peterbirks: (Default)
peterbirks ([personal profile] peterbirks) wrote2010-11-02 08:45 pm

A fun hand

I don't see the point in posting hand histories any more, but this one was interesting.

Back story. SPT Slick is an uber-lag. I'd already caught him for one stack and I wanted the rest of his money.

$100.00 USD NL Texas Hold'em
Table Renovah (Real Money)
Seat 7 is the button
Seat 1: ashkoto ( $103.00 USD )
Seat 2: Hero ( $238.35 USD )
Seat 3: PiperMalibu ( $100.00 USD )
Seat 4: Muximuss ( $101.70 USD )
Seat 5: theteetree ( $71.70 USD )
Seat 6: AnyLord ( $195.50 USD )
Seat 7: RageIlluminati ( $207.25 USD )
Seat 8: Dreaming 4uvak ( $106.25 USD )
Seat 9: SPT Slick ( $194.60 USD )
Dreaming 4uvak posts small blind [$0.50 USD].
SPT Slick posts big blind [$1.00 USD].

** Dealing down cards **

Dealt to Hero [ Q♠ Q♡; ]

ashkoto raises [$2.00 USD]
Hero calls [$2.00 USD]
PiperMalibu calls [$2.00 USD]
Muximuss folds
theteetree folds
AnyLord calls [$2.00 USD]
RageIlluminati folds
Dreaming 4uvak calls [$1.50 USD]
SPT Slick calls [$1.00 USD]

** Dealing Flop ** [ 4♡;, 4♠, 4◊; ]

Dreaming 4uvak checks
SPT Slick checks
ashkoto checks
Hero checks
PiperMalibu checks
AnyLord checks

** Dealing Turn ** [ 7♣; ]

Dreaming 4uvak bets [$5.00 USD]
SPT Slick calls [$5.00 USD]
ashkoto folds
Hero calls [$5.00 USD]
PiperMalibu folds
AnyLord folds

** Dealing River ** [ 7♡; ]

Dreaming 4uvak bets [$23.00 USD]
SPT Slick raises [$46.00 USD]
Hero folds
Dreaming 4uvak raises [$76.25 USD]
SPT Slick calls [$53.25 USD]

Dreaming 4uvak shows [7♠, 7◊; ]
Dreaming 4uvak wins $222.50 USD from main pot

SPT Slick doesn't show [8♣;, 4♣; ]


In my case this is known as "dodging a bullet". For poor old SPT Slick, there was no escape.

______________

[identity profile] tchernabyelo.livejournal.com 2010-11-02 09:47 pm (UTC)(link)
Holy crap, Pete, that's some fluke hand! Presumable SPT just figured there was one seven, not two, lurking in the hole and that he was betting against 7s over 4s - but did you make the same assumption?

[identity profile] peterbirks.livejournal.com 2010-11-06 10:10 am (UTC)(link)
Indeed I did, at the time, although in retrospect it's hard to see how the guy would have played the hand the way he did with, say, 78s. Looked at with hindsight, one is nearly compelled to follow the Holmes dictum that, once all of the thing which are impossible are eliminated, one has to accept that the last option, however improbable, is the truth. But, at the time, I just thought that he had 'got lucky' with 78 (although, of course, this would have turned out to be unlucky).