Middle Pair, Weak Kicker ftw!
Greetings poker entrepreneurs,
Yes, I continue to exist for those who are monitoring my pokerforum career. Still deeply enjoy poker, I could just use a few bucks so I can enjoy it in a casino context more often. For now, this bad beat I dealt to my dear friend and cousin took place in a completely casual, 5-handed poker game that had $0 invested in it. We each started with around thirty five chips and the blinds were 1chip/2chip.
I have the button and I'm in an aggressive mood today. I raise with 97o and end up heads up with my cousin to the flop. Flop comes
10d 9h 4c
Cousin bets something like 8 chips into a 14chip pot or something of that nature. I make my read that he's weak. With my middle pair, weak kicker I just decide to ship it because it felt great at the time. In fact, I insta-shipped it on him. Not going to lie, it really did feel good.
He calls and flips over Top Pair...
The run out decided to come in my favour: I rivered a 7h or something like that. At the time, it felt somehow right. Poker rewards aggression, right? I felt great about the aggressive move I made: even if the more probable event occurred and I went bust I just simply felt the move was sexy. When I rivered the goods I acted like it's all happened before. I was indifferent to the result at that point, but then it just decided to arrive in my favour.
However, all of the fun of shipping it aside, now that I reflect I feel it may be patently obvious that my play is simply not good in so many ways lol. This is where I'm hoping to get some feedback. This concept in poker seems to haunt me, in that I feel like I've heard it a lot but don't know what it means. "Consider what you're getting called with..." Consider what you're getting called with. Is that a thing? Cuz perhaps if I considered what I was getting called with in the situation I was presented with today I simply would not have done what I did indeed do. The 'expression' or concept tells me that the only hands calling my all-in are hands that are going to rEEdonkewlouslEE CRUSH Middle Pair, Weak Kicker. Lol.
But, I dunno. It still felt great at the time. And I achieved a great early double-up. Any help? :bs:
However, to further reflect, I made the read that I was stronger than he was and I wanted to blow him out of the water with my raise. Was there any logic in what I did or do I need to take it easy? TV poker tells me sometimes you can ship it and your opponent just insta-folds to the raw power animal magnetism of your confidence and suave. Can I be James Bond or will I forever just be the chump who plays 97o with the '89 Honda Civic that I bought for $600 in some abandoned car lot in West Virginia from a real sketchy dude?
Yes, I continue to exist for those who are monitoring my pokerforum career. Still deeply enjoy poker, I could just use a few bucks so I can enjoy it in a casino context more often. For now, this bad beat I dealt to my dear friend and cousin took place in a completely casual, 5-handed poker game that had $0 invested in it. We each started with around thirty five chips and the blinds were 1chip/2chip.
I have the button and I'm in an aggressive mood today. I raise with 97o and end up heads up with my cousin to the flop. Flop comes
10d 9h 4c
Cousin bets something like 8 chips into a 14chip pot or something of that nature. I make my read that he's weak. With my middle pair, weak kicker I just decide to ship it because it felt great at the time. In fact, I insta-shipped it on him. Not going to lie, it really did feel good.
He calls and flips over Top Pair...
The run out decided to come in my favour: I rivered a 7h or something like that. At the time, it felt somehow right. Poker rewards aggression, right? I felt great about the aggressive move I made: even if the more probable event occurred and I went bust I just simply felt the move was sexy. When I rivered the goods I acted like it's all happened before. I was indifferent to the result at that point, but then it just decided to arrive in my favour.
However, all of the fun of shipping it aside, now that I reflect I feel it may be patently obvious that my play is simply not good in so many ways lol. This is where I'm hoping to get some feedback. This concept in poker seems to haunt me, in that I feel like I've heard it a lot but don't know what it means. "Consider what you're getting called with..." Consider what you're getting called with. Is that a thing? Cuz perhaps if I considered what I was getting called with in the situation I was presented with today I simply would not have done what I did indeed do. The 'expression' or concept tells me that the only hands calling my all-in are hands that are going to rEEdonkewlouslEE CRUSH Middle Pair, Weak Kicker. Lol.
But, I dunno. It still felt great at the time. And I achieved a great early double-up. Any help? :bs:
However, to further reflect, I made the read that I was stronger than he was and I wanted to blow him out of the water with my raise. Was there any logic in what I did or do I need to take it easy? TV poker tells me sometimes you can ship it and your opponent just insta-folds to the raw power animal magnetism of your confidence and suave. Can I be James Bond or will I forever just be the chump who plays 97o with the '89 Honda Civic that I bought for $600 in some abandoned car lot in West Virginia from a real sketchy dude?
