The Insanity Continues!!

teach

Another half hour session at the 1/2 SH NL Limit Game at supreme!!

Read my first post under Supreme is the Nuts, then get a lot of this.

At the start of these posted hands - I am up a modest $50.00 USD.

Hand #66675880 at table: Table TH 555
Started: Tue Jun 28 23:02:45 2005

cabo is at seat 1 with 83.70
The Teach is at seat 2 with 250.27
bnkroll is at seat 3 with 254.05
maciko is at seat 4 with 98.25
mr.Fjun is at seat 5 with 158.82

mr.Fjun posts the large blind 2.00
maciko posts the small blind 1.00

maciko: --, --
mr.Fjun: --, --
cabo: --, --
The Teach: Qc, 7c
bnkroll: --, --

Pre-flop:

cabo: Call 2.00
The Teach: Call 2.00
bnkroll: Call 2.00
maciko: Call 2.00
mr.Fjun: Check

Flop (Board: Qh, 5c, 5d):

maciko: Check
mr.Fjun: Bet 5.00
cabo: Fold
The Teach: Call 5.00
bnkroll: Raise 10.00
maciko: Fold
mr.Fjun: Call 10.00
The Teach: Call 10.00

Turn (Board: Qh, 5c, 5d, 3d):

mr.Fjun: Check
The Teach: Check
bnkroll: Bet 10.00
mr.Fjun: Call 10.00
The Teach: Call 10.00

River (Board: Qh, 5c, 5d, 3d, 4d):

mr.Fjun: Check
The Teach: Check
bnkroll: Bet 30.00
mr.Fjun: Fold
The Teach: Call 30.00

Showdown:

bnkroll shows: 8d, Kc (a pair of Fives)
The Teach shows: Qc, 7c (two pair, Queens and Fives)

Mainpot:
The Teach wins the pot of 127.00 with two pair, Queens and Fives
CLOWN AT THE TABLE ???CLOWAN AT THE TABLE



IT GETS MORE INSANE!!!!

Hand #66678614 at table: Table TH 555
Started: Tue Jun 28 23:16:20 2005

cabo is at seat 1 with 120.40
The Teach is at seat 2 with 352.22
bnkroll is at seat 3 with 183.25
maciko is at seat 4 with 145.35
FireMKey1 is at seat 5 with 37.00

bnkroll posts the large blind 2.00
The Teach posts the small blind 1.00

The Teach: Jd, 7s
bnkroll: --, --
maciko: --, --
FireMKey1: --, --
cabo: --, --

Pre-flop:

maciko: Call 2.00
FireMKey1: Fold
cabo: Fold
The Teach: Call 2.00
bnkroll: Check

Flop (Board: 10c, 6s, 9s):

The Teach: Check
bnkroll: Bet 2.00
maciko: Call 2.00
The Teach: Call 2.00

Turn (Board: 10c, 6s, 9s, 8h):

The Teach: Check
bnkroll: Bet 10.00
maciko: Fold
The Teach: Call 10.00

River (Board: 10c, 6s, 9s, 8h, 9c):

The Teach: Check
bnkroll: Bet 30.00
The Teach: Call 30.00

Showdown:

bnkroll shows: 2d, Ad (a pair of Nines)
The Teach shows: Jd, 7s (Jack high straight)

Mainpot:
The Teach wins the pot of 89.00 with Jack high straight

THE GUY IS CRAZY NUTS - I LOVE HIM.

