cheetaking
-
Content Count
145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by cheetaking
-
-
Just to post the results, if anyone really cares...I trusted the read and folded. Villain turned his cards up and revealed pocket Kings. When an ace failed to hit, I patted myself on the back for making a good fold. However, about 25 hands later, I still hadn't seen another decent hand. I got forced to take a risk by pushing all-in preflop with an unsuited Q/J and an M of about 5, and got caught and knocked out, so I was wondering if I should have taken the risk when I had the chance. Anyway, thanks for the help everyone. Bad luck, I suppose... or maybe just a bad tournament structure...
-
Fold. If the other guy was a short stack pushing all-in, I'd call in a heartbeat. But since he is under no significant pressure, and neither are you, he probably has a good hand and there is no reason for you to take such a big risk yet.The rest of the decision is read-dependent. Is this guy passive, aggressive? Does he represent the flop? Is he tight? Loose? 6/6 is such a tough hand to play after the flop that you are going to be in a tough situation no matter what. In a live game I might call and see if I can outplay the guy after the flop with reads, but not online... and especially not in bad position. If you were on the button, you could play this hand against a literal player because you would get to see whether they had anything or not first, but being out of position puts you in an even worse bind. This is just way too mediocre to call with. And going all-in is just a bit too risky IMO, unless the villain has a reputation of trying to steal blinds in early position.
-
I encountered this hand last Friday in a $20 NLHE tournament.This was the first time that I was making a legitimate effort to stop and study player actions before making my decisions, so I was still kind of unsure about a lot of my reads, but I was seeing them for sure. This is what made this one confusing for me.THE TOURNAMENT:$20 NL Hold'em. 3000 starting chips, blinds start at 25/50, double every 20 minutes.Level III... blinds 100/200.8 players remaining at table, 43 players remaining in tournament. Payout = top 7.PLAYER INFO:Hero:Has only played one hand to showdown... 7/4, which flopped the nut straight and then slow-played it until the river and busted someone about 10 hands ago.Villain:Has raised once pre-flop, then lost at showdown with A/K. Has won 2 pots without showdown. What I have noticed about this player is that he exhibits very tight behavior, is quite smart about choosing his moments to strike, and also has shown quite an obvious tell... the traditional "looks away when he has a hand, only stares at you when bluffing."CHIP STACKS:SB: 50 (he just lost a huge all-in, and is all-in no matter what this hand.)Hero: 3550 (UTG+4)Villain: 2575 (Cutoff position)THE HAND:(A
Q 
)ACTION:SB posts small blind (50) and is all-inBB posts big blind (200)UTG foldsUTG+1 raises (600 total)3 players foldNow, UTG +1 was an aggressive, but completely amateur, player who was giving off tells as clear as if there was a sign on his head, so I decided to flat call and try to win some more chips off of him by outplaying him after the flop.Hero calls (600)Villain re-raises to 2575, and is all-in.Button foldsSB foldsUTG+1 foldsHero ?Main Pot: 250 (2 players)Side Pot: 3175 (1 player)Call Price: 1975Total Odds: 1.7:1Normally this would be an automatic call for me, because I had a gigantic suited ace, the Villain could either be risking it with a small pair, and seems smart enough to know how to do a squeeze play, both of which are great for me. Plus I have the bigger stack, and the blinds are getting high fast, so risk is usually a good idea. But not this time. And because I was finally paying attention, I noticed some things that made this go from an automatic call to a very questionable one.I stared Villain straight in the eyes. He held the focus for a fraction of a second, and then looked away as if he was uninterested. This meant strength.Then, I asked him a question. "Do you have a monster, or are you just trying to pull a squeeze play on me?" He sould have kept his mouth shut, but he didn't. He replied very comfortably "Hey, I just threw my chips in and hoped for the best." From past experience, any sort of strange reply like that means a strong hand, while either no reply or something threatening like "Why don't you call and find out?" means a bluff. So even though the odds would usually be in my favor, I now had two tells that were pointing to him having quite a good hand.So, what do you all think? Should I trust the slightly favorable odds and take the risk, or should I trust my reads and get out of the way? Since the SB is all-in, I get to find out whether I was right or not either way, so there is no information incentive to call. So, your thoughts? Help me out here. -
Basic rule: Don't bet on the river unless your opponent will either call with a worse hand or fold a better one.This board is way too dangerous for a raise on the river. Once that flop hits, your best bet is probably to just back off and hope to get to showdown for as cheap a price as possible. Raising on the flop or the turn might help you figure out where you are in the hand, but there is NO WAY that you should be raising on the river. the board is way too dangerous.With the bet you made, he's not calling with anything weaker than your trip aces except maybe a set, and he's definitely calling with anything better. If you flat call, you are beating the worse hands which he would fold to your raise anyway, and by flat-calling you are also limiting your losses if he does have you beat. Your river bet is just basically just throwing away 24 dollars.
