#@&%$, I'm lucky!
1/3 NL 10-players
MP3 (~$200) read: tight passive...
Hero (~$600)
Pre-flop: Hero is button with :ac :6c
UTG raises to $10, 2 fold, MP1 calls $10, MP2 calls $10, MP3 calls $10, 1 fold, Hero calls $10, SB folds, BB calls $10
Flop: ($61) :ad :10h :2c (6 players)
BB checks, UTG checks, MP1 checks, MP2 checks, MP3 checks, Hero bets $20, 4 fold, MP3 raises to $40, Hero calls.
Turn: ($141) :5c (2 players)
MP3 bets $45, Hero calls $45
River: ($231) :9c (2 players)
MP3 checks, Hero bets $100, MP3 calls $100
Final Pot: ($426)
MP3 shows :as :ts for 2 pair and says disgustingly, "#@&%$, you're lucky!", and then rebuys for another $200
MP3 (~$200) read: tight passive...
Hero (~$600)
Pre-flop: Hero is button with :ac :6c
UTG raises to $10, 2 fold, MP1 calls $10, MP2 calls $10, MP3 calls $10, 1 fold, Hero calls $10, SB folds, BB calls $10
Flop: ($61) :ad :10h :2c (6 players)
BB checks, UTG checks, MP1 checks, MP2 checks, MP3 checks, Hero bets $20, 4 fold, MP3 raises to $40, Hero calls.
Turn: ($141) :5c (2 players)
MP3 bets $45, Hero calls $45
River: ($231) :9c (2 players)
MP3 checks, Hero bets $100, MP3 calls $100
Final Pot: ($426)
MP3 shows :as :ts for 2 pair and says disgustingly, "#@&%$, you're lucky!", and then rebuys for another $200
Comments
I agree!
Pre-flop: MP3 68%
HERO 32%
Flop: MP3 95%
HERO 5%
Turn: MP3 82%
HERO 18%
So from this reply, I'm to assume you fold this hand when??
You call a UTG raise with a weak Ace. A lot of limpers, so ok.
On the flop you are 19:1 to win. You flop top pair with a bad kicker and only backdoor flush draw. You get check-raised by MP3. I like your bet out but I lean toward fold after the check-raise. I know my Ace is beat....the six is just too small. The only hands you are beating are A-3, A-4 and A-5; unlikely check-raise hands. And to me, backdoor draws are not draws. So, I'm pretty sure I fold. Maybe if the other 4 players did not fold, I call. But heads up, I'm beat.
If you get to the turn, well, now you're in it. With a nut flush draw and top pair w/ bad kicker, MP3 needs to bet you out of the pot. $45 into $141 is not enough to get you to fold (as a $20 check-raise was not enough on the flop when your hand was worse!).
Remember, this is just my opinion!!! Congrats on the hand.
I see nothing wrong with how the hand played out.
Now mister A10 played this hand terribly IMHO.
People... Poker is a game of MISSING INFORMATION.. You can't judge Hero's play on the hand that Villian showed down, and then jump into the way-back machine to tell him he played it completely wrong.
We know that the villian is tight-passive.. We know he min-checkraised us.. What hands can be have? Well it's probably anywhere from AT-AK, AA-KK so I think his range is wide enough that we can call the min checkraise (based on pot odds) and expect to be good if we make two pair..
You ARE missing something here. The size of the pot on the flop is 61. Hero raises so it's 81 and Villian check raises to make the pot 121. Hero's getting 6:1 on the min raise flop call. Dunno where you get 13.5 to 1 from.
If you find yourself constantly folding to min bets and min raises, you are far too tight.
Whats to say tight-passive isn't testing out the waters with KK or QQ?
$271 = money currently in the pot + the rest of the opponent's stack.
ScottyZ
I'm having a hard time getting my head around what the bet of $20 accomplishes on the flop. With TPNK into a field of 5 opponents, it's hard to imagine that your hand is currently best. Picking up the pot right here seems like a remote possibility.
Do you care if any of your opponents fold on the flop? I doubt it. You will pretty much only have regrets about not betting the flop if exactly Kc, Qc, or Jc comes off on the turn. Even still, you will have position on the turn, and may be able to correctly draw at your backdoor flush if it in fact materializes.
A 6 coming off on the turn would not even be such a great card for you, as SirWatts has already pointed out. This would be a classic win a small pot, lose a big pot scenario against reasonable opponents. Even against opponents who will marry top pair (good kicker) here have a non-trivial redraw against your two pair. When hitting just about the best possible card you could hope for turns out to be this shaky, this is a thin draw to be sure.
I would check behind the field on the flop. This either lets you get away from a flop/turn which has missed you at no extra cost, or leaves you with a simple pot/implied odds decision on the turn if you do pick up the nut flush draw.
And yes, I really did mean to say that the flop has missed you. :cool:
ScottyZ
I think every single response I've read here has been unfairly biased against the Hero because you know he loses.
Scotty.. Ok, you check the flop with top pair.. Someone comes out and bets the turn and you fold top pair.
Sounds like a great strat to lose.
Nobody thinks that a it's pretty unlikely that a tight-passive has made two pair on this flop? It's ACE TEN, thats the lowest of the low bounds for a tight players hand.. Yet everyone says he's got that or a set.
yeesh.
Yes, depending on what the turn card is (and how much the turn bet, if any, is), that is how I would play it in general.
