is it sometimes correct to chase?

[akishore 0]

this is low limit fixed limit.i wake up to AKo in the small blind with six callers (!) behind me. i raise for value. big blind folds but other six callers call of course.i hit nothing on the board but the board is fairly uncoordinated and it's rainbow. so at this time, the pot is 7.5xBB. since i am first to act, i bet, hoping to thin out the field and set myself up for a possible steal on the turn or river (representating an overpair).EVERYONE calls.i also miss on the turn so i decide it's time to checkfold. but the guy after me bets and EVERYONE calls to me. right now the pot is 17xBB (monstrous frickin pot!!!), and it's only 1xBB for me to call. i'm getting 17:1 on my money, and since the board looks so ragged, i decide that if i hit one of my six outs, i have a decent chance at holding the best hand (which might be shaky because it might make someone two pair, but i figure the return on my money would be worth it if i have the best hand even one in 15 times).with such great odds, i call and chase. i don't hit, but i don't think that's relevant. i believe i made the correct decision, but want to check with the forum. what do you guys think?aseem

[bsabres81 0]

There are plenty of times its correct to chase. I don't feel this is one of them. Ignoring the fact that with ragged cards, someone is likely to have a set, the other likely possibility is Ax with x paired, greatly reducing your outs. The only card that could win you the pot is probably a king, but, since you are likely drawing dead, and still a longshot to hit your king (or maybe ace, you never know), it is probably a fold. None of this even considers the fact that other people may be chasing with AK, AQ, KQ, etc., taking away even those outs you had if you were drawing live.

[Smasharoo 0]

Of course you should call if you think your overcard outs might be clean in a pot this big.

[Smasharoo 0]

There are plenty of times its correct to chase. I don't feel this is one of them. Ignoring the fact that with ragged cards, someone is likely to have a set, the other likely possibility is Ax with x paired, greatly reducing your outs. The only card that could win you the pot is probably a king, but, since you are likely drawing dead, and still a longshot to hit your king (or maybe ace, you never know), it is probably a fold. None of this even considers the fact that other people may be chasing with AK, AQ, KQ, etc., taking away even those outs you had if you were drawing live.That's horrible advice. The over card outs need to be clean 1 time in 3 to make the call correct here.Assuming they're not 2/3 of the time is stunningly weak/tight.

[jayboogie 0]

Your getting pot odds to call, there's enough in the pot where you could call and try to hit 1 of your 6 outs. If you listen to that other poster's advice, your playing weak and thinking about hands that beat you and the million possibilities someone else could have, but the truth is how many people actually flop sets or even 2 pair? It doesn't happen as often as you think. Top pair on the board is often good enough to take the pot. If your drawing a hand that you think will win the pot, you should chase as long as there's enough in the pot to justify it. If you play thinking your beat all the time, your not going to maximize profits when you win with the best hand. The most important thing in poker is maximizing your profits out of your winning hands, everybody gets winning hands, it's who gets the most out of there hands they win that make the difference between winning and losing overall.

[Munky 0]

There are plenty of times its correct to chase.  I don't feel this is one of them.  Ignoring the fact that with ragged cards, someone is likely to have a set, the other likely possibility is Ax with x paired, greatly reducing your outs.  The only card that could win you the pot is probably a king, but, since you are likely drawing dead, and still a longshot to hit your king (or maybe ace, you never know), it is probably a fold.  None of this even considers the fact that other people may be chasing with AK, AQ, KQ, etc., taking away even those outs you had if you were drawing live.

Don't mean to be rude, but it seems like it would be easy to steal a pot from you after you raised it.

[bsabres81 0]

Smash, if there are no draws on the board as the original poster said, what could 6 other people possibly have that would make an ace or king likely the best hand?It would be helpful to know the exact flop, but he makes it sound like it was something like J 7 2 4 Unless he was at the loosest table ever, I really can't think of 1 betting and 5 calling hands with this board. Maybe if it was exactly1. QJ2. J103. J94. 875. 886. 1010More likely though is1. AJ2. KJ3. J104. A75. 10106. 99I would say an ace would almost never win you the pot, and a king rarely would. At least 80% of the time you are drawing dead

[Smasharoo 0]

I would say an ace would almost never win you the pot, and a king rarely would. At least 80% of the time you are drawing deadLudicrous.Your reasoning only makes sense in a game where people play perfectly postflop.Stop playing in those games.

