Do You Make This Call? ($11 Sng)

[throwemaway 0]

The point I think that everyone is trying to make is that playing an aggressive tourney game in low stakes HE has proven to be the most succesful..Therefore, you should be raising pots or folding, especially when opening a pot in late position..Limping from the button isn't switching it up, its just weak/tight...Limping in is OK with a high implied odds hand (small pairs and suited connectors) but Ace 4 os does not contain high implied odds..Its a hand you want to win the blinds with and get out...The easiest way: Raise pre flop...I don't see any reason to put yourself in situations like this where you have to make tough decisions, because in low buy in tourneys, the money is to be made making simple, straightforward decisions..I mean thats great that you came out ahead in this spot, and really, were all pretty proud of you..But fancy play syndrome just doesn't cut it long run in small stakes sngs..Maybe this helps to clear things up, maybe you still vehementely disagree..Take it for what its worth

[WolvenASE 0]

but Ace 4 os does not contain high implied odds..Its a hand you want to win the blinds with and get out...

I stopped reading after that.You, obviously, have not read any of my posts.

[throwemaway 0]

I stopped reading after that.You, obviously, have not read any of my posts.

Good response..Wolvenase>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tourney Strat forum

[Actuary 3]

Strategy,thread with Smash? The one Smash had QQ in BB on Bubble?Or something else...I harldy ever disagreed with Smash.Do you have a link or anymore detail ?I don't mean to sound personally offended.I do wish to learn and admit my shortcoming quite often.Maybe the sarcasm and seemingly offensive stance looks to you as if I"m really offended. Forums don't convey intent too well. Honestly, I don't take a lot of pride in my Poker. Everythnig I know I learned over the last 12 months. Most of it on here.***************************Copernicus,Wouldn't you think at a passive table you could see just about every flop early on?But 65% over entire STT would require a huge stack have been built up, I'd think

[WolvenASE 0]

Good response..Wolvenase>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tourney Strat forum

Don't know where you're getting that from. If you read any of my posts, I wasn't playing the hand for "implied odds". Christ.. I've explained that about 4 times now.Anyways, yes, it does involve having a deeper stack. I will play loose as I accumulate more chips, and call more raises, make reasonable raises, and often limp in the first level or two of the SNG. If I'm down to 1000 chips, I become even more aggressive. Rather than shutting down and tightening up, I try to force things to work. I really don't understand why he thinks 65% is impossible. It really, really isn't, and it's certainly more probable in a structure like Full Tilt's, which is the site I currently play at.

[throwemaway 0]

Don't know where you're getting that from. If you read any of my posts, I wasn't playing the hand for "implied odds". Christ.. I've explained that about 4 times now.Anyways, yes, it does involve having a deeper stack. I will play loose as I accumulate more chips, and call more raises, make reasonable raises, and often limp in the first level or two of the SNG. If I'm down to 1000 chips, I become even more aggressive. Rather than shutting down and tightening up, I try to force things to work. I really don't understand why he thinks 65% is impossible. It really, really isn't, and it's certainly more probable in a structure like Full Tilt's, which is the site I currently play at.

Oh, so you were playing it for value, I get it..Silly me, and I thought Ace 4 was a weak hand..I said you should limp w/ hands with high implied odds..Otherwise don't do it because limping late position short handed is weak tight!!!(Unless your trapping, which I still think is stupid) I don't think your trapping here with Ace 4...but by your logic so far, that wouldn't really surprise meBut no I understand now..You just have far superior post flop skills than everyone and you always outplay your opponent..We get itDo you find it odd that your the only one who likes your line?

[Actuary 3]

it's starting to feel like General Forum.I'd prefer not to drive away new blood.Especially if he plays a different style.You can choose to ignore if you wish.

[WolvenASE 0]

throwme,It seems that every reply you make, it's more apparent to me that you have not ready my posts. Second page, second or third post from the bottom, whichever is the biggest, explains my thought process with limping in on the button with A-4. No, I was not playing for value, and no, I was not playing for implied odds. It's a simple play I make to pick up the blinds, rather than making a noticeable steal by raising everything in late position.

