Dave's Q8s hand
Dave,
Do you think there is a decent chance that you were actually ahead on the flop? Maybe she's on a re-steal?
Here is what I think. First, let me get the facts right. You started the hand with ~$150k and she started the hand with ~$83k. And let's assume she didn't play the hand like a baboon. Then I can't see her playing any hand that have you beat the way she did.
The thing is after you checkraised her to 16k she decided to RERAISE you ANOTHER 37k. I've got to think she's pot committed herself with any decent hand at this point because she only had 25k left and pot was laying her almost 5:1 on her last 25k. With any hand that have you beat I can't see her reraise you without willing to go all the way. Raising 2/3 of her remaining stack with a decent hand without willing to go all the way would be basic mistake in no-limit, no? If we assume she didn't play the hand like a baboon then I can't see her make this mistake.
What's your take?
Do you think there is a decent chance that you were actually ahead on the flop? Maybe she's on a re-steal?
Here is what I think. First, let me get the facts right. You started the hand with ~$150k and she started the hand with ~$83k. And let's assume she didn't play the hand like a baboon. Then I can't see her playing any hand that have you beat the way she did.
The thing is after you checkraised her to 16k she decided to RERAISE you ANOTHER 37k. I've got to think she's pot committed herself with any decent hand at this point because she only had 25k left and pot was laying her almost 5:1 on her last 25k. With any hand that have you beat I can't see her reraise you without willing to go all the way. Raising 2/3 of her remaining stack with a decent hand without willing to go all the way would be basic mistake in no-limit, no? If we assume she didn't play the hand like a baboon then I can't see her make this mistake.
What's your take?
Comments
The fact that she folded for a small amount relative to the pot makes me think there is also a good possibility that she was on a stone cold bluff.
ScottyZ
But it's not a really a coin flip because there is already significant money in the pot. The pot is laying her almost 5:1. I'll take a 5:1 coin flip any day.
1. She was on a re-steal, a complete bluff. IIRC Dave said that she only folded after "going into the tank" for a long time. If she WAS on a complete bluff, then the time in the tank was a "Hollywood" act (which is completely reasonable... no reason to make it obvious to the entire world that you were bluffing)
2. She played the hand absolutely horribly. She made the one major no-limit mistake that is repeated over and over again in every book or article or discussion about no-limit poker: Don't raise with a hand if you absolutely HATE being re-raised. In this case, if she has any kind of a hand, she hates being re-raised, because she throws it away, along with about 2/3 of her stack, and it might be good.
I find it hard to believe that a pro would make a mistake like that, but, hey, everyone makes mistakes, and I guess she is more known as a high-stakes limit player than as a no-limit player. Still, I am more inclined to believe choice number 1, although the extremely long "time in the tank" is a good argument against it.
Comments?
Keith
First, when I check-raise her she may not give me much credit for a hand. Remember that I had already blown off 55K to her on a drawing dead bluff. She consider me to be, at the very least, reckless.
So her re-raise could be a bluff or a value bet with a hand that she thinks is the best (A-K for example). Once I re-re-raise she can no longer consider that I am bluffing. I have invited her to play for the remainder of her stack and I EXPECT HER TO CALL. That is the key. She knows and I know that I EXPECT HER TO CALL. So, what do I have? Either I have a HUGE draw or a HUGE hand. The draw is a little harder to put me on. I think she put me on a set or two pair and laid down an ace. If I have a set she is drawing almost dead. I if I have two pair she is drawing to three outs. Both of those hands are a good laydown with top pair for her. Preserve the 25K and soldier on.
25K was very low at that point in the tournament but not yet into oblivion. In the hands of a dangerous player like Annie is was feasible to carry on. Indeed, she didn't step down her aggression one bit with a short stack.
Whatever she had, and in my limited wisdom, my take on it is that you *both* played the hand extremely well.
If she was actually bluffing, it was probably a nice spot to take shot at you. You mentioned that she probably perceives you as reckless, and so you might be raising the flop with just about anything.
