Live 1/2 Hand

[hartman72 0]

This is such poor reasoning. so.. even tho the hand worked out for you. its safe to say you and every at the table are bad players. No offence, but to put the stigma that you and UTG are solid regs is silly.you assigned Q,10 on your SB? and thats it. so thats why you called....?I agree UTG shows up with AK often, but thats a chop at best. why are we calling for a chop[b](Oh and if you notice, my advice about betting the flop is the best line. SB folds out his junk. and UTG probably calls. then he probably looks to check/call turn. this is where your position and stack comes in handy.)you could have easily scooped this entire pot by repping AA, JJ , AK - (which would be the only hand he doesnt lose to) or even the 1 combo of KK[/b]

I take no offense. I am happy with my results playing live 1/2, and am by no means a superstar.If I take your advice on raising to 140 on the flop......sb folds and most likely utg and i chop a small pot. As it stands, we chopped a much bigger pot because I threw the SB some rope. If you read any of my replies, you would see that I admitted that I took a very weird line but, bc of my reads on the two players, I believe I extracted the most value. Remember to look at UTG and my stacks....it would be very hard for me to make more than I did if I force the SB out of the hand

[Royal_Tour 0]

I take no offense. I am happy with my results playing live 1/2, and am by no means a superstar.If I take your advice on raising to 140 on the flop......sb folds and most likely utg and i chop a small pot. As it stands, we chopped a much bigger pot because I threw the SB some rope. If you read any of my replies, you would see that I admitted that I took a very weird line but, bc of my reads on the two players, I believe I extracted the most value. Remember to look at UTG and my stacks....it would be very hard for me to make more than I did if I force the SB out of the hand

You should be outplaying UTG.. hes probably more tight passive than you think.You could have easily walked away with a nice pot very easily with minimal stress and gamble. I fully believe you could outplay UTG and push him off AK on the turn (because like you said.. It becomes apparent that he has AK the way he has played the hand.) so now that we know this, we need to win this hand outrightThe idea is to win as many simple pots as possible. Trust me. winning the pots that make you tank and make hero calls is cool if you play once in a while, but if u play to make money, its all about winning pots as safely and stress free as possible

[Royal_Tour 0]

you really think SB shows up witha boat there often? I have to say I very much disagree... especially with his bet sizing on the river... SB dosen't call a raise and a reraise, he calls a bet and a raise... I hate to be nitpicky but termonology is very important here... there is a huge difference between a three bet and a bet and a raise...UTG is so well defined here that there is almost zero chance he has us beat... SB could turn up with a full house here... but this dosent seem like a very probable live line for me

umm.if you're going to be nitpicky, then you should realize that when talking about preflop. the first opening bet is a RAISE. the blinds have been posted and any amount higher than the blinds is called a raise. can be mistaken for an opening bet. But technically a raise is more correct.P.S. terminology is very important here... sooo anyways because you didnt know that, i'll just ignore the rest of your post and assume it as flawed reasoning.

[Mills 0]

awesome, are you just like.. embarrased because the hand you thought "had to be a boat" turned out to be what is essentially air, or are you this much of a prick in general?Also.. the fact that the rest of the post must be flawed because we dispute the correct termonology is a wonderful piece of illogic, so thanks for using it to invalidate yourself.lol, at the poor reasoning of others... the guy called a bet and a raise from the SB so... he must have a PP? Have you ever played live 1/2 before? Dosen't sound like it.Not to mention every point you raised has already been raised in this thread at one point or another, so thanks for the sagely advice, but ur a bit late..Hey, I have an idea... instead of needing to be right all the time (even in spots when you are clearly wrong) why not treat this as it should be treated: as a learning experience for those who are asking questions... ya know, instead of just berating everybody who disagrees with you and telling them they suck?I dont see him doing this with QQ or worse. (possible, maybe he's having a slow day)Another stellar read....you were wrong, get over it.

[hartman72 0]

You should be outplaying UTG.. hes probably more tight passive than you think.You could have easily walked away with a nice pot very easily with minimal stress and gamble. I fully believe you could outplay UTG and push him off AK on the turn (because like you said.. It becomes apparent that he has AK the way he has played the hand.) so now that we know this, we need to win this hand outrightThe idea is to win as many simple pots as possible. Trust me. winning the pots that make you tank and make hero calls is cool if you play once in a while, but if u play to make money, its all about winning pots as safely and stress free as possible

I agree with the bolded items.......I still believe it would be VERY tough to push UTG off, but it is possible I suppose. Trust me, I don't like playing pots like that either....and I do play more agressive than the one I played in this hand. I just have a different thought process than you in what I saw with the SB. I was worried about extracting money from him, not trying to push UTG off his hand.