[gobears 0]

Problem with Ace rag is that either you win a small pot or lose a big one.Here on the button, I would raise if it was open folded to me. I read your post, Wolven, but I probably have the best hand and I'll bet out with it to take the blinds. By limping, I'm giving two hands that are probably worse than me a free shot to pass me.For this particular hand, the call is reasonable as you're getting 2.5-1 on the river and villain played it like a straight draw that missed. If I was villain, I would have check/raised you on the flop which would probably have bought the pot.

[WolvenASE 0]

Thanks for the response. I wish there was just more of that kind of input.I understand that we may have the best hand. However, at the time, my mind wasn't thinking about playing it for value. And yes, I agree completely that you'll win small and lose big. My biggest fear about raising would be being called, having an Ace flop, and then having him suddenly bet out at me. Then, it's more of a difficult spot to be in at that point because I'd probably go all the way to the turn and possibly the river in trying to see if I was good, or if I could possibly force him out of the hand if he was trying to buy it. Again, I just felt it would be too much of a risk.My biggest wish is that you understand my mindset about playing this hand, which so many others seem to not get. I wasn't playing to trap anything.Once again, I appreciate the input, since that -did- have some value to me. I believe it was Actuary that said the most useful thing since then about how raising all the time with a wide range of hands will never allow them to put you on something like a weak ace. Regardless, thanks for your help bud.

[Actuary 3]

it looks quite simply to me like a delayed steal.you hope no one catches a piece of the flop worthwhile and if checked to you, you can pick it up.raising builds a pot with a vulnerable hand.It also costs more than laying it down post flop to a Blind flop lead after you just limp.Some people never ever ever open limp in LP.I never ever ever say never ever.it's almost inconsequential what two cards you haveit's a postion play.Everyone seems to assume you'll go apeshit with any Ace flopping as if you had the nuts. I do very little speculation and orphan pot stealing (likely a weakness of mine) so this play is not in my repetoire. Doesn't make it bad. man, this is crazy to have gone so far!.

[WolvenASE 0]

it looks quite simply to me like a delayed steal.you hope no one catches a piece of the flop worthwhile and if checked to you, you can pick it up.raising builds a pot with a vulnerable hand.It also costs more than laying it down post flop to a Blind flop lead after you just limp.Some people never ever ever open limp in LP.I never ever ever say never ever.it's almost inconsequential what two cards you haveit's a postion play.Everyone seems to assume you'll go apeshit with any Ace flopping as if you had the nuts. I do very little speculation and orphan pot stealing (likely a weakness of mine) so this play is not in my repetoire. Doesn't make it bad. man, this is crazy to have gone so far!.

......Well, ****.. I wish you had said this three and a half pages ago.

[Actuary 3]

......Well, ****.. I wish you had said this three and a half pages ago.

lolit's fun to see the emotion!

[copernicus 0]

Strategy,thread with Smash? The one Smash had QQ in BB on Bubble?Or something else...I harldy ever disagreed with Smash.Do you have a link or anymore detail ?I don't mean to sound personally offended.I do wish to learn and admit my shortcoming quite often.Maybe the sarcasm and seemingly offensive stance looks to you as if I"m really offended. Forums don't convey intent too well. Honestly, I don't take a lot of pride in my Poker. Everythnig I know I learned over the last 12 months. Most of it on here.***************************Copernicus,Wouldn't you think at a passive table you could see just about every flop early on?But 65% over entire STT would require a huge stack have been built up, I'd think

Early on at a loose passive table (so there are 4-5 limpers in every pot) you may be able to survive with 65% of flops seen with superior post flop skills AND readable players. That also means you have to limp with your strong hands as well, because raising will chase a table that is used to seeing you limp so often. these are the top 65% hands:22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q2s+,J2s+,T2s+,94s+,84s+,74s+,64s+,54s,A2o+,K2o+,Q4o+,J6o+,T7o+,97o+,86o+,76oFrom what Ive read here I dont think those conditions exist routinely enough that someone can play a significant number of SnGs and maintain that kind of average early on.the overall percentage of flops seen can be skewed by making it to a lot of HU situations where you are probably seeing 80%+ of the flops, but the blinds are usually big enough by the time you get there (especially in a weak game where a lot of the time chips are just being passed from player to player) that you arent going to see a lot of HU hands.

