cheetaking

My thinking is that I bet the flop after pf raising, so he could very well think I'm just making a continuation bet. Now if I raise on a scare card on the turn, it looks extremely defensive. It does not look like I have anything that can call a re-raise, so I think he very well might read a mid-strength hand on my part and try to force me out with some kind of semi-bluff. By flat calling, I have to have something in order to do it, which will make him think twice about bluffing the next street. That's what I was thinking anyway. Again, all of this is just IMO. I am the one asking the question,

I don't think I agree with you about raising on the turn.Consider this: If I re-raise on the turn, any number of hands from a set of 8's to a full house, to a mere semi-bluff flush draw are going to push all-in over the top, a bet which would definitely force me to fold. If I flat call, now the draws and the trip 8's are likely checking the river, and made hands are probably betting half the pot again, which means that I actually get more information about his hand by flat calling. Also, If I'm going to throw away $10 by re-raising, and he's probably betting half the pot (also $10) on the rive

Thanks, everyone. I especially found jmbreslin's post to be interesting, as that is kinda why I was considering calling, because I really didn't think that any hand would make that huge of a bet as a value bet.Here's what actually happened:At the time, I was kind of on tilt after taking a couple of tough beats, and then moreso for not getting an ounce of action with pocket kings in the previous hand (yes, I had them 2 hands in a row...,) so at the time I had not even considered the possibility of a full house betting for value, and had reasoned that the odds of him making such a huge bet with

Some good insights so far. I don't know if I want to put him on as wide a range as some people have been suggesting, though. He did fold from the big blind in the previous hand, so I think it's somewhat safe to say that he's probably not a total donk, and narrow his range at least a bit.

This hand just happened over on AbsolutePoker, and it was a really tough decision, so I want to know what everyone thinks the proper course of action would have been.GAME:AbsolutePoker Game #1494260071, No Limit Hold'em (.25/.50 NL)8 players at tableSeat 6 - SB (Villain) ($49 in chips)Seat 1 - (UTG+2) Cheetaking ($35.65 in chips)READS: I know absolutely nothing about Villain, and he knows nothing about me. He just sat down at the table 1 hand ago, and hasn't played a hand past the flop yet.Villain - Posts small blind $0.25BB - Posts big blind $0.50*** POCKET CARDS ***Dealt to Cheetaking [K K

SB: A/5MP: A/Q

Anyone else?I don't mean to pester, but I did only get one reply...

If you know he's continuation betting, and then he bet a big amount out-of-turn on a blank, why are you worried? That screams bluff. I personally probably wouldn't have the guts to call, but I do think you've got him beat here. I'd day shove, let him call with a crap hand, and hope that he doesn't catch a miracle on the river.

SB has bet every street out-of-position, so I really doubt that queen helped him. I'm putting him on either something like A/5, or a donked up overpair. It's almost certain that you've got him beat. If he was the only player you were against, I would say stick in a mini re-raise, which should incite a call from a lower boat.However, since there are 2 players in the hand, MP has flat-called twice, and he seems to be quite loose, you have to be genuinely worried about him. Because you didn't stick in a raise on either of the two earlier streets, you have almost no info on him. Him having a queen

I don't think the call was a bad play at all. The only hand that's beating you is a draw, so why not flat call and wait to see the turn before committing more chips? I might call here too and wait for the turn to come a high card that's not a heart. If it is a heart, and the action gets crazy, drop it. If it's a high card, bet the farm and bust someone.Aside from that, what more do you want? You got all your money in with a 70/30 advantage, and caught a guy semi-bluffing. I don't see anything wrong with that. As long as you've got the bankroll to absorb a bust if it doesn't go your way

This hand came up tonight while playing .25/.50 PL Hold'em on Pokerstars.READ INFO:-Villain is 32/18/2 with 63 hands. He has been betting a lot, especially on the turn and the river when scare cards come up, and has clearly made continuation bets, so he seems to be very aggressive. He got re-raised a few times and dropped, so that furthers my suspicions. Also, one time he raised pre-flop and then showed an 8/9 down at the end of the hand. He has also slow-played a flopped set once, though, so he's also capable of that.-Hero has seen around 25% of the flops so far, and I have played very aggres

Actually, fast tables really aren't that much faster than normal ones. It's like 60 hands/hr versus 50.And the forementioned stats were mostly at .25/.50

At the .05/.10 level, two tables is definitely optimal. Because at those stakes, people are mostly stupid, and you make the most money by playing good solid tight/aggressive poker. So if you are only playing one table, you'll get bored fast waiting for good hands.However, once you step up into the dollar levels, I'm going to go against the grain and say stick with one table if that's what you're comfortable with.Personally, I have found that I win a LOT more playing one table because I have much better reads on everyone, and can focus on each and every decision with no pressure. This lets me p

No, it is much less effective in micro-NL. Small-ball is better suited for games where everyone is playing tight/aggressive at least to some degree, because those players are easier to put on hands, and more likely to be paying attention to the hands you play, which is what makes small-ball effective. From personal experience, basic tight/aggressive is best for when a table is really loose, and then switching to small-ball is the way to go once the table tightens up and you've had time to study everyone's play.

