how to play against the unorthodox

[Big-Ern777 0]

It was four-handed in an online Sit & Go tourney at Stars at the final table.If found this players move interesting, but at the same time poor when it comes down to the number of times he's going to be called.Blinds 100/200 Stack: 8,000I'm on the button and raise to 700 with A 9 and the SB calls, everyone else folds.Flop comes A 8 5 and I check, SB goes all-in for about half my stack (roughly 3500). I figure ok, he called me with some like 6-7 and is trying to steal or maybe he's bold enough to be pushing in on K-K. I call and he turns over AK. Wow...only about 1800 in the pot and he's pushing that hard (3500 more) hoping to get a call. My question is any recommendation or advice against unorthodox players as such when you're caught in a situation such as this one. I figure most players are pushing in at flops like that one on a rather weak hand or a drawing hand, but jesus...AK. I mean the majority of the time he isn't going to get a call if I've missed with KQ or have something such as pocket tens or jacks as it isn't worth it to take that risk. I guess he's planning on winning all or nothing and doesn't like extracting. Right now I'm pretty clueless as to what I could of done better as a fold would be extremely hard given that he's trying to unnecessarily represent strength and appears to be pushing me out.

[bourbenz 0]

he was probably hoping someone with a hand like a9 - aq would call :-)

[Big-Ern777 0]

he was probably hoping someone with a hand like a9 - aq would call :-)

Ha,well no kidding. More times then not they're going to be folding though. It just seems wreckless and a bit of waste.

[NickTheKid 0]

Yeah man, that was a bad call. If you were on a flush draw, sure I'd call.. but all you have is top pair, medium kicker, he could have the following that beats you.Ace 8, 5 rainbowA-A, A-K, A-Q, A-J, A-10, A-8, A-5, 8-5, 8-8, 5,5.

[....Ian.... 0]

his move was dumb, but paid off (which of course does NOT mean it was good)shit like this happens tho. but what are you gonna do? part of variance is bad players making moves that are fucked up and getting lucky when a REAL player misreads it because the move is so bad.

[Big-Ern777 0]

Yeah man, that was a bad call. If you were on a flush draw, sure I'd call.. but all you have is top pair, medium kicker, he could have the following that beats you.Ace 8, 5 rainbowA-A, A-K, A-Q, A-J, A-10, A-8, A-5, 8-5, 8-8, 5,5.

You must get pushed out of pots a lot. I remember I called a player for all my stack last night at a tournament final table with K high - the board was 245 and I read him for a 3 and no more...sure enough he turned over J3.

[Swift_Psycho 1]

It's not that unorthodox. A ton of people overbet their big hands online. Not saying it's a good play, but certainly not uncommon.

[Big-Ern777 0]

It's not that unorthodox. A ton of people overbet their big hands online. Not saying it's a good play, but certainly not uncommon.

Oh of course. But I don't think a professional or an experienced player would dream of making that kind of a raise in that situation. It's true though, online is all about overplaying big hands because they know fish will donate with something like a pair of 5s.

[sanemancrazywrld 0]

his move was dumb, but paid off (which of course does NOT mean it was good)shit like this happens tho. but what are you gonna do? part of variance is bad players making moves that are fucked up and getting lucky when a REAL player misreads it because the move is so bad.

I love some of the discussions around here, such as:Guy bets a whole bunch, so I put him on f. all and called him. Turns out he bet so damn much because he had a really good hand and was hoping to be called. Gees, what a moron.

[Big-Ern777 0]

his move was dumb, but paid off (which of course does NOT mean it was good)shit like this happens tho. but what are you gonna do? part of variance is bad players making moves that are fucked up and getting lucky when a REAL player misreads it because the move is so bad.

I love some of the discussions around here, such as:Guy bets a whole bunch, so I put him on f. all and called him. Turns out he bet so damn much because he had a really good hand and was hoping to be called. Gees, what a moron.

Right, so when you flop a powerful hand, don't attempt to extract chips and just put your tournament life on the line. I mean I guess it was an ok play if he has no reading ability what so ever, but he has to know that heads up with top pair and top kicker most of the time you have the better hand, so why not extract rather than cross your fingers for a call. He's killing any sort of chip-making oppurtunity by vastly limiting hands that can call him..and most of the hands that can call him beat his hand.

[HelioCentric 0]

you did raise 700, he has a reasonable chance of being correct putting you on a weaker ace. Again, this is a pretty standard play online. I have done it myself as well. All depends on what level buy-in SnG your playing. In anything less than a $20 buy-in, this move pays off WAY more than it should as fish will call with any part of the board and pay you off.

[TheIceman05 0]

Man, what am I missing here? He made a perfectly fine play, in my opinion. He flat called preflop, which is sneaky. When the flop came down Ace high, he had to figure the following:"Alright, my opponent either missed completely, made a set, or caught just a piece. If he missed completely, he's probably not gonna make a second best hand. If he made a set, I'm going bust no matter what. He raised preflop, so it's reasonable to assume he's got a weaker ace, or a hand like QQ or TT. If he has a hand like AT, I'm way ahead, and he'll have a hard time folding. Underbetting the pot is risky and suspicious, so I'll overbet the pot and make it easier for a weak ace to call."He played it very well. You raised preflop, and he had every reason to believe you'd call with a weaker ace, and fold everything else no matter WHAT he bet. Thoughts?Ice

[HelioCentric 0]

i guess you were his fish.