[WolvenASE 0]

Hello? MM? Hi!Screenname/Pokersite please. Thanks.

[Bizzle 0]

I got sent to this thread once so I could post the tourney rules. I thought to myself, "theres no way! this can possibly go on for any longer. It's due to fizzle out!"But I was wong. And I accept that. I'm fine with it. Seriously. It's ok. Everyone is wrong once in their lives.

[timwakefield 68]

you played A4 for 700t ?mixing it up means open raising 65s from the button, not limping with A-rag.

Oh crap, open-raising 65s from the button is mixing it up? For me it's standard....

I'd play QQ for it's value, which contrasts my goal with the A-4o to pick up the blinds on the flop. The 4 on the flop obviously changed the course of the hand, but that was the general mindset I had going into it.

So if I am understanding this, you limp with the A4 hoping that a bet on the flop will take it down? Just for giggles I put A4 into the hand calculator vs 2 random hands (in this case J2 suited and 75 offsuit). A4 is 36% to win vs those hands. So, in other words, if you are trying to pick up the blinds then you should just raise and pick them up. Letting random hands see the flop means letting them improve, and it doesn't take much to beat A4.IMO limping from the button and betting the flop will not get you any more fold equity than betting preflop will. It will in fact get you less, because hands which could not call you preflop can certainly beat you on the flop.

[psujohn 0]

The delayed steal isn't a bad play in the right circumstances. Namely when you've been stealing a lot and your opponents are at least somewhat observant. In short handed situations you've got to give your opponents credit for being somewhat observant since they're seeing you play a lot more hands and they're forced to act much more frequently which minimizes the effects of other distractions they might have going on.I think the delayed steal is MUCH more effective in the SB than on the B because:- there's only one hand that could hit the flop- you get to act first on the flopThe problem here is that this isn't a great situation for a delayed steal. There will likely be two other players to the flop. Without a PF raise you have NO idea what cards they hold and they'll likely at least call your flop bet with even the smallest part of the flop. PF you most likely have the best hand. In general after the flop (a generic flop no this particular one) you're much less likely to have the best hand. PF you're likely to fold bad hands with a standard sized raise. After the flop you're likely to get calls from over cards to the flop, gutshot draws, bottom pair etc.Essentially by foregoing the chance to raise PF you're trading a situation where you're likely ahead and likely to get lesser holdings to fold for a situation where it's less likely that you're ahead and even lesser holdings (weak draws) are more likely to call.Absent something like "It folded to me on the B 9 of the last 10 orbits and I took it down PF with a raise" this hand is clearly a PF raise situation. Given that situation I'd say it's a PF fold. I understand exactly what you're trying to do. I just think it's a bad idea - wrong time to do it.Given that though, you can't call the river bet. You have NO idea what villain holds. Absent a read that this guy is willing to risk 1/3 of his remaining stack on a stone cold bluff you can't beat him. You can't get a read that strong on a single low level SNG. You don't see enough hands and villains play will not be that consistant.It's important to defend your play in strat posts. You may have a though process that isn't immediately obvious or you may remember details that didn't make it into the OP. Sometimes the initial comments will be incorrect. Sometimes people will just plain misread the hand. But strat posts are useful when you want to find out if you did something wrong and how you could have played a hand better. If you're absolutely certain you'r play was brilliant you're not really looking for feedback. In that case just post the hand in general, with results and title it "brag post". If you post a hand like this in strat and ignore responses you fail to learn/grow as a player. If we as a forum allow you to display such a hand as a "look at my brilliant play" we risk misinforming others that come behind you to read the forum.