Next:

---

Hand #66678865 at table: Table TH 555
Started: Tue Jun 28 23:17:32 2005

cabo is at seat 1 with 120.40
The Teach is at seat 2 with 398.22
bnkroll is at seat 3 with 140.25
maciko is at seat 4 with 139.35
FireMKey1 is at seat 5 with 37.00

maciko posts the large blind 2.00
bnkroll posts the small blind 1.00

bnkroll: --, --
maciko: --, --
FireMKey1: --, --
cabo: --, --
The Teach: Ac, Qc

Pre-flop:

FireMKey1: Fold
cabo: Call 2.00
The Teach: Raise 8.00
bnkroll: Call 8.00
maciko: Call 8.00
cabo: Call 8.00

Flop (Board: 7d, 8h, As):

bnkroll: Check
maciko: Check
cabo: Check
The Teach: Bet 16.00
bnkroll: Raise 32.00
maciko: Fold
cabo: Fold
The Teach: Call 32.00

Turn (Board: 7d, 8h, As, Jh):

bnkroll: Check
The Teach: Check

River (Board: 7d, 8h, As, Jh, Ah):

bnkroll: Bet 40.00
The Teach: Call 40.00

Showdown:

bnkroll shows: 7s, 5s (two pair, Aces and Sevens)
The Teach shows: Ac, Qc (three of a kind, Aces)

Mainpot:
The Teach wins the pot of 173.00 with three of a kind, Aces

I....I....I ....I dont know what to say.


Another:
There are only 5 at the table, can they all be wahoos???

---

Hand #66680359 at table: Table TH 555
Started: Tue Jun 28 23:25:11 2005

cabo is at seat 1 with 128.80
The Teach is at seat 2 with 481.92
bnkroll is at seat 3 with 43.85
maciko is at seat 4 with 151.65
betw is at seat 5 with 28.00

betw posts the large blind 2.00
maciko posts the small blind 1.00
cabo posts all blind 3.00

maciko: --, --
betw: --, --
The Teach: Jd, Qd
bnkroll: --, --

Pre-flop:

The Teach: Call 2.00
bnkroll: Call 2.00
maciko: Call 2.00
betw: Raise 8.00
The Teach: Call 8.00
bnkroll: Call 8.00
maciko: Call 8.00

Flop (Board: Ks, 5c, Qc):

maciko: Check
betw: Bet 6.00
The Teach: Call 6.00
bnkroll: Call 6.00
maciko: Fold

Turn (Board: Ks, 5c, Qc, 3d):

betw: Bet 6.00
The Teach: Call 6.00
bnkroll: Call 6.00

River (Board: Ks, 5c, Qc, 3d, 8d):

betw: All in
The Teach: Call 10.00
bnkroll: Fold

Showdown:

betw shows: 2h, 7h (high card, King)
The Teach shows: Jd, Qd (a pair of Queens)

Mainpot:
The Teach wins the pot of 85.00 with a pair of Queens

$400 deposit turns into $1226.20 in an hour or less!!!!!!!!!

Can these players be for real???

WaterLooser

Maybe some college kids are testing their "bots". Keep it up!

BBC Z

What is far more insane is calling down top pair no kicker on a paired, straighted and flushed board.

stpboy

Well, in defense of that particular play the straight and flush didn't materialize until the river and they both would have had to have been runner runner. Pretty tough to put your opponent on either one of those hands. The way bnkroll played it, I would have likely called him to but would have been afraid that my 7 kicker was no good.
Nice hands teach. Are you employed by Supreme Poker now? Watch out, Scotty_Z might warn you soon for all of the advertising...

stp

ScottyZ

It's hard to do NL cash game hand analysis in isolation.

In some sense, analysing NL tournament hands is a little easier since the blinds generally mean something. So a lot of tournament NL plays come down to someone being offered (or not offered) some kind of odds (pot, implied, etc) which makes a certain kind of play superior to the alternatives.

However, in NL cash games, stacks sizes are almost always very very deep relative to the blinds. Much of the profit in NL cash games come from having someone in the correct box in their post-flop play and extracting money from them as appropriate. Are they too tight? Run them over with pure bluffs. Too loose? Make lots of value bets, and keep the bluffing to a minimum. Are they super aggressive? Let them do the betting when you pick up a decent hand.