[JimD82 0]

I don't really think this was a bad play on his part. If I had a set of aces I'd be trying to extract. He knows he has the best hand, there's a good chance you have a weaker ace, and in tournaments it's important to make sure you win pots when the blinds are this high by playing very strongly whether you have the goods or not. It makes you hard to read and prevents a lot of the suckouts which wouldn't be a big deal over the long run in cash games but can cost you a tournament. He was forcing you to fold anything but top pair or better and if you called he had you dominated unless you had atleast two pair. It also shows everyone at the table that he can very well have the cards when he pushes all-in, something that becomes increasingly crucial as the blinds escalate.

[Big-Ern777 0]

Man, what am I missing here? He made a perfectly fine play, in my opinion. He flat called preflop, which is sneaky. When the flop came down Ace high, he had to figure the following:"Alright, my opponent either missed completely, made a set, or caught just a piece. If he missed completely, he's probably not gonna make a second best hand. If he made a set, I'm going bust no matter what. He raised preflop, so it's reasonable to assume he's got a weaker ace, or a hand like QQ or TT. If he has a hand like AT, I'm way ahead, and he'll have a hard time folding. Underbetting the pot is risky and suspicious, so I'll overbet the pot and make it easier for a weak ace to call."He played it very well. You raised preflop, and he had every reason to believe you'd call with a weaker ace, and fold everything else no matter WHAT he bet. Thoughts?Ice

Like I said before, there are more hands out there then not that are folding here, as simply assuming a preflop raise means A is dimwitted. There are a lot of medium-strong hands that could make that raise that wouldn't be calling here and the others would only have him beat. I think the margin of hands that lose to him that would call is too slim to be putting in that much. I also wouldn't call with TT-KK or 6-7. Therefore only A-x, AA, 5-5, 8-8, 5-8, A-8 and A-5 would be his calls. Unfortunately he hit a perfect situation considering there about 8 different A-x hands I'd call with and lose. Then there's every other losing hands that could raise 500 more preflop and they number in an amount around 30 (these aren't calling..for example KQ-K9, low-high pocket pair, QJ-Q9 suited, etc). Then there are about 6 other hands that call and have him dominated.So roughly 8 hands out of 36 or more that strictly call and are dominated..that's why I don't understand the play. A check or a medium bet would work out better in my opinion.

[JimD82 0]

Later in the tournament when the blinds go up very high the game is less about making hands and extracting chips. It's about position and agressiveness. If you don't bet a real hand or two strongly you won't have the credibility to make the steals that compose 60-90 percent of the chips you accumulate late in a tournament. If this move was made in the early rounds I'd agree that it was a gross overbet and way too risky.

[HelioCentric 0]

Like I said before, there are more hands out there then not that are folding here, as simply assuming a preflop raise means A is dimwitted.

There was 1800 in the pot.He had 3500 remaining.Moving up to 5300 is quite all right I'm sure as far as he was concerned.So you folding is NOT the worst thing that could happen here for him. Bonus if you did raise with a weak ace, WHICH IS a possible holding for you. And if not, I'm sure he is not super dissappointed. He made net +900 on that hand. Also, he is insuring that he doesn't get drawn out on cheaply if you do hold a QQ or 1010, regardless of how unlikely. He is going to make those hands pay to outdraw him, cuz AK is going to be just too hard to lay down later in this hand anyhow.

[Scott Aigner MD 0]

I guess Chau Giang's play in the Tunica WPT was really bad too. He had K-6 and flop came k-q-4. Chau moved in. John Stoltzman was able to fold his q-10. Why would Chau move all in with top pair? I guess maybe Chau is a horrible player in your book, huh? It is because some players would think it was a bluff and call. John was able to lay his second pair down. A number of players might have made the wrong choice. John thought pretty long and hard here so he was at least contemplating a call. His remark at the time to Chau "I thought you guys like to play small bet poker."Chau's move was fine and so was the guy with A_K in this situation. He flopped top pair top kicker and made a move that you read as being a different tyoe of hand like an open ended straight draw. You put him on only one hand here which was 6-7. A good player has to put his opponent on a number of hands based on what they know about their opponent. Hindsight is definitely 20/20 for my analysis but maybe next time you will put your opponent on more than one hand possibility when an opponent overbets the pot and be able to fold like John did. The situation was different with John Stoltzman only having 2nd pair but the play was very similar by Chau in that he disguised his holding by making the big over bet. Scott

[Bravado2112 0]

Ya know, everyone's reading the same books, watching the same pros, and listening to the same experts. Sometimes it makes sense to go against the grain and not necessarily play a hand the "correct" way in order to extract more money. He has to assume you have some kind of hand to have raised and by going all-in he figures that he either a) takes down the pot right there without giving you a chance to beat him or B) gets you to call because his all-in makes it look like he's trying to steal so your weak ace or pocket pair might seem best to you.