[bsabres81 0]

Munky, I admit I am fairly easy to steal from, but my point is that with the bettor and 5 callers, I won't continue.Smash, I just can't think of what a bettor and 5 callers could have with a board such as the one I described that would make AK drawing live. If you can, let me know. The 6 I posted earlier would still require terrible play by loooooose players.

[Smasharoo 0]

Smash, I just can't think of what a bettor and 5 callers could have with a board such as the one I described that would make AK drawing live. If you can, let me know. The 6 I posted earlier would still require terrible play by loooooose players.Well, you're right in that not knowing the flop it's hard to speculate. This is a low limit game. People will continue to the river with any pocket pair trying to spike a set. People will play any two suited cards from any position and continue to the river with them with any pair. People will continue with a single overacard to the board with any kicker, etc.The hand history would be nice as it might demonstrate some indication that the overcard outs might not be clean, but again at 17 to 1 they only need to be clean 1/3 of the time.

[akishore 0]

sorry no hand history, i had closed the table before i thought about posting it here. i don't remember what exactly the flop was either.

[Smasharoo 0]

sorry no hand history, i had closed the table before i thought about posting it here. i don't remember what exactly the flop was either.Do you remember what won the hand?

[akishore 0]

haha no, i remembered the hand a while after i had played it. i play two tables, so i might not have even seen what won it.

[The Sheriff JBJ 0]

haha no, i remembered the hand a while after i had played it. i play two tables, so i might not have even seen what won it.

This is not a dig, but more of an interesting ask.How is it possible to play 2 games well? If you didnt see what won the hand, how do you put a read on your opponents. Are people holding mid pocket pairs for trips?Like you are they holding two big over cards?Are they chasing starights & flushes?I know some people just play their own game regardless of what others do, which is fine, I just wanted to raise this point.Smash, I beleieve plays multiple tables, am I right to presume at mid limits $10 / $20 blinds + ? So you could well have strong support for the multi table option.I like $2 / $4 myself as I hate the gung ho, all in maniacs, and the limit call everything micro scene.

[Spidurman 0]

When you play multiple tables, you sacrifice some knowledge and some profit per table.Lets say you make 4 BB/hour playing one table, and 3 BB/hour playing two. If you play two tables at once, you'll make 6 BB/hour (2 tables at 3) vs 4 at one table. Everyone has a point where adding a game is not efficient, generally between 2 and 4.

[TheIceman05 0]

With a ragged board like that and very little action, we can pretty well assume that ONE person MIGHT have Top pair A kicker. We can easily assume that:No one has a set (or just the one better, in which case no one has TPAK)There are probably a few draws out there. But since your A or K won't fill any of them, they're likely clean on that front. And since this is a bad table, there are probably a lot of gutshots and maybe hands like "JQ" or "A10" calling out of desperation/because they suck. If you have 3 live outs (KKK, eg) and you're getting laid a price of 17-1, YOU ARE STILL GETTING THE CORRECT PRICE TO CALL. At this point, the only concern becomes winning the pot because it is so big. The only reason I can see that one might fold here is some absolute disdain for money. Also, in this situation, I would MUCH rather have KQ than AK. Iceman

[JistTheFist 0]

And since this is a bad table, there are probably a lot of gutshots and maybe hands like "JQ" or "A10" calling out of desperation/because they suck. Iceman

haha... a lot of times if there is a lot of action with a raggedy flop people will turn over 77 or something that you don't really see coming.... however... like they have all said... you only need to right once out of three times to make your money... it was a good call as the right price was being laid to... just be careful about those sneaky sets like 44 and crap.

[justblaze 0]

JisttheFist you are my new favourite poster. When is your book coming out? will you sign my copy?

[akishore 0]

How is it possible to play 2 games well? If you didnt see what won the hand, how do you put a read on your opponents. Are people holding mid pocket pairs for trips? Like you are they holding two big over cards? Are they chasing starights & flushes? I know some people just play their own game regardless of what others do, which is fine, I just wanted to raise this point.

I'm actually the type of person that agrees with you (most of the time I prefer playing only one table and studying people), but once in a while I play two tables just to increase my win rate per hour a little. I never do more than two, as I've found my play deteriorates from there on (I play hands forgetting about position or not remembering the guy who reraised me is a lagger, etc.).The other reason for playing two tables, or rather support of, is that sometimes the same people play on multiple tables, as was the case last night, so my notes on three fish carried over to my second table where all three of them were as well.Aseem