier bet-sizing point, I've lowered the raising and flop-betting size mainly through experience.

I'm more minded to check behind on this flop usually too. My thinking was mainly that gregson tended to fold to any bet if he missed (so, for example, I'd be getting rid of small pairs of his here because the king would frighten him) and fish might be calling me even if behind.

If gregson folds and fish calls and a brick comes on the turn, it goes check-check, and I re-evaluate on the river depending on the card and the size of fish's bet. I wouldn't rule out calling him with Ace-high.

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with raising the pot when attacking limpers pre-flop. I don't understand why you think the play is exploitable ... your AdJd is a better hand than theirs (on average) and you have position on them too. It's not exploitable at all since you're also raising there with the top hands. Perhaps you meant something else but it seems like a standard play to me.

Anyway I've thought about this one and decided that you must raise in order to try to get the fish's entire stack. I'm tending towards the overbet shove here as it looks like an isolation move with AA (or even AK) and the fish can probably beat AA. The smallish raise of another 50-60 looks too much like KK (or AJ of course) and I can see him getting away from two pair hands more easily. If he's slowplaying a set then you extract the maximum as I dont think he can fold a set to a shove.

matt

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Hi Matt: In the text I make no reference to a pot-size raise. I say that I know my sub-pot-size raise is exploitable, not a pot-size-raise. I don't really want to go into the strategic detail of this particular style of play and I'm not advocating it for other players. It just works better for me.

It's interesting pondering on fish's range here, because fish are the second-hardest category to put any range on at all, I thin (the hardest category being the complete maniac).

He hasn't raised preflop, so I think that rules out AK, KK, QQ, JJ, but not necessarily AA. He's called the small raise -- that doesn't narrow his range at all apart from eliminating AA (he would have reraised that).

He's then check-called my half-pot bet on the flop. This tends to indicate a drawing hand with this kind of player, although it could be a drawing hand with a feature (KQs?). He'd be raising a flopped two-pair. Given the hand distributions, either an open-ended or a gutshot is favourite.

On the turn he checks, but calls the $29.50. I think that even fish might fold the gutshot here, so I lean towards QJ or JT, although AQo can't be totally ruled out. KQ is the other possibility. I can't see him playing J9 like this.

That seems to me to make it something like 75% that he has an open-ender with a pair.

PJ

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

My second thoughts on your point Matt (and this is a genuine question).

To what extent do fish with this kind of range actually pay any attention to anything apart from their own cards?

I refer to Matt's line The smallish raise of another 50-60 looks too much like KK (or AJ of course) and I can see him getting away from two pair hands more easily.

Do people think that, as a general rule, this kind of fish is likely to adopt this train of thought?

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

You can't say he has any hand 75% of the time. Don't be silly. In any case "gregson01 checks, fish bets [$11.00 USD], Hero calls [$11.00 USD]" so he didnt check the turn he woke up and came out betting.

He has something like AJ/J9 5% of the time, set 20%, two pair 40% and pair plus gutshot 35% in my opinion.

matt

[(Anonymous)]

sorry i meant "pair plus gutshot or pair plus open-ender" in that category

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

whoops, sorry, you are right, he bet out turn. Yes, that makes distribution slightly different, with two pair significantly more likely and the draw significantly less.

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

I'm tending towards the overbet shove here as it looks like an isolation move with AA (or even AK) and the fish can probably beat AA

I don't think so. The opportunity to do this has already presented itself and been declined, which should look strange even to the fish.

Ayrton Senna

[(Anonymous)]

Well it looks equally strange (arguably stranger) to now raise it up another 50 or so. But I don't think checking is an option.

matt

[(Anonymous)]

Sure, it's stranger - you've got a big hand either way - but he'll pay to 40-50ish to make it and call something on the river.

Jockey Wilson

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

But Ayrton, there's a big difference between a shove when the pot is about $30 and a shove when it is $68. I might well decline the shove option in the first case but go for it in the second.

I'm not sure why people are worrying about things looking strange to the fish. He's a fish, for heaven's sake. Just because something looks strange to them doesn't mean that they will fold.

PJ

[(Anonymous)]

No, it's not about the shove, it's about the raise. You can't very well sell the shove as an isolating AK or AA if you've already declined the opportunity to perform this action. Either raise the guy knows he's in trouble, but one of them drags him in playing bad, and, perhaps, suck him into more action - where as the other will certainly let some fish off the hook. The real question is: how fishy?

Merlene Ottey

[(Anonymous)]

By "declined the opportunity to perform this action" Merlene meant the isolation, not the shove.

Nick Barmby

[(Anonymous)]

'A DAY LATER'

You slow rolled 'im? Beauty.

Shane Warne