[alf13 0]

This was a great play....There is nothing like having JJ and calling a raise from somebody that has AK written all over his face and then having the flop come AKJ.....I have done it millions of times....if you read somebody for strength and you have the n"current" nuts.....why not put a big bet out there and play a big pot?The small bet "bear trap" and hoping to get raised is for the birds...that has become the amatuer play...If you KNOW that you will get called for a ton of chips and you have a MONSTER...push. Why not?

[evmann86 0]

I agree, I think this was a great play.He's getting rid of hands that could suck him out, or he's getting paid off when your a huge dog with your Ace-lower kicker. (or he's losing all his chips to a set or two pair, which would be very hard to avoid anyway)Also, he's pulling a super reverse psychology move by making you think he's trying to steal because he acted so strong. I love how this play works, you get to put in a ton of chips on a monster hand, and are more likely to get called because people think your stealing.Whether or not he was thinking about the reverse psychology move is debateable, but the fact remains: You called him.My only advice is maybe pay better attention to your oppenents tendencies next time. That or be more cautious when your weak ace raise gets called preflop. And yes, bear trapping for a small amount of money in this situation is definetly outdated

[Emptyeye 0]

I've gotta agree with the masses here; this was a fine play on his part and you walked right into it.The fact is, with poker in the state it is today, fastplaying really is the new slowplaying. For some reason, so many people typically do two things--A. they slowplay their monster hands, which more often than not just gives them away (And makes simply betting when you make a hand a more deceptive play), and B. For whatever reason, people would MUCH rather make a great call than a great laydown. This means that a seemingly ludicrous overbet of the pot is actually a sound move when you hit something. Why? People have been trained to believe that a huge overbet screams "BLUFF", or at the very least "SEMIBLUFF". There are thus lots of hands that SHOULDN'T call that bet but will, particularly online. You were apparently one of them, thinking "He's full of crap, I'll call" when you were in act dominated. Personally, I tend to give people credit for a big hand until they show me they're capable of making a move otherwise.Anyway, there's no real context here, but he, being in the small blind, could have been defending his blind and hit two random pair, a baby set, or he could've called with something worth calling but not necessarily reraising with like AQ or AJ.Of course, it's impossible to say that he was thinking so deeply as to say "He's going to think no competent player would possibly push with a GOOD MADE HAND here, so that's just what I'll do and he'll call me thinking I'm full of crap". I will say that I've made absurd preflop pushes all-in with pocket kings because I WANT to be called by someone who thinks I'm full of crap and is picking me off.So no, the play isn't as weird as you think it is.

[Big-Ern777 0]

I guess Chau Giang's play in the Tunica WPT was really bad too. He had K-6 and flop came k-q-4. Chau moved in. John Stoltzman was able to fold his q-10. Why would Chau move all in with top pair? I guess maybe Chau is a horrible player in your book, huh? It is because some players would think it was a bluff and call. John was able to lay his second pair down. A number of players might have made the wrong choice. John thought pretty long and hard here so he was at least contemplating a call. His remark at the time to Chau "I thought you guys like to play small bet poker."Chau's move was fine and so was the guy with A_K in this situation. He flopped top pair top kicker and made a move that you read as being a different tyoe of hand like an open ended straight draw. You put him on only one hand here which was 6-7. A good player has to put his opponent on a number of hands based on what they know about their opponent. Hindsight is definitely 20/20 for my analysis but maybe next time you will put your opponent on more than one hand possibility when an opponent overbets the pot and be able to fold like John did. The situation was different with John Stoltzman only having 2nd pair but the play was very similar by Chau in that he disguised his holding by making the big over bet. Scott

Hindsight is always 20/20 when you know the hand details, isn't it? I'd love to see you throw away A9 in that situation...bit different from mid-pair, eh? I didn't just think 6-7 either so you skipped what I had said or completely ignored it. Hands such as small-high pocket pair came to mind along with low-pair and medium-pair which I all had beat. Pretty damn hard to say, oh, he pushed in there he must have AK..duh.IRT All:I also don't believe the play was horrible, just unorthodox. If you disagree with that term oh well, get past it because the right term for it is insignificant. My question is how to distinguish a powerful hand to a weak or drawing hand in this situation as laying down the A9 is either an extremely brilliant move or a horrible move.

[MilesZS 0]

No offense man, but why did you post this hand if you're just going to chastise everyone else for saying the move was alright? You coulda just told the story to your parents and friends and got sympathy, if that is what you were looking for.Scary to think maybe this move that seems like it was boneheaded to you may have been made by someone with a read on you, huh?C'mon man. If you think it was a dumb move and you're not planning on wavering at all on that stance, then just forget about this thread. If you're looking for others constructive views on the hand and are willing to listen and try to understand, then quit coming back at those people.

[NickTheKid 0]

Sorry, I disagree. You don't risk half your stack near the end of a tournament with top pair, 9 kicker. It's stupid, why do that? just sit back and blind it down till you find a more comfortable position. I'll stand with my comment:Bad Move.