Hello, everyone.I have been a No Limit Hold'em player for as long as I can remember, but then recently while I was playing in a few HORSE tournaments for fun, I discovered that I was doing much better at Stud than Hold'em. So I have decided to give the Stud cash games on PokerStars a try, but I have no idea what an appropriate bankroll would be.I know in NLHE it's generally 10 buy-ins, but what should it be in Stud? I've never really tried playing a limit game for anything but sheer entertainment before, so I'm clueless. I have about $55 in my bankroll at the moment. Is this enough for the .25

Yeah, I actually do. I played both a $10 180p, and a $5 180p, and the play was MUCH different. In the $5 one, the field was down to 64 players after the first hour. In the $10 one, there were still 94 left. I think that's a pretty big difference. Fewer donks in the $10 ones, and more tight players.

I don't know about that... I mean, his raise on the river was awful questionable. I checked the flop, check/called him, and then check/raised a small amount on the river. That usually screams "slow-play! Warning! Warning!" I was really surprised that he played top 2 like that. I could easily have had a set.

This also depends on what stakes the tournaments are. If they are 10+1 tournaments, your strategy will be much different than if it is one of the 5+.50 "donkaments" as BeaverStyle so eloquently puts it.1. You have to call that. Raising is a bit too risky. The play fits a low wired pair perfectly, so you genuinely have to be afraid that someone spiked trips. Another possibility is that the other guy is also holding a queen. Again, that fits perfectly. He could also be on a flush draw, and is just being a donk on the river, or, strangely enough, could be sitting with an 8 or 9. In these low-stak

Heh... so pretty much, I just totally screwed up on this hand.Thanks for the advice, everyone. Here are the results:I hesitated forever... I really didn't want to call and lose and get knocked out near the bubble for a third straight tournament. And his actions were absolutely spot-on for having pocket sevens, pocket jacks, or kings. No way he was bluffing... he was giving me almost 4:1 pot odds, and he's too smart to donk it up like that. He could have been slow-playing an ace, but that river bet doesn't make sense. Then I realized that there was another likely option: ace/jack. so, with 3 ha

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Blinds 100/200, 25 ante (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)This is the end of an 18-player sit&go. Payout is to the top 4.UTG (t2950)MP (t3855)Button = Villain (t8025)SB (t5370)cheetaking (t6800)PLAYER INFO:cheetaking: I've been playing a bit more conservatively than usual, grinding it out after tripling up on the very first hand. I've still done some blind-stealing and a couple suspicious bets, but my table image is a little tighter than usual. Still fits the tight/aggressive bill, though. Villain has b

Okay, now that I've commented on the other one and thought for a minute, I'm for folding the second one also. I stick with shoving the first time, though. There, YOU are the short stack and you need some altitude with 6 people still left to stand a chance.

best case you're up against a flush draw and top pair. Worst case, you're up against a set and a made flush.In deep-stacked situations, this is an easy "call and see what he does on the turn" scenario. But this is different. Here's my thoughts:1. There is a player with an M of only 3 still in, and it's the bubble. If you lose, you win nothing. If you fold, you're still in great shape for making the money.2. There's a flat-caller behind you. He is almost as much of a threat as the raiser.3. In the best-case scenario, you're only winning 66% of the time. If you fold, you have twice as much as th

I shove all-in both times. Your M's under five, and you need to make a move to get back in it. Sure you may risk getting knocked out on the bubble, but you're not gonna win by sitting and waiting for a monster.

The pot size after my push was 10425, and it cost him another 3900 to call. Not small enough to call with just a draw, not big enough to be a suspicious overbet. That's one of the reasons why I did it. It looked like a move that someone with a monster would make.

I just finished playing in this tournament, and made a move with about 400 left until the money that had me sweating bullets. I'm curious to know whether everyone thinks that this was a good move or a donk bet.GAME: PokerStars $10+$1 Hold'em No Limit, $15,000 guranteed, starting chips: 3000.Blinds: 200/400, 25 ante (Level VII)Game Info: 2160 players started, 650 remain, payout to top 250.9 players at table.UTG + 5: cheetaking (8725 in chips) BUTTON: Villain (15130 in chips) Player Info:I just sat down at the table about 8 hands ago. Villain bet me out of a pot after I called pre-flop from the