-
Phew... glad there are others out there. For a minute I thought everyone was going to say "you're a complusive gambler, you need therapy, quit the game." So thanks for the BR notes, and I'll try to learn that. Until I've learned restraint, though, I think I'm just going to swith to tournament play, the only game which I consistently crush, and can't lose a bankroll in one night at. Then. maybe once I've learned small-ball strategy and BR management, I'll go back the the cash tables... anyway, thanks for the replies everyone.
-
yeah, I do have a huge problem with winnings patience. I have problems playing at any limit below .10/.25, regardless of my bankroll size, because the results don't come in fast enough and I get tired of the slow, steady climb. I know this is a huge problem, but I can't seem to stop. And this is probably why I keep losing.My pattern is basically buy-in for 50 dollars, play great poker for several weeks and get it up to 250 or so, and then either prematurely step up limits or start playing too maniacally and lose it all in 2 days. I can't keep a cap on it, and no matter how hard I try, the impatient side of me which wants huge results instantly keeps getting the best of my common sense.Did anyone else have a problem like that? If so, how did you get over it?
-
RESULTS:I called, barely thinking about it, because I was too blinded by the fact that I had hit a straight. I didn't even notice at the time that there was a potential better straight out there, so I eagerly tossed in my last $63 for the call without even stopping to ponder.Villain revealed K/J for the nut straight, and just like that I had lost 90% of my bankroll. Since I only allow myself to add an additional 50 dollars per month, that means no more poker for me until my next paycheck.The bad part is that this is the third time that something just like this has happened to me, and I still haven't learned.The first time I took the premature step up, my flopped flush lost to a straight flush on the river. The second time, I flopped a straight and lost to a boat on the river after slow-playing it. And now I have lost 2nd nut straight to nut straight.THE LESSON: Stay at your own limits. And now that I have 'learned' that (again), I'm going back to the .10/.25 tables where I belong until I have $200 in my bankroll for the .25/.50 and so on. I deserve a dunce cap for this... ;p
-
Today I did something that I will hopefully never do again, yet I still keep doing it every time I get money-hungry... playing out of my bankroll. I've been building it, and doing very well, from the .10/.25 and .25/.50 tables for the last month, but today there was an opening at the loosest .50/1.00 table I'd ever seen, so I took it. Take this hand as a lesson as to why you should never do that. Regardless of the results of this hand, I was putting a month's worth of winnings on the line on just one hand. And if I lose this hand just once, I'd be broke. So, anyway, here's the hand.PokerStars No Limit Hold'em ($0.50/$1.00)Seat 1: ($45.85 in chips) Seat 2: Villan (BUTTON) ($120.55 in chips) Seat 3: SB ($58.75 in chips) Seat 4: cheetaking ($100 in chips) Seat 5: ($56.50 in chips) Seat 6: ($35.50 in chips) Seat 7: ($91.70 in chips) Seat 8: ($121.15 in chips) Seat 9: ($68.90 in chips) This was my very first hand at this juicy table, so I had no reads on anybody. All I can guess about Villain is that he's a winning tight grinder, based on his chip stack size. But I have no data at all to back this up. (man, I need PokerTracker...)SB posts small blind [$0.50]cheetaking posts big blind [$1]*** PRE-FLOP ***Dealt to cheetaking [8
J 
]UTG calls [$1]UTG+1 calls [$1]UTG+2 calls [$1]UTG+3 calls [$1](2 Folds)Villain (Button) calls [$1]SB calls [$0.50cheetaking checks With a hand like J/8, I have no intent of trying to buy this pot. I'm fully content with checking and trying to get very lucky on the flop.TOTAL POT: $7*** FLOP *** [T 9 4 