Comments
The basics can be boring. It's like sitting down in a neat circle in class learning your ABCs from your mommy when you really want to be out partying with all of your closest friends and a bunch of hot chicks.
Tight/aggressive is cool and I've totally been there done that and realize the value of it. However, I also love busting out of my timid poker shell and playing loose/agressive when it fits my fancy. Honestly it just felt so right during that particular casual session. Maybe it was the no-money-at-all-on-the-line giving me some free courage but I like playing that way. I can even recall playing super loose at the casino once for the same reason (I was in the mood and seemed to be having success with the style online). Get involved in plenty of hands and take lots of flops with any two somewhat decent cards (or even rags if you have position) - I recall when I tried that at Niagara with my min. buy in of 60 on the line, I played 10 7o in position on my very first hand, promptly flopped two-pair and had a customer who paid me all the way to the river and I doubled up - going on to cash out an hour or so later with like $125, my biggest profit and most financially successful casino trip to date.
For me personally (at least at times) I feel like the greatest joy of poker (and where you'll be most rewarded) is to just get loose (poker-wise and mood-wise) and just go for it.
Haha, great response. I totally agree. I believe at your home games I save $20 on a min. buy in (from 60 down to 40) and get more bang for the buck due to the blinds being cut in half. I'm going to make a point to try and make it out, especially if I can bring my poker buddy (aforementioned dear friend and cousin). I'll be checking out the thread for upcoming dates. I live in Hamilton so the drive might be an hour-long or so but it's quite do-able for a good game.
http://www.pokerforum.ca/f60/saturday-night-nlhe-80-r-tourney-hamilton-mar-4th-7pm-33724/
http://www.pokerforum.ca/f89/march-18th-rake-free-cash-game-33729/
"The secret of life is there's never a shortage of suckers."
One thing to also consider is the fact that no money is coming out of the pot in these home games, compared to up to $5 per hand coming off the table at the casino. It doesn't sound like much, but it's a killer at the low stakes and will make a huge difference to your bottom line over the long haul.
~~~~~~~
Ty trigs, please put me and buddy (Ryan) down for the 18th. Much appreciated and look forward to it!
To answer your question, we typically start at 25/50 and go up gradually from there, keeping it moving nicely while trying to avoid big jumps. It's actually a shit ton of chips compared to the average tourney, as they are intentionally very deep during the rebuy / late registration period. I find it gives folks a chance to "get loose" (as you say) during those early stages.
Your friend is also welcome, just let me know and I can get you guys on the list. And if I don't see you there, look forward to meeting you at trigs' game!
Andrew
Consider what you are getting called with...
In the scenario described in the OP I got burned -- Top Pair over Middle Pair -- even though I sucked out. I recall even in another post in this forum, I shoved with Top Pair, Top Kicker right after the flop in response to a raise (I was heads up) and got burned by a set.
I do recall the advice from the latter post was "pot control" and "small hand, small pot - big hand, big pot". Perhaps that still rings true. But if anyone knows what the heck I'm talking about and getting at, can anyone speak to this? Generally speaking, maybe especially for me as a relative beginner, should I be looking only to shove with a very strong holding?
That's a key statement.... Before you bet consider what you want the outcome to be and think, will your bet have the meaning to your opponent you think it will? That's something I wrestle with constantly. If you want your opponent to call, think what amount he will call and if you don't want a call, ie you think you can get a better hand to fold, bet appropriately. Sometimes when we bet too much we will make weaker hands than our own fold (ie bad), or only better hands than ours to call. (also bad).
Betting sizing is key in poker and there is no magic to it other than experience.
I think I need to store that quote into the poker lab I have somewhere up in my noodle. Thanks for that, I think that takes my phrase " consider what you are getting called with " and puts it in a lot more practical terms for me.
Another thing I was pondering that I meant to post yesterday as well:
One of the earliest things I learned about poker (from the so-called 'experts') was that poker rewards aggression. And I think I've quoted this back to you guys enough times.
Alternatively (or perhaps not), I've also heard dudes like Daniel Negreanu preach "small ball" and so-called studs like Cliff Josephy (2016 November Niner) say things like "I only play small pots."
Where shall I take up residence among this spectrum when I sit down among the big boys? Certainly from this thread I have preached the so-called fun and effectiveness of what could be called a loose-aggressive playstyle. But I'd like to know about all of my options and gather all the data I can.