[SwolyswoND 1]

Mills,He's not wrong. You are doing results-oriented thinking, claiming that since you were right based on what actually happened in this hand, that you are right for every situation like this that comes up in poker.However, that's not how poker analysis works. Royal's advice is spot-on for this situation - and yes it is very important that you think SB cold called a bet and raise instead of the correct raise and re-raise. Even you said it yourself...

I hate to be nitpicky but termonology is very important here... there is a huge difference between a three bet and a bet and a raise...

Yes it is very important, but you got it wrong. Pre-flop is a raise and a re-raise (3-bet), so SB cold called three bets. And the way Royal described it - the correct way - should narrow SB's range considerably. You can't say something is important, be wrong, and then get defensive about how unimportant the terminology was.Just because SB showed up with (essentially) air this time, doesn't mean that Hero made the correct call. I agree with Royal that this is almost always a boat, and just because you happened to catch SB the 5% of the time that he is bluffing, doesn't mean you made the right decision long term.I also humbly advise you to perhaps not try to talk down about the forum regular's abilities when you are new here, and have no idea of the play skill of who's giving you the advice. Lots of posters here are quite reputable for being stellar players, and RT is one of them, and quite frankly, even though I don't know you at all (and I am just saying this based on the fact that he is above average and you are an unknown - this is not meant as a knock on you) he is probably better than you. So you might want to actually heed his (and others') advice instead of getting defensive.

[hartman72 0]

Mills,He's not wrong. You are doing results-oriented thinking, claiming that since you were right based on what actually happened in this hand, that you are right for every situation like this that comes up in poker.However, that's not how poker analysis works. Royal's advice is spot-on for this situation - and yes it is very important that you think SB cold called a bet and raise instead of the correct raise and re-raise. Even you said it yourself...Yes it is very important, but you got it wrong. And the way Royal described it - the correct way - should narrow SB's range considerably. You can't say something is important, be wrong, and then get defensive about how unimportant the terminology was.Just because SB showed up with (essentially) air this time, doesn't mean that Hero made the correct call. I agree with Royal that this is almost always a boat, and just because you happened to catch SB the 5% of the time that he is bluffing, doesn't mean you made the right decision long term.I also humbly advise you to perhaps not try to talk down about the forum regular's abilities when you are new here, and have no idea of the play skill of who's giving you the advice. Lots of posters here are quite reputable for being stellar players, and RT is one of them, and quite frankly, even though I don't know you at all (and I am just saying this based on the fact that he is above average and you are an unknown - this is not meant as a knock on you) he is probably better than you. So you might want to actually heed his (and others') advice instead of getting defensive.

Alrite.....I'm a little surprised that a lot of people think this is a boat 95% of the time. Did you look at his stack? Even though he bets 200 on the river, it's only slightly more than a quarter of his stack. He was way up, and if he only had 250 to start the hand, I might agree this is a boat more often than not. We had shown weakness on the turn so a pot sized bet on the river with a boat does not make a lot of sense to me. JMO

[Royal_Tour 0]

awesome, are you just like.. embarrased because the hand you thought "had to be a boat" turned out to be what is essentially air, or are you this much of a prick in general?Also.. the fact that the rest of the post must be flawed because we dispute the correct termonology is a wonderful piece of illogic, so thanks for using it to invalidate yourself.lol, at the poor reasoning of others... the guy called a bet and a raise from the SB so... he must have a PP? Have you ever played live 1/2 before? Dosen't sound like it.Not to mention every point you raised has already been raised in this thread at one point or another, so thanks for the sagely advice, but ur a bit late..Hey, I have an idea... instead of needing to be right all the time (even in spots when you are clearly wrong) why not treat this as it should be treated: as a learning experience for those who are asking questions... ya know, instead of just berating everybody who disagrees with you and telling them they suck?I dont see him doing this with QQ or worse. (possible, maybe he's having a slow day)Another stellar read....you were wrong, get over it.