]Not a bad flop for me. Now I've got an open-ended straight draw, and the board is a rainbow so nobody can have a flush draw. Since I'm in early position, I figure it's probably best to keep the pot small and try to see the turn cheaply, so I check.SB checks cheetaking checks UTG checks UTG+1 checks UTG+2 bets [$2]UTG+3 calls [$2]Villain calls [$2]SB folds The $2 bet into the $13 pot obviously gives me the odds to call.cheetaking: calls [$2]UTG foldsUTG+1 foldsWow, what a loose table... it's the turn, and there are still 4 players in the hand. Now I've just got to hit the straight, and I get to trap the hell out of somebody, right?TOTAL POT: $15*** TURN *** T 9 4 [Q ]Yes! I got it! I decide to bet out, since a check/raise would make it much more obvious that I hit the straight. About half the pot seems right... just enough to get 2 pair or a set to call me.cheetaking: bets $7.50UTG+2 folds UTG+3 folds Villain raises $10.00 to $17.50Hmm... interesting. A small re-raise seems like a value bet to me, so I'm guessing that he either just hit top 2 pair or was slow-playing a set. Not sure since it's my first hand at the table, but I decide to put some pressure on him so that I can win the hand without having to worry about the board pairing on the river, or force him to make a bad call with a worse hand. Again, i wish I knew what kind of a player he is, but I'm still just stabbing in the dark.cheetaking: raises $20.00 to $37.50Villain raises $80.05 to $117.55 and is all-incheetaking ?Now i've got a decision. He flat called on the draw-heavy flop with tremendous pot-odds, and I know nothing about how much of a risk-taker he is, so I can't rule out that he called the flop with King/Jack and now has the nut straight. His monstorous 4-bet seems way too strong to be made by 2-pair, and even a set would be borderline. I've got the second best hand possible, and am facing a bet for all of my chips from a player I know nothing about. What should I do? And not only is this call worth a loss or a win, it is worth all but $15 of my bankroll, because like an idiot I decided to jump into this game which is 2 levels above my playing limits. What to do? -
Seems like no more replies are coming, so here are the results:Hero didn't think about it very long. He called almost instantly, sure that he was catching the Villain on a bluff.Villain, unfortunately, was far from bluffing this time. He showed K/K for the full house, and had led Hero along through the hand like a dog on a leash by overbetting with his monster on purpose, and making a completely unorthodox bet on the river. I, too, was surprised from my 3rd person perspective, because I was sure that the maniac had been caught. BUt apparently he was smarter than everyone thought, and cashed out $130 ahead for the night two rounds later. As soon as he left the table, three other players from the table also left. (Too bad... if Villain had stayed, it looks like he could have made some more money off of them too.)Hero bought more chips, and kept playing for another hour or so, easily recovering the money he lost in that hand and still cashed out over $50 ahead.This, to me, was a perfect example of why table image is so important. If Villain were a rock, he would have just won the blinds with his monster, because there's no way Hero would have called pre-flop with A/7, let alone the post-flop bet where he thought he had him figured out. So by playing more aggressively and faking predictability, Villain won an extra $80 on that hand alone because people started calling him every time he bet to try and catch him bluffing.Just some food for thought.
-
I'm definitely against re-raising pre-flop. K/Q suited is more of a drawing hand than anything. And if you re-raise and don't hit the flop, you're then forced to make a continuation bet out of position, which is often a recipie for disaster. Call, and wait to see the flop before you commit any more chips to the pot. Once the flop comes and there is a bet/call, shoving all-in is the only option. Since this is Bodog we're talking about, your shove is getting called by any set, 2-pair, big overpair, and maybe even just an ace-high flush draw. That's 4 groups of calling hands which you beat versus just one which you don't. Those are the implied odds that you should be dreaming about. Shove!