[WolvenASE 0]

Oh crap, open-raising 65s from the button is mixing it up? For me it's standard....:)So if I am understanding this, you limp with the A4 hoping that a bet on the flop will take it down? Just for giggles I put A4 into the hand calculator vs 2 random hands (in this case J2 suited and 75 offsuit). A4 is 36% to win vs those hands. So, in other words, if you are trying to pick up the blinds then you should just raise and pick them up. Letting random hands see the flop means letting them improve, and it doesn't take much to beat A4.IMO limping from the button and betting the flop will not get you any more fold equity than betting preflop will. It will in fact get you less, because hands which could not call you preflop can certainly beat you on the flop.

Okay, so what's a raise preflop supposed to do? A raise preflop has the -exact- same potential for a blind to wake up with a strong premium hand and call you, and make life a living hell for you in that one particular hand.Secondly, and alternatively, if you limp in, and let's see the BB checked with a raising hand with a hand like A-10 to see if he can hit before he puts more money in. If the flop comes complete rags, he has no reason to call a bet on the flop with so little invested, unless he would just put me on a complete steal.The fact is, 1/3 of the time you will hit your flops. Because you say A4 has a 36% chance to win does not mean you can't win on a steal. Again, we're not playing for value, and I could careless if I was a 1% to win. That's not the point.If you think you're going to let marginal hands catch up to you with a limp on the button, then this is true, I've already said that, and I've admitted it was risky. However, more often than not, they will miss the flop. It's the same situation both ways. Either they will have a hand preflop, or they will not. They will either have a hand on the flop, or not. With how aggressive I have been in that one particular game, I doubt they would want to committ too many chips without knowing that they would eventually be playing for a LOT of chips.

[Canada 0]

you're mistaking the OP for someone who wanted to post a hand here to learn something. OP wanted to post this hand to TEACH us something. Namely how great he is.

I wonder if you hurt that nail when you hit it on the head.OP, you asked the villain to bluff and the villain complied. Call the river.Betting the turn lets you control the pot size. You could've got to showdown cheaper and more importantly not let the villain dictate the final bet.psujohn covered preflop well.don't post results.brag posts go in general.hopefully somewhere in there you have learnt something.

[WolvenASE 0]

The delayed steal isn't a bad play in the right circumstances. Namely when you've been stealing a lot and your opponents are at least somewhat observant. In short handed situations you've got to give your opponents credit for being somewhat observant since they're seeing you play a lot more hands and they're forced to act much more frequently which minimizes the effects of other distractions they might have going on.