Ok. before you start calling me a prick, remember you were the one who wanted to "nitpick" Now let me clear up why i believe your reasoning as flawed. (for you and hartman and anyone else)Your villain in this case is a total Unknown. So we have to go on zero reads as far as his style of play. And please... saying "he's a 1/2 player" is not a read.Preflop it goes, open to 10, pop to 30 and SB calls (2 bets cold) Out of Position. (if we think results based. calling there with AJ is a huge mistake - mistake number 1) From our perspective if we assign a wide range for SB it would look something like all PP's, AKs, AKo, maybe AQs, and maybe "maybe" low -mid suited connectors from . assigning Q,10 or K,Q is a mistake vs a normal unknown. Doing so will result in spewage.Now part 2.flop - SB checks, UTG fires half pot, Hero flats, and then SB calls again. (back to results thinking - Its another big mistake. He is basically throwing away money)But from our perspective, he is a total unknown, so what types of hands can he do this with. any sets, any big K, maybe Q,10. but because of the nature of this hand, and the preflop action, we eliminate Q,10. (why? because he is an unknown. we have no reason to believe he is that Loose)Now Part 3The turn checks through on a brick - everyone shows everyone they are weak (or at least they are trying to give that impression)Now part 4river pairs the brick. nothing changes. and all the sudden SB fires 200. roughly 4/5 pot. (its a fishy type of bet because its large and out of left field from his passive play on previous streets)But if we dissect it, what would he do this with that we beat. any Q,10. and any weak pair holdings. - We tried to eliminate Q,10 earlier so lets forget that, and if we look at weak holdings, what can we assign?K,Q? AJ? Q,J? - if we want to assign him one of these hands, we have to wonder where he is coming from. Its makes zero sense for him to call the flop with a weak pair but then bluff it on the river when nothing changes.If he called the flop with a weak pair thinking it might be good, what has changed since? If anything, the checked turn should strengthen the notion that maybe a pair of Jacks is good.So does he bet 200 as a bluff? or as value? well we know value makes no sense, because the only hands calling 200 on the river are hands that have him beat.so does he bluff it? why? he has showdown value vs all hands that missed. and If he thinks he's up against 1 pair bigger than his Jack, why did he call the flop?He had no reason to believe anyone was weak on the flop. Only on the turn did hero and UTG show weakness. All of these reasons make it hard to put a totally unknown (at any limit) on a bluff here.Now. part 5folding or calling the 200 AFTER it was already called. Like Tskillz said. we're overcalling. Its true, no ands ifs or buts about it. we are risking 200 to potentially win 225. We put UTG on AK - so we're already assuming its a chop.So at best, we're winning 1.2-1 on our money. Thats an AT BEST situation. Optimally we should be thinkinng about the entire session, we can safely fold, and take notes at showdown, because we already know, There is going to be a showdown.thanks.feel free to explain your reasoning for each point. I'm curious to know how you came up with SB was bluffing more often than not.

[mtdesmoines 3]

It's just emotion that's taken me overTied up in sorrow, lost in my soulBut if you don't come backCome home to me, darlingYou know that there'll be nobody left in this world to hold me tightNobody left in this world to kiss goodnightI have to add the video.

[rbakken2504 0]

Mills,He's not wrong. You are doing results-oriented thinking, claiming that since you were right based on what actually happened in this hand, that you are right for every situation like this that comes up in poker.However, that's not how poker analysis works. Royal's advice is spot-on for this situation - and yes it is very important that you think SB cold called a bet and raise instead of the correct raise and re-raise. Even you said it yourself...Yes it is very important, but you got it wrong. Pre-flop is a raise and a re-raise (3-bet), so SB cold called three bets. And the way Royal described it - the correct way - should narrow SB's range considerably. You can't say something is important, be wrong, and then get defensive about how unimportant the terminology was.Just because SB showed up with (essentially) air this time, doesn't mean that Hero made the correct call. I agree with Royal that this is almost always a boat, and just because you happened to catch SB the 5% of the time that he is bluffing, doesn't mean you made the right decision long term.I also humbly advise you to perhaps not try to talk down about the forum regular's abilities when you are new here, and have no idea of the play skill of who's giving you the advice. Lots of posters here are quite reputable for being stellar players, and RT is one of them, and quite frankly, even though I don't know you at all (and I am just saying this based on the fact that he is above average and you are an unknown - this is not meant as a knock on you) he is probably better than you. So you might want to actually heed his (and others') advice instead of getting defensive.

+1....if you arent laying down a winner once in awhile, you are calling bets too often, IMO. Also, key to this hand is the fact that it is a live NL game....i dont know where this is at, but most live NL 1/2 games are very snug, meaning the majority of players are reluctant to bet big without big hands...they'll call light a lot, but betting or raising doesnt usually happen without a big hand. There are exceptions to this rule, drunk players, just uber aggro gus hansens, or the Bike in LA....but Royal and Swoly and all others that are saying this is a boat a huge percentage of the time are correct.