-
My goal is basically just to quit donking it up. I make the right plays almost all the time, and can go on huge runs when I just play the game straight-up, but I have still never been able to supress my natural tendencies to throw out completely stupid bluffs every 50 hands or so. So my goal isn't any specific winnings goal, but rather to go through the whole month without throwing away more than $100 on bluffs. Also, my goal is to learn to play small-ball strategy so that I can get away from my traditional over-aggressive old strategy.December Goals:-Build any sort of bankroll from my $50 buy-inResults:-Would have been up to $500 if it weren't for donking it, but had to settle for only being up to $155 after throwing away over $300 on stupid bluffs, and another $50 by calling bets even when I knew that I was beat.
-
Oh... okay. I didn't get that part.I still say check, though. He's a fellow small-baller, so we can't be sure enough of what he has in order to risk lots of chips with just a jack kicker on top pair. Once he calls on the flop, I'm probably just hoping to check it down. But since it's Mike, another smallish bet of 1/3 of the pot seems like a good option too, since the flop call could easily just be an information call. But since he has position on us, we've got to be careful.
-
I say check. The opponent is a grinder, and showed interest by calling, so he's probably calling another bet on the turn and we don't really know if we're ahead or not. I say check. If he fires back, drop it, if he checks behind you then he was probably calling with a mid-pair, and you can check/call the river. If he makes a bet on the turn, I think you can honestly be worried enough about K/Q and A/K to fold since he's the grinder. Betting the turn will only win the pot if he had a mid pair, which you would win anyway by backing off, and then you're wasting another big bet if he does indeed have you out-kicked. I say check.
-
I had always been one of those hugely aggressive players who threw away lots of chips by trying to force the pot and getting re-raised a lot just because people knew I was bluffing. I was getting sick of it, so I'm glad that I read this topic. I knew that something was missing from my game, had seen DN check & call a lot before, but never why he did it. Simply by reading the basis behind the strategy, it finally all came together and I had seen a better way to do things. I had to try out the small-ball strategy for myself, and so I did at the .25/.50 tables on PokerStars last night.Well, this is definitely a great strategy. I would have won almost $200 off of my $25 buy-in if I hadn't have made 3 stupid donk bluffs which cost me about half of it, and one or two mis-reads. But the winnings just kept coming... none of the others were good enough to figure out how to beat the strategy, and I finished up $75 after the 2-hour session ended.By the end, the table was eating out of the palm of my hands. They were sick of seeing me in pots, making vast overplays whenever I started betting at them, and I won huge pots all six times that I had monsters by mixing up the slow-roll and fake bluffs and forcing them to overplay.Great stuff you've got here, DN. I'm definitely going to keep trying this out, and see if I can keep the success coming with the small-balling.
-
This is an interesting hand which just came during my semi-nightly trip to the Pokerstars .25/.50 tables. I wasn't the hero, but I thought it was a fun hand to look back at.PokerStars Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50) - 2007/01/01 - 04:42:15 (ET)Seat #4 is the buttonSeat 1: Villain ($96.80 in chips) Seat 2: ($52 in chips) Seat 3: Hero ($166 in chips) Seat 4: BUTTON ($36.80 in chips) Seat 5: SB ($92 in chips) Seat 6: BB ($51.90 in chips) Seat 7: ($22.45 in chips) Seat 9: ($26.30 in chips) NOTES ON PLAYERS:Hero has played a very smart game so far, and has clashed with Villain numerous times. Villain has been hammering away at the chat box, and Hero has out-played him when he was bluffing several times already, so Villain is probably putting Hero's play at a very high level, and you can tell that he's getting a little frustrated.Villain is the resident maniac, playing almost half of the hands he sees to the flop, and almost always following his pre-flop raises with a continuation bet. He has just