Go down with this hand?

Soup66

It was on pacific so the hand history is hard to get. Anyways the basics is I was playing $50 NL.

I have about $61 in chips or so.

I have Jh 8C frlop comes down 9H 10H Qh. I floped the straight with an open end straight flush draw.

Checks around to me I bet up $10 and get two callers, turn is brick, raise again, one folds, button calls. River brick, I check he raises me all in. I figure the obvious play is fold, what would you do?

ScottyZ

Go down with this hand?

I hope you're talking about poker.

Checks around to me I bet up $10 and get two callers, turn is brick, raise again, one folds, button calls. River brick, I check he raises me all in. I figure the obvious play is fold, what would you do?

Did you mean "bet" on the turn and river, or is there some other bet and then a raise?

Even though it's complicated getting the hand history, we would still need some more info to analyse the hand.

How much did you bet on the turn?

What are the blinds?

What is the pre-flop action?

What is your pre-flop position, and that of your opponents?

What are the stack sizes of all of your opponents who are in the hand?

What are the bricks exactly? Low cards? (Note that a 6 is not exactly a brick) Is the board paired on the turn or river?

[I'm inspired because Harrington wrote a bit something like this in his new book.]

ScottyZ

Soup66

Yes, I bet the turn, he bet the river all in. The player had about $45 going into the hand. No action preflop and I was BB. The board did not pair up and the brick's could have done nothing else but hit his PP. I raised up $15 on the turn. Granted his raise all in was only for about another $17 I had him on slow playing the flush but I didnt think I could lay it down, as he was a bit of loose cannon in earlier hands(trying to take down pots with mediocre hands)

ScottyZ

I probably would not have folded on the river in the scenario you described, particularly against an opponent who is even somewhat of a "loose cannon". Such players will automatically bet the river most of the time with both kinds of hands (made flush or missed flush) if you check the river to them.

Nothing has changed since the turn, which you though was worth betting $15 into. Your opponent has either missed, or already had you when you committed a lot of chips (relative to the opponent's stack) on the flop and turn.

Assuming the blinds are $0.50/$1.00, betting out $10 on the flop seems like a fair overbet. It's important to be able to interpret the meaning of our two opponents' calls. Betting exactly $10 gives each opponent who called* almost the correct odds to chase the bare Ah if he thought there was a good chance of getting paid if made. I'd prefer a more controlled bet of around 3 or 4 bucks into a pot which is currently around 3 or 4 bucks.**

Checking the flop is worthy of consideration too, particularly with one player in who you describe as a "loose cannon". With a strong, but vulnerable hand, I might prefer playing it slowly in the early streets in an attempt to cheaply see how the flush story unfolds.

As for the turn, and supposing the flop bet was $10 and called in two places, I'd likely move all-in here. The pot is now big enough to protect if one (or both) of your opponents are on draws. The fact that one of my opponents may have made a nice play trapping me on the flop is not going to cause me to make a major blunder by not protecting the large pot on the turn in the opposite case. Betting $15 (again, it depends to some degree on the unknown turn folder's stack size) might be okay, but I prefer getting all the chips in now in order to get full value from a foolish draw. The fact that you also have a marginal redraw against many of the possible made flushes (as it was an unraised pre-flop) is also not irrelevant.

ScottyZ

*Depending on the stack size of the turn folder.

**Not knowing the pre-flop action, I don't know what the flop pot size is.

kalozdi

I play on those tables on Pacific and they are so fishy that I would make that call and would probably of been betting the whole way. This guy probably made an ugly two pair or something and thought it was the nuts.

Anton81

kalozdi wrote:

This guy probably made an ugly two pair or something and thought it was the nuts.

LOL ^