A tight-passive player is unlikely to make a check-raise (since he is typically passive) with a hand that is worse than A6 (since he is typically tight). That is to say, you probably have a 3-out draw at best.
ScottyZ
This No-Limit Hold'em not limit. We need to consider implied odds here. Not only are the implied odds amazing here given the range hands that our villain would have I think that folding to min raise opens a huge door to the table screaming "Push me around now!"
Scotty does point out the bad bet on the flop but it still doesn't make calling the min raise wrong. I'm not even sure that assuming we're beat is the correct thought here either. Overall though I think the only error Mickey made is the tiny bet at the flop. The villain on the other hand had many chances to win/protect their hand and failed miserably.
This represents the money odds you could win during the rest of the hand in the best case for you. Though it happened to be the realized money odds in this case, it is generally a substantial parlay to achieve the maximum implied odds during a NL hand, particularly when the parlay includes hitting either a thin or obvious (or both) draw.
Making assessments based of implied odds is challenging, since they depend not only on your opponents' hole cards, but also on their unknown future betting actions.
For example, if you know for certain that the opponent has AK, and know for certain that the opponent will move all-in on the turn, you can't call the additional $20 on the flop.1 On the other hand, if you know for certain that the opponent has AK, will never make another aggressive bet during the hand, and will call any future bet you make, you have an extremely easy call for $20.
Of course, the reality of this hand lies somewhere between these two cases, meaning that assessing the flop call strictly on the basis odds is impossible, even if we go so far as assuming that the opponent has an exact hand. The opponent's future betting behavior (or rather, expected future betting bahaviour) matters.
ScottyZ
1Because you are offered 13.5 to 1 money on a 14 to 1 draw. If you'd like to fine tune this calculation including the backdoor flush draw, don't forget to throw in the opponent's re-draws too.
Let me add to this by saying that I had a very good read on my opponent (he's a regular contributor in the game), and I was very close to sure that he had indeed flopped 2 pair here... why did I call his minimum raise then? While the backdoor flush was a possibility, I didn't really think he would let me draw on the turn cheaply enough (like he did) to make this call correct... To be honest, I had thoughts of taking this pot down if a face card falls on the turn... depending on the size of his bet, and I'm sure he bets less than $45, I have HUGE fold equity if I raise him all-in... I was actually surprised when he called my river bet.... I had initially thought it was too large to get called... and he mentioned that he called thinking I was semi-bluffing with AJ, AQ.
Then you played it horribly.
No-limit Texas Hold'em Multi Table Tournament, 25 Sep 2005 03:43 PM
Seat 1: baynai2001 ($2,290 in chips)
Seat 2: cdnmoose05 [KC,KD] ($6,480 in chips)
Seat 3: win maker ($4,157 in chips)
Seat 4: MAO11 ($9,410 in chips)
Seat 5: chernikot ($120 in chips)
Seat 6: zboy1949 ($1,905 in chips)
Seat 7: philman4191 ($6,085 in chips)
Seat 8: inkman2121 ($2,870 in chips)
Seat 9: tjm99a ($5,540 in chips)
Seat 10: curly32 ($7,018 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
philman4191 posts blind ($150), inkman2121 posts blind ($300).
PRE-FLOP
tjm99a folds, curly32 folds, baynai2001 folds, cdnmoose05 bets $1,000, win maker folds, MAO11 folds, chernikot folds, zboy1949 bets $1,905 and is all-in, philman4191 folds, inkman2121 folds, cdnmoose05 bets $905.
FLOP [board cards AS,8S,8H ]
TURN [board cards AS,8S,8H,8D ]
RIVER [board cards AS,8S,8H,8D,8C ]
SHOWDOWN
cdnmoose05 shows [ KC,KD ]
zboy1949 shows [ JC,AC ]
cdnmoose05 wins $2,130, zboy1949 wins $2,130.
Of course, I'd be a little hesitant to deem an opponent as nearly 100% predictable if he doesn't know what a "semi-bluff" is.
ScottyZ
1Technically, it comes down to what MH means by "HUGE fold equity", and if such an expectation is accurate. For example, if he believes (and is correct) the opponent will drop 50% of the time if a face card comes off, then he essentially has 6 outs to steal the pot on the turn, which represents win odds of 6.5 to 1, which are pretty close to the money odds offered. If the opponent will drop 75% of the time or more (say), the call is clear.
You were totally unlucky here.
You had twice the probability of winning the hand, rather than settling for the chop-chop.
ScottyZ
In the same sense you cannot discount the questionable call just because he has made his hand in the end? I think the pre-flop call was a mistake. Assuming the tight-passive player is likely on the hands suggested AK-AT, etc...you honestly believe after the brutal flop bet and a check-raise by a tight-passive player that his kicker will hold up? He makes this kind of play over the long run and I believe he will lose his money, he got very lucky. I think when he got to the turn he finally had the odds to call and made his hand, in my opinion still lucky. I think it was misplayed until the turn, regardless of the result. Now hearing that he put the villain on two pair post-flop this play is even more reckless.
No because he has the odds to call. (Ignoring the read that put Villian on two pair)
Once you have odds to call, it's not questionable.
Apparently everyone plays poker in a vaccuum and then erases everyones memory every hand. Must be nice.
Is it just me or are we agreeing again?