check/folded, check/called, and check/raised the flop too, though, so his variety is not too bad. Also, several hands ago, someone took a stand against him and doubled him up after he faked making continuation bets and bluffs when he really had pocket kings. He is very aggressive, but has the skill to overbet monsters and bluff on slow-plays as well. Then again, just 30 hands ago, Hero called two straight increasing bets from him after he represented the flop, and thenmade the minimum re-raise and he folded while Hero showed him a complete bluff as well. He was steamed, and hasn't shut up about it since. So he is definitely maniacal, but not completely stupid. Also, he seems to try and read the other players, and has been more willing to call overbets than value bets in the past.SB posts small blind [$0.25]BB posts big blind [$0.50]*** HOLE CARDS ***[A
7 ](2 Folds)Villain raises $2 to $2.50Villain raises a lot, and you have been able to out-play him after the flop on several occasions, so calling with the A/7 and trying to take the pot down after he bluffs at it seems like a good idea.UTG+3 FoldsHero calls [$2.50](3 Folds)POT SIZE: $5.75*** FLOP ***[8 5 9 ]Villain bets $3.50Just as we expected, the flop came with crap and Villain threw out his traditional continuation bet. With an inside straight draw, and pretty much nothing of value that we can put him on, a call seems legitimate, just to see what he does.Hero calls $3.50POT SIZE: $12.75*** TURN ***8 5 
9 [K ]Villain bets $8Looks like another bluff attempt. He could have the king... he's shown in the past that he is willing to make this bet whether he has it or not, but it still seems kind of unlikely with the overbet. Now you have a straight draw, a flush draw, and still have an overcard, and because Villain is so aggressive the implied odds are huge. And even if we miss, we can still win the pot with a nice raise back in his face on the river, so the odds are good. A call seems reasonable.Hero calls $8POT SIZE: $28.75*** RIVER ***8 5 9 K [5 ]Bingo! We've hit the nut flush. Now we just have to wait for Villain to bet so we can win the huge pot.Villain checksWell, that was certainly unorthodox. Logically, this seems that he realizes that he's been caught (again) and has given up. With the knowledge that he responds to overbets, though, and the memory of the last time he got outplayed by Hero fresh in his mind, a nice big bet might suck some more money from him.Hero bets $20Villain raises $62.80 to $82.80 and is all-inHero ?Well, that was random. The check/all-in on the river is by far the fishiest thing that Villain has done this entire session. So far, every time he has check/raised he has had at least 2 pair, so suddenly the flush doesn't look so good with the paired board. If this was a blatant re-raise after a bet, the call would be pretty easy, but why would he check? Perhaps he has finally figured out how to out-play us, or maybe he's just acting like the donk he's made himself out to be in the chat wondow. So, what to do? Play it safe and lay down the flush in fear of a potential boat after the suspicious check/raise on the river, or take a stand? -
-
I'm guessing Ace/King. That would mean that the raise pre-flop was legitimate, the flop bet was a standard continuation bet, and then he said he had the straight to try and intimidate you so that he could bluff at it. Ego players love trying to intimidate you... so he's got sh*t and is just trying to bluff. A/K.
-
Yikes! That was actually a very gutsy play on your part. Villain's stats are very tight, and his high showdown win % means that he's a very good player.CONSIDERATION 1:This very tight, good player, raises from UNDER THE GUN! That should immideately be sending red flags up in your head. He needs at least A/Q to make a bet like that IMO.THE FLOP:He bets it. This doesn't mean as much. It could easily just be a continuation bet. But then...CONSIDERATION 2:He re-raises you, out of position, after betting under the gun. More red flags should be going up.CONSIDERATION 3:He bets again after you call on the flop. There's no way that he's doing this with anything but an overpair.As tough as it is, I'm giving up on the hand after his bet on the turn, putting him on Aces or Kings, and folding. You've got a lot of guts to be willing to come over the top like that. Congrats on winning it.