Okay.. which had been the case.I think the delayed steal is MUCH more effective in the SB than on the B because:- there's only one hand that could hit the flop- you get to act first on the flopEr.. is this a joke? Only one hand that could hit the flop? I hope you don't mean that only one hand is going to hit on the flop..Sure, you get to act first, which may be an advantage to you. I understand that, and it makes sense, I might end up doing that more often. However, though, I, personally, prefer the button limp, because you have the advantage of acting after. If there's a bet, then whatever. If I want to get involved or not, it makes my decision of how I'm going to handle my next actions much, much easier."The problem here is that this isn't a great situation for a delayed steal."I don't know why you think it's not a great situation for a "delayed steal". I've told you in many posts above, that I was -constantly- raising in late position, on the cutoff, or on the button. Where are you getting this idea that it wasn't the right situation? There will likely be two other players to the flop. Without a PF raise you have NO idea what cards they hold I don't know what cards they hold either if they decide they're going to call one of my raises in the blind, either. It's a guessing game on the flop."and they'll likely at least call your flop bet with even the smallest part of the flop."True, which is what the case was in this hand, and I understand that.. That's the "risk" part of this play. But being unpredictable involves alot of risk in itself.PF you most likely have the best hand. In general after the flop (a generic flop no this particular one) you're much less likely to have the best hand. PF you're likely to fold bad hands with a standard sized raise. After the flop you're likely to get calls from over cards to the flop, gutshot draws, bottom pair etc."Essentially by foregoing the chance to raise PF you're trading a situation where you're likely ahead and likely to get lesser holdings to fold for a situation where it's less likely that you're ahead and even lesser holdings (weak draws) are more likely to call."I think maybe one of the smartest things you've said in this post, was ironically the first sentence in this quote. That is the point. I'm either in trouble on the flop with a limp, or in trouble preflop with a raise. I understood that, but I continued on with it anways.Absent something like "It folded to me on the B 9 of the last 10 orbits and I took it down PF with a raise" this hand is clearly a PF raise situation. Given that situation I'd say it's a PF fold.I understand exactly what you're trying to do. I just think it's a bad idea - wrong time to do it."Again, you weren't there, so I don't fault you for not knowing what was going on, but I can assure you that I was raising in late position with almost anything, all teh time, consistantly. This was the first time I had limped on the button. What I don't get, however, is why you keep assuming it was a bad idea without knowing what the circumstances really were."Given that though, you can't call the river bet. You have NO idea what villain holds. Absent a read that this guy is willing to risk 1/3 of his remaining stack on a stone cold bluff you can't beat him. You can't get a read that strong on a single low level SNG. You don't see enough hands and villains play will not be that consistant."I thought it was a pretty obvious steal. I see this play SO much. If someone bets 2/3rds into a pot in that situation, I start to suspect something, more so at these lower limits. This was never supposed to be a thread about limping on the button with A4. In fact, I believe that 5/6s of the posts here should all be compiled in a thread called "Limping on the button with Ace-rag", stamped, sealed, and locked forever. This was never meant to be the focus of the conversation, but, I guess inevitably, it was. The reason why I asked was to see what people thought about the bet on the river. I wanted to know what others would put him on. People are telling me to not call, but without reasoning as to why. WHY? That seems to be a huge problem, in this thread, alltogether. That's why I'm trying to defend my play, because no one is telling me WHY I should do what you suggest I should have done. Cause and effect.

It's important to defend your play in strat posts. You may have a though process that isn't immediately obvious or you may remember details that didn't make it into the OP. Sometimes the initial comments will be incorrect. Sometimes people will just plain misread the hand. But strat posts are useful when you want to find out if you did something wrong and how you could have played a hand better. If you're absolutely certain you'r play was brilliant you're not really looking for feedback. In that case just post the hand in general, with results and title it "brag post". If you post a hand like this in strat and ignore responses you fail to learn/grow as a player. If we as a forum allow you to display such a hand as a "look at my brilliant play" we risk misinforming others that come behind you to read the forum.

That's the point. I don't think I, personally, could have played the hand better up to the river, the way my style of play incorporates everything. I know this sounds arrogant, but not once did I ever question my play up to the river, but apparently, almost everyone else has. And I don't think people are questionning my play because it's ciompletely illogical, but because it's a conflict of styles. What I would really, really wish is that if someone is going to try and tell me my play was bad, I would like to know what they have done. Sure, some people have done that, but they left out the biggest question I wanted to know.WHY?I want to learn. If there's ANYTHING I want to do in poker, it's to be more successful at it. And there's no way I can do that without learning something new almost everytime I play.If something doesn't make sense to me, I'm going to question it. Not because I'm hating down on the way they play it, but because I feel that there is no merit to it. If someone tells me to do something that doesn't make sense, then I will question it all day long.EDIT: In response to Canada's post, I frankly don't know why I'm responding in the first place. Quite frankly, it looks like you're confused about the entire direction of this thread. The only thing you said in that post that I believe is worth getting replied to is your comment saying by betting the turn, it controls the size of the pot.Do you mean because I carry the act of the aggressor, he'll check the river to me, assuming I have a hand and let me check the pot down there? If that's the case, then sure, I agree, and I've done that before.But why do you prefer this over checking the turn? By checking the turn, it KEEPS the pot small. Nothing is being added to it, so if he bluffs, the amount he's going to bet would be considerably smaller than it would be on the river if the pot was larger. You have to committ yourself to the bluff. This is all hypothetical, because as I have said earlier in this post, I'm not asking for critiquing on my play up to the river, I'm asking what you think our villain has, and why you would put him on that.