[Mills 0]

A couple of things:1. I'm not really sure how you can call my thinking in this hand results Oriented, as i've held that the small blind was weak before I saw any results at all... It is not as though I changed my reasoning after I saw the AJ... You may say i'm being results oriented in my response to royal, but that was after I got ticked off because he was acting like a jerk.2.I openly accept that there are probably many players on this board who play poker better than I do, but I sort of have to laugh when your advice to me is to 'be humble' when his first two posts contain phrases like:its safe to say you and every at the table are bad playersandI will assume it is flawed reasoningKeep in mind that, even though what I said to him about termenology turned out to be technically incorrect, I never said it in a smug or demeaning way, I just happened to say something that wasn't true. After he mentioned it, I looked it up, and it turned out he was correct, that's fine I was wrong about that, I'll probably be wrong about some other things too... why so venemous as to attempt to invalidate everything I had to say because of it?he's a regular, i'm not, I get it... he's probably better at poker than me.. I get it... dosen't give him free range to act like a jerk, though.

[Mills 0]

as for the hand itself... I agree swith your assesment of the SB range after the flop.. but, as i've said previously.. I don't think he shows up with 77 that much in this spot... The reason being is he would have lost so much value playing it this passive. Facing a raise and a reraise, a flop containing a K and a J probably hits both of my opponents in someway, therefore if I am holding 77 in this pot I probably put a small/ med checkraise the flop... this is pretty likely to get a call in at least one spot, probably two. Failing that, I would absolutely have to bet the turn.. As it is, he puts one bet on the river with 77 in our hypothetical when he might of had the oppurtunity to play for stacks.As for JJ, sure JJ is in his range... I agree completley... However, as you mentioned... the size of the bet seems very fishy, it seems to me that 3 Jacks in this spot would either value bet or overbet... the 4/5ths thing just dosen't make much sense to me..In my mind, it's either JJ, or we have it... I settled on we have it.

[LittleWyvern 0]

In my mind this is a fairly standard fold in most live 1/2 situations. I think that you put yourself in a bit of a bind here by playing your hand too slowly after the flop. By playing so weakly you will find yourself very often on the river thinking, "well, villain doesn't think I have anything so he is trying to steal the pot." The hand you seem to be repping is QQ and appear afraid of the king... so villain must be trying to bluff you. It becomes easy to talk yourself into an overcall that way.Unfortunately, in a live game with weak players it is much more likely that the villain will be betting his own hand rather than betting against your hand. I feel like far more often than not with this line you are going to be facing JJ or 77 from the SB who led out the flop hoping to get raised by AA, but then tried for a CR on the turn vs two opponents who have announced they have something. Firing a near pot sized bet on the river into two opponents who have both already demonstrated that they have hands (there was only one possible, unlikely draw on that flop) is such a desperate bluff that in a live 1/2 game it almost never happens. Much more likely is that the SB is sitting on a boat and looking to be called by one of your two AK's.In this particular case he actually was bluffing (even though he had a pair I can't imagine he actually thought it was good and was going for value), but in my mind that is easily the exception and not at all the rule. Even without the 1P tank-call this would be a fold a lot of the time. As an overcall this decision is not all that close.

[hartman72 0]

Merry Christmas everyone,I thought I'd bring this up again since no one has analyzed it. Let's assume the SB had 300 to start the hand. THEN I would believe it is a boat 90-95% of the time. The fact that he has 4 BI's though, lends me to believe he is bluffing here more often than not. Players are more likely to make big bets like this when they have a big stack bc they still have a profit if they lose the pot.

[SwolyswoND 1]

Merry Christmas everyone,I thought I'd bring this up again since no one has analyzed it. Let's assume the SB had 300 to start the hand. THEN I would believe it is a boat 90-95% of the time. The fact that he has 4 BI's though, lends me to believe he is bluffing here more often than not. Players are more likely to make big bets like this when they have a big stack bc they still have a profit if they lose the pot.

Merry Xmas...However, I think your reasoning is flawed, and I do not take it into account when analyzing the hand. Big stack =/ more willing to bluff.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Merry Xmas...However, I think your reasoning is flawed, and I do not take it into account when analyzing the hand. Big stack =/ more willing to bluff.

especially considering SB was new to table.so he had no reason to believe sb was going to bluff any of his stack.