-
The key to this pot, I believe, is that the villain's stats. He is 36% VP$IP, and on the short stack, which means that he's a losing loose player. That means that he is calling your pre-flop raise with a lot of hands, and unfortunately, lots of them beat you on the river. There's no apparent reason for us to believe that he is smart enough to play a completely varied game, because of his low chips and apparently bad statistics, so we can definitely make generalized assumptions. The pot odds are 4.7:1, though, so we'll have to be pretty sure if we're going to fold.PRE-FLOP:Limp/Call from 2nd position. With his PFR% at twelve, we can probably assume that he's not making this move with hands like A/K, A/Q, A/J, or pocket tens through queens. He would, however, make this play if he was being tricky with kings or aces, so not all of the top hands are eliminated. This seems very likely to be a pair of some sort, because the limp/call is VERY standard behavior for this type of hand. Mid-range suited connectors are a slight possibility, but would be slightly strange behavior for a limp/call. So my pre-flop hand range on him is pocket twos through nines, kings, aces, J/10 through K/Q, every ace between A/2 and A/10, or suited connectors between 6/7 and 9/10.FLOP:The texture of this flop is VERY favorable for you. The only problem with it is that it is very obviously favorable, which makes people more likely to think you're bluffing and therefore more likely to call with nothing.Another check/call from him. Since we're assuming that he's not a pro, and therefore does not have the skill to flat call with a crap hand with the intention of faking a slow-play to set up a later bluff, he has to have something in order to make this call. So let's analyze whether or not he'd play the hands we put him on before the flop, going from the top down.Pocket Aces or Kings: Possibly. If he slow-played them before the flop, he could concievably just limp/call again, either trying to trap you or just because he's afraid you have the jack. It is looking a bit more unlikely now, but it still might be the case.A/10, A/9, A/8, Q/10, K/10: Possibly. I won't eliminate them yet, because the flop texture is very un-scary and loose players often make donk calls on the flop when that is the case.A/5: Yes. This one fits, because he's now got 2 pair and the board is very safe. The initial check could just be beacuse he's kind of passive and prefers calling.A/2 through A/7: Very Unlikely. Almost no way anyone's calling your large bet with as crappy of an ace as this.K/Q: Somewhat more possibly. Same case as the medium-high aces, except the two overcards make it seem even prettier to loose players.K/J, Q/J, J/10: YES!!! If he had a weak face card combo such as this, which has now turned into a monster, this is exactly what will usually happen. This one is a definite yes.Low Pocket Pairs: Yes. Same case as A/5... 2 pair on a safe board looks very pretty.Pocket Fives: Definitely. Another classic slow-play case, which fits perfectly.Suited Connectors: No freakin' way. Nobody's dumb enough to call a huge bet with no pair, no draw, and weak low cards. Only a top pro, who knows how to fake a slow-play, would make this kind of a call. But since he's loose and losing, we can assume he's not and is folding the junk.So, after the analysis, his hand range is down to AA, KK, A/10, A/9, A/8, A/5, K/Q, K/10, Q/10, K/J, Q/J, J/10, 9/9, 8/8, 7/7, 6/6, 5/5, 4/4, 3/3, and 2/2. Of those hands, 6 have you beat and 14 don't. So far you're in great shape.THE TURN:Believe it or not, that card was far from a disaster. Of the three hands which we determined he would call with on the flop with a queen, only 2 of them fit into the "junk into gold" category, and one of those hands seems rather unlikely. You're still ahead 12 times to behind 8. After his check, I would throw out another bet. If he has sixes through nines, A/5, or K/10, he's going to call you and then check the river and you'll win. If he does indeed have a monster, he'll either re-raise you and you can confidently fold, or he'll smooth call again and you will immediately back off and try to check the river down. A bet will win you the pot right there 6 times, get you called with a worse hand 6 times, and the opponent will call and win 8 times. 12 times, the bet is a profitable play, only 8 times is it a waste. I bet here.Analyzing your play, though, the double check basically means nothing. He'd make this check with every single possible hand, except maybe the queens, which he would probably bet. It also seems fishy to check aces or kings again, so the odds of those two have gone down slightly.THE RIVER:Wow. What a disaster. Now out of the 20 hands he could have, five have just given him the edge. So now 13 of the hands have you beat, and only 7 don't.My biggest concern is the small bet. Why make such a small bet? He's bet ten dollars into a 47 dollar pot, which seems to be the exactly perfect play for a slow-played monster hand to bet. I honestly think that aces and kings have lost their credibility with three checks in a row pre-flop, on the flop, turn, and the micro bet on the river, so I'm eliminating them. This bet would also be very very weird for pocket twos through fours, and they are somewhat less likely to call pre-flop, so they are eliminated as well. I won't completely eliminate the mid-high pocket pairs, but that would again be a very awkward defensive bet. K/10 might make this bet, but