If she did have an Ace, I think she played it well, and made a nice lay down at the end for the reasons you mentioned.
Also, I thought you played it well, and the last raise all-in was a nice demonstration of thinking on multiple levels; i.e. "She knows that I know that she is likely to call if she has any sort of good hand. So she might adjust to this and fold more hands than usual which are merely good but might give me some trouble (like one pair of Aces)."
I'm also curious, did you decide to voluntarily show your hand when she folded because you assessed *at the time* that there was a good chance that she had an Ace? Or because you thought (at the time) she was bluffing? Or because either one of these was a possibility? Some other reason?
Very intersting hand.
ScottyZ
Well, whatever she had, I think that you outplayed her on this hand. If you hadn't shown it, I don't think that anyone would have guessed what you actually held. I'd probably be sitting here willing to bet the farm that you had flopped a set.
As for what she had, I understand how it could be a bluff, but a value bet? I don't understand how this can be a good play. If she is going to fold for another 25k when re-raised, she can't feel all that good if she is called either. Isn't the point of a value bet that you WANT to be called?
I am not saying that it was not a good fold. In fact, I think that it was an amazing fold. Like I said, had you not shown your hand, I would have believed (from the fact that she raised pre-flop, and it looks like a GREAT flop for a raiser) that you had a set. But I don't understand the re-raise.
Anyway, once again, no matter WHAT she had, I think that you made a great play on that hand, and you deserved the chips.
On a side note (possibly somewhat related, if she DID have AK) I have been noticing that every time someone is talking about a tournament, and they talk about a hand that they misplayed, or a hand that really cost them, it seems that more often than not it is AK. I noticed this in your "final day" post too. All 3 hands that you said you regretted in that 36 hour period were AK. Personally, I hate this hand in no limit. I never have a clue what to do with it. It seems like, either I'm winning a couple of chips, or blowing off a significant portion of my stack. Seriously, how are you supposed to play this hand? I am starting to think that it's overrated.
Keith
Well, I think that it's probably still a good re-raise with a pair of Aces, but maybe calling it a value bet is misleading. I guess it's more like a "let's see where I'm at" kind of bet. Perhaps it might be best thought of as stage one of a two stage value bet *if* Dave is semi-bluffing a draw.
Dave seems to have indicated that he had been often out of line before this hand, so Annie re-raising it is sort of a statement of "I think you're out of line, and I've got something." Obviously you don't actually *need* to have something to make such a statement via a re-raise. However, if she does have a good (but not great) hand, her plan of attack may have been to push the rest in on the turn if a spade does not come off (if Dave only calls on the flop). Note that if this actually happened, then Dave is suddenly the one in a pickle on the turn. That's another reason that Dave pushing in on the flop is a nice play, since it defends against exactly that.
When Annie is re-re-raised by Dave, one might argue that she is pot-committed. But this gets back to what Dave was talking about: both players know that both players know that she is pot-committed. And that changes the (apparent) meaning of Dave's re-raise a lot. (Yes, I meant to say "both players know that" twice.) 8)
I think I agree with this. I'd say AK and JJ are a couple of the toughest hands to play, but particularly AK.
The stangest thing I've noticed is that AK is often a great equalizer--- namely, both very bad and very good players tend to overplay it post-flop. Bad players tend to often blow off chips chasing 2 overcards, and good players are tempted to make fancy aggressive moves when they miss or "brilliant" calls with Ace high.
I think the toughest part (as Keith already alluded to) is not losing a tonne of chips when the flop comes K-rag-rag and you're losing.
ScottyZ
The thing that strikes me as most important here is that there isn't enough money in that pot to be putting my own chips at risk making fancy moves with hands like a pair of Queens, or 7-high. I'm generally *not* going to try to push around an overly aggressive player in this particular kind of spot.
Also, I wouldn't say that pushing all-in (if I'm going to play) is necessarily the optimal play in general either (it's quite the overbet), but I'd favour it myself in this case.