Of course, if you're often playing against the same group of players, you're going to get into complicated levels of counter-strategies, counter-counter-strategies, etc. In online NL play, you just want to get a quick and dirty read on a player and go with that. You might be wrong once in a while and give some opponent free cards when you shouldn't have, or try to bluff a tight player off a pot when he happens to have the nuts. These are exactly the kinds of plays which might end up looking silly on their own. Analysis of a hand in isolation may basically conclude that YPLC, where in fact your play might have been absolutely correct based on the overall context of the NL session you are in.

It seems that Teach pegs the relevant opponent(s) here as the kind who will bet strongly with nothing at all, and continue firing on all streets, particularly the river. The passive play with what are generally marginal hands (e.g. top pair, bad kicker) is perhaps called for against this kind of player. To put it differently, against some kinds of players, top pair no kicker is no marginal hand, but a monster relative to the opponent's usual holdings. And possibly letting a particular opponent do the betting is the best way to win his chips.

Taken individually, and against an unknown opponents, Teach's play in each of these hands probably looks questionable at best. However, if Teach has these players in the correct version of the "maniac" box, his play starts making more sense to me.

Even all that said, I'm going to go out on a limb and try a (gasp!) hand analysis in isolation. How about check-raising that Jack-high straight on the river for value? (I like Teach's play up to and including checking on the river.) Knowing your opponent's holding after the fact, it may look like a useless value bet, but I think a minimum raise stands a good chance of getting called by this particular opponent if he has any piece of that board. He may also be convinced to give you all his chips if he has only the Ten-high straight.

Watch out, Scotty_Z might warn you soon for all of the advertising...

Then I guess I shouldn't mention the fact that I saw even worse players at the Supreme 10-20 limit game last night...

ScottyZ

teach

Thanks for the analysis boys. I rarely post hands as I play so differently from most players. :fish:

Anyway, there is no question, I was playing the players. I was pretty sure I had correctly pegged two of my four opponents as maniacs / loose cannons. I understand your thoughts about some of my plays.

Often, I was just calling because my gut was like, yikes, this board sucks, I cant be winning!! But having seen the maniac make pot size bets up to $70.00 with nothing , with any marginal hand I was going to call him down. I was in somewhat of a state of shock. Much different game than the Friday game at Neils I'll tell you!


Were you playing the 10-20 game or watching ScottyZ?

Stp - I haven't found an enticing enough offer yet to get a piece of Neil! =}

ScottyZ

Often, I was just calling because my gut was like, yikes, this board sucks, I cant be winning!!

Yes, I think that raising on the river (or before) in the hands other than the J7 would have been a little much. And just calling was probably fine in each case based on your opponent read.

Were you playing the 10-20 game or watching ScottyZ?

I was playing the 10-20 (10-handed) for a bit. It was a soft game, usually with 2 or 3 serious fish (like the ~100% VP$IP kind) at the table at a time.

ScottyZ

teach

hey Scotty - are you exercising your right to a vote on the CNPL Player of the Season - you are only 1 of 2 that I am waiting on!

Unknown

Now that I've been reading some of teach's hand histories, I realize how strong a play I made at Zithal's a year or two ago, calling teach's bet all-in with pocket threes on a flop that had missed me completely. 

Of course, looking at that hand in isolation made me feel like a bit of a fish, but now, I think I made the right call at the wrong time.

Just messin' with you teach.  Very very nice session my friend. And your post about 'NL cash game analysis in a vacuum' is excellent, IMHO, Scotty.

teach

Wow, so that is what separates the average from the Great players - I can't believe you still remember that hand. Do you remember what I had?? :c:

It was a good call, for the record. I am a very aggressive player. I have really learned, just over the last year or so, how to be a solid, smart, aggressive player. :d:

I did, however, know a little of your background, so probably I would not have made too many bold moves against you at Zithal's. So, in that regard, bad call! :

There is only one way to settle this, Heads- up Devin? :h:

ScottyZ

The scary thing is that I remember that hand. And I was at another table. :cool:

I believe my reply to Devin when he described the hand to me during the break was, "Against Teach, of course you call there."

ScottyZ

teach

LOL