I'm surprised that it isn't bigger. The total junk hands which have now turned into 2 pair with a kicker higher than yours would definitely make this bet, as would the 'pair of queens' hands, which are now value bets from full houses.So the final range of hands which beat you is A/10, A/9, A/8, A/5, K/Q, K/J, K/10, Q/J, Q/10, J/10, and pocket fives.The final range of hands which don't beat you are 9/9, 8/8, 7/7, and 6/6.Starting from the top down, let's look at how likely each hand is to have made the given plays through the entire hand.HAND ---- PRE-FLOP Limp/call ---- Flop check/call ---- Turn Check ---- River Bet ---- What % of time does the playing of the hand fit?A/10 ---- Yes ---- possibly ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- 30%. Whether villain would call the flop is the big question with this hand.A/9 ---- Yes ---- possibly ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- 25%. Again, the flop is the question mark.A/8 ---- Yes ---- slight possibility ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- 20%. Calling the flop is unlikely, but possible, for this hand.A/5 ---- Probably ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Probably ---- 85%. The pre-flop call and river bet are the only plays with any sort of doubt.K/Q ---- Probably ---- Probably ---- possibly ---- Definitely ---- 40%. The turn check is what's odd with this hand.K/J ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Definitely ---- 95%. If he had K/J, this is exactly how he would play it.K/10 ---- Yes ---- possibly ---- Yes ---- Potentially ---- 25%. The call on the flop and the river bet make this hand less likely.Q/J ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Definitely ---- 95%. Again, exactly how this hand would be played if he had it.Q/10 ---- Yes ---- possibly ---- possibly ---- Definitely ---- 20%. Really bad call on the flop, and unorthodox on turn, but possible.J/10 ---- Probably ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Definitely ---- 85%. The Pre-flop call would be weak, but everything else fits.5/5 ---- Definitely ---- Definitely ---- Yes ---- Probably ---- 100%. Fits perfectly.9/9 ---- Probably ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Unlikely ---- 30%. He might raise pre-flop with this one, and the bet on the river would be very strange with this hand.8/8 ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Unlikely ---- 35%. Same as above, but more likely to limp/call pre-flop.7/7 ---- Definitely ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Unlikely ---- 35%. Same.6/6 ---- Definitely ---- Yes ---- Yes ---- Unlikely ---- 35%.Something worse ---- possibly ---- possibly ---- yes ---- unlikely ---- 5%.Something else which beats you ---- unlikely ---- yes ---- yes ---- yes ---- 25%. This includes other bad hands like J/9, Q/9, etc, which are unlikely to call pre-flop but beat you.So, doing some quick math, hands which beat you make a grand total of 645.Hands which you have beat make a total of 140.Your odds of winning the hand if you call are therefore 140/785, or 4.6:1 odds against you.The calling odds are 4.6:1 versus 4.7:1 pot odds. This makes the call completely borderline. It is inconclusive, and you can do either action. Calling is very slightly profitable, but you're only going to win this hand about 1 out of 4 times. If you think that he can slow-play Ace/Jack preflop, or would call your $6 raise with J/9, it's a definite fold. But as I figured it, either way works.END RESULT: It's up to you. I'd personally call, just to see what he had, but don't expect to win the hand if you do call.Thanks for listening!
-
True, True. Then that's just even more proof.
-
I agree... a big leak. Limping and calling small raises with weak aces will cost you TONS of chips. Me personally, I use the following theory for deciding when to enter a pot.Don't enter the pot pre-flop unless:1. You are raising2. You are willing to call a raise after limping3. You are in late position and are calling because you have the proper odds.Weak aces aren't good enough to raise with unless you're in late position and nobody's limped in before you, there's no way you are calling someone else's raise with them, and ace high is definitely not an odds hand, because every time you hit the hand it will be very obvious, and you will only get called by hands which have your top-pair-weak-kicker beat. I'd personally rather see you playing suited connectors than A/2 through A/9.By limping in with weak aces, these are the most common results you're going to get.1. You are raised pre-flop, and have to fold them. (very common)2. The flop hits an ace, but you have a lower kicker than someone else and lose a ton of chips figuring it out. (about 1/10 times, but very very costly when it happens.)3. You hit the flop, but you barely win anything because nobody else has anything. (very common)4. You miss the flop and have to fold, and can't bluff at it because you just limped in pre-flop and now the pot is small with a lot of players, and therefore too risky to bluff at. (most common)5. Someone calls with a draw, and you are forced to back off out of fear that you are out-kicked. (common)6. You hit a lucky flop, hitting 2-pair, and someone else has a higher ace and will pay you off (maybe 1/60)7. You hit a luckier flop, flopping a low set, and catch someone with top pair. (1/100 at the most)
-
Any reads on the villain? Again, I think how you play the hand best depends on his past behavior.