ScottyZ
I thought, at the time, that she laid down an ace. I wanted to stick the shiv in as it were. She either bluffed off a ton of chips or made a bad laydown. She rubbed my face in it. I snapped and rubbed her back. I shouldn't have and I will never do such a thing again. But that is why I did it.
I think there are two good plays.
(1) Play exactly as Annie did. Put in a big re-re-raise hoping to lose the apparent bluffer. I do not like to shove all-in because you leave yourself an escape valve if the apparent bluffer has a hand. This is what Annie did. when I come BACK over the top I have very few hands... Two pair - set - or a hige draw which on that board included K-Ts, J-Ts, X-8s and that's about it. Annie gets unlucky and runs into just such a hand held by a willing opponents. (it is EXACTLY a hand like this that Harrington took me to the felt with -- bottom pair and a flush draw).
(2) Call. Don't commit more chips yet. You have position. Wait and see what the turn brings. If it makes the flush, be leary. If it hits your kicker be happy. If you opponent is bluffing, will he have the balls to bluff again? Having a skilled player call you with position is withering.
I have a few thoughts. Assume I have a decent but not great hand, say an Ace.
1. If I'm losing, then I'm losing badly and I need to fold.
2. If I'm winning and you are bluffing with a lot of outs, then I'd just call and make a decision on the turn. I don't put a lot of chips in on the flop because you are aggressive and have a lot of chips. You may set me in on the flop. Then I have a tough decision because I can't tell reliably between 1. and 2. In addition, I don't have an edge on the flop in either case. For example, even your Q8 hand is a slight 51% favourite over AK (with no spades) on that flop.
3. If I'm winning and you are bluffing with few outs. This is the only case where I may consider raising on the flop. But if I do raise, you just fold and I don't win anything more from you (which is a perfectly good result here). But I could also wait till the turn to do it. Since you have few outs and I have position I could make a more informed decision on the turn.
Over all I think it works out to be if she thinks you are in box 3. 61% of the time then her 37k raise breaks even in terms of EV. If you are in box 3. less than 61% of the time and she's going to fold to a subsequent all-in, then the raise is negative in EV. I really doubt you are in box 3. 61% of the time or more.
We can also work out the EV of just calling on the flop. I haven't complete it because it's more complicated and needs more assumptions about turn play. But I feel (from my limited play) it may be a better strategy in terms of EV. You also risk less chips on the flop when you have less information than on the turn. But this is all guessing.
Any comments are welcome.
I still don't understand how this is a good play. Let's put ourselves in her shoes. There are basically 3 possible categories of hands you could have:
1. A strong hand. We are drawing slim-to-dead.
2. You are semi-bluffing a good draw. We are somewhere between 50-50 and a 2-1 favourite to win a showdown.
3. You have rags and are on a complete bluff. You are drawing very, very slim.
Ok. So what does this big raise get us? In situation 1, all the rest of your chips go in the pot. In situation 2, the rest of your chips go in the pot. In situation 3, you fold.
If you ARE on a complete bluff, your fold doesn't gain us much. It doesn't win us any more chips. Wouldn't it be better to just call? Maybe you will bluff off more chips on the turn. At least that way we have a chance to win more chips.
If the rest of your chips go in, it is either situation 1 or 2. We don't really know which, but we have to lay it down because we can't risk the rest of our stack in a situation where we might be drawing dead.
So, what is the end result of the raise? Either we lose a huge part of our stack, or we lose a chance to win more chips when you try to bluff again.
Either way, it seems we are losing something.
Of course, there is something good that comes out of this... we find out where we are. Well, sort of. We find out whether or not you are bluffing. If you're not bluffing, we don't find out whether you have a big hand or a big draw. But, the thing is, 2/3 of our stack seems to be an awful lot to risk just to "find out where we are". If we are feel so strongly that you are probably bluffing that we are willing to risk most of our stack, wouldn't it be better to just call and then call a bet on the turn (if it comes) so that at least we stand to gain some more chips if we are right and you are bluffing?
Keith