[psujohn 0]

Er.. is this a joke? Only one hand that could hit the flop? I hope you don't mean that only one hand is going to hit on the flop..

I'm assuming the B folds. In a blind battle, by its very definition, you're only facing one other player. You hitting the flop is just as irrelevant as your holding in a steal. You only have to worry about one guy catching a piece vs in this case where you have to worry about SB or BB catching a piece.

I'm either in trouble on the flop with a limp, or in trouble preflop with a raise.

You're missing my point. 62o folds to a raise PF. J8 folds PF. If your opponents hold J8 and 62 a lot more flops help one of them than help you. You're not in trouble PF. You allow yourself to get into trouble on the flop.

This is all hypothetical, because as I have said earlier in this post, I'm not asking for critiquing on my play up to the river, I'm asking what you think our villain has, and why you would put him on that.

I have no fucking idea and neither do you. Nothing in this hand has served to narrow his holdings - especially at low limits. That's my whole point.You can say it's just a style difference but I think your "style" is unnecessarily risky for little reward. You turned a nice simple blind steal into a complicated hand. Instead of a simple PF raise to 300 you end up risking 650 chips with a marginal hand and no idea where you are in the hand. Perhaps its just a "style difference". Perhaps I'm over re-acting to leaking too much in BSB situations. I "like" to get "caught stealing" now and again. If I raise PF with something like A4 and get re-raised I fold it. Re-steals are infrequent at low limits. If I CB and get called, I'm happy too c/f it down. I'm hoping that the villain remembers that when I pick up AA on the B. Not only will he re-raise my steal attemp he'll call my all-in with KTo because he thinks I'm bluffing.

[WolvenASE 0]

You're missing my point. 62o folds to a raise PF. J8 folds PF. If your opponents hold J8 and 62 a lot more flops help one of them than help you. You're not in trouble PF. You allow yourself to get into trouble on the flop.

It's pretty apparent that you're missing MY point. If he's trying to be sneaky and check with a GOOD hand, a hand that you CAN play for value, and misses with it, you can steal that hand away rather than meeting resistance preflop. It's a switch situation, and I don't think you understand that. It can go EITHER way. 50/50."I have no ****ing idea and neither do you. Nothing in this hand has served to narrow his holdings - especially at low limits. That's my whole point."I obviously had a general idea of what he had. Some have voiced that they do, too. The fact that you can't put him on a hand, at all, makes it completely useless for you to even voice your input in a thread devoted entirely to making this call on the river. Let me ask you this, to make your ranting somewhat useful and try to leak out the information I was trying to get, in this thread. With a bet like that on the river, what does that PERSONALLY mean to you? Is he buying it? Is he value betting? Is he purposefully betting that much to make me think he's stealing, when in fact, he has a monster like J-10? My experience at low limit SNGs that this proportional bet means a steal. More so now than before(in the last 3 months). I'm wonderring if I'm reading too much into that general steal play, or if people have had more than enough experience that with a bet like that, that means a hand. This is the information I'm trying to get, not how to raise Ace-rag on the button.

[anselm 0]

This thread is a good reminder of why a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. OP played the hand like a typical $11 SnG donk, only he's learned some poker lingo to justify his crummy play. There have been some interesting posts, but I fail to see how the hand in question is instructive or unique. I did learn one thing, however, which I plan on implementing into my strategy immediately: "IMPLIED ODDS ARE BULLSHIT." TY nice to know. NH sir.

[WolvenASE 0]

Thanks buddy.