-
MP2 is 45? Wow. In that case, I'd definitely re-raise more pre-flop. Stick in another 15 or so, and let him make a donk call. After that flop, I'm betting too.Since MP2 sees so many flops, but seems to not raise a lot, that makes him a generally loose player, who probably just got very lucky by sucking someone out to win all of those chips. So I say bet the hell out of the flop. The flop is draw-heavy, and he's loose anyway, so he's going to call you with a lot of stuff. I'd bet about $20 here, and force him to make a call against the odds.With the way that you personally played the flop, I'm re-raising to somewhere around 35 to 40. If you flat call, you're just asking for him to hit a draw and win lots of chips off of you by betting the suck-out. Put the heat on him, and force him to make a bad call.What is really strange to me about the flop, though, is the check/min raise. That is VERY fishy. I can't see someone making that bet with a draw, unless it's a HUGE draw like an open-ended straight flush draw... surely a straight semi-bluff would be for more. I'm putting him on either 2 pair or a lower set, and throwing a huge bet back at him. With any luck, he'll push all-in over top of you and you've got him. With him playing loosely, betting heavily is the only correct play IMO. His behavior suggests to me that he flopped a decent hand, and he's probably not going to be able to get away from it. Sick it to him!
-
A bet on the flop follwed by a check on the turn after a call seems like a bad pair to me. Especially since you're in position, and a raise could easily be a "hey he's in position, he's just representing the flop. I'm going to catch him" re-raise. He could just be stone bluffing, but most of the time I'd expect a second bet on the turn if that's the case. However, considering that he limp/called before the flop, J/10 is right in the hand range for that. No way would 2-pair check it, or even check/raise the flop for that matter, because that board is too scary with draws for that. Same goes for a set. I'm putting him either on a bad pair, maybe top pair with a weak kicker, or a straight. I'm putting him on the mid pair... 9/10 or A/9 sounds about right.Since he's probably not calling if you bet on the turn, I'd check behind him and see if you can convince him to take another stab at it on the river. There aren't a lot of scare cards aside from the 10, Jack, and Ace, so you can be pretty confident calling another bet from him. So, I'm checking behind him on the turn and then check/calling the river.
Joe Navaro's Book
in General Poker Forum
Posted
Having just read Caro's Book of Tells, and now in the process of reading this one, I have to agree that it is significantly better. Caro explains that a certain action means strength or weakness, a brief description of what it means, and what action to take when you see it. This is useful, yes, but reads more like a rule book, and can be a bit shallow at times. And some of the mentioned tells are downright useless, such as the ones about people reaching chips into the pot before it's their turn, smoking, and several others that just don't happen in real life anymore.Navarro's book goes so much farther. It not only clues you on to just about every unconscious gesture that someone might give off while at the table, it fully explains why that action happens. It's a whole different mindset that this book puts you in... it encourages you not only to look for the tells, but also to understand the motivation behind the specific tells, and how to truly decipher what it means in context. There are whole sections that Caro didn't even mention, such as the one on the most honest part of the body, and the bonus info on getting in the proper mindset for detecting tells, and an overall mindset to understand the actions in everyday life, is just bonus. I think this book has almost everything. Vastly superior to the old tell books, IMO, and definitely worth the money. The only bad part is that Hellmuth still hasn't learned to write without stroking his ego. He does add some key points, but the traditional "look at me" attitude is still there. Forget that Phil's name is on it... Joe Navarro is the guy you need to listen to.