LLHE hand for discussion

Hork42

Tight-aggressive 5/10 table. No significant reads on individual players.

Fearing an UTG raise will only steal the blinds, I attempt a limp-reraise with the aces to extract a little more value out of them. No raises, Hmm. So we see a cheap flop. The fun begins...

***** Hand History for Game 3137888859 *****
$5/$10 Texas Hold'em - Saturday, December 03, 14:21:16 EDT 2005
Table Bad Beat Jackpot #1098758 (Real Money)
Seat 2 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 2: ebtsco ( $306.25 )
Seat 3: kwhister19 ( $289.08 )
Seat 4: PartTimeJob ( $135.15 )
Seat 7: Lingy ( $241.25 )
Seat 8: aznrdragon ( $266.25 )
Seat 9: lyon1 ( $95.32 )
Seat 6: Hork42 ( $155.50 )
Seat 10: bo_b2 ( $525 )
Seat 5: kathyG222 ( $250 )
kwhister19 posts small blind [ $2 ].
PartTimeJob posts big blind [ $5 ].

Holecards:
Dealt to Hork42 [Ac As]
CALL Hork42 , $5
FOLD Lingy
FOLD aznrdragon
CALL lyon1, $5
FOLD bo_b2
CALL ebtsco, $5
FOLD kwhister19
CHECK PartTimeJob

Flop:
[3s 2s 8h]
BET PartTimeJob, $5
CALL Hork42 , $5
FOLD lyon1
CALL ebtsco, $5

Turn:
[4h]
BET PartTimeJob, $10
RAISE Hork42 , $20
CALL ebtsco, $20
CALL PartTimeJob, $10

River:
[5s]
BET PartTimeJob, $10
CALL Hork42 , $10
FOLD ebtsco

Any guesses as to what PTJ holds? Any other comments on the play of the hand?

Results in white:


PartTimeJob shows [ 3d, 6c ] a straight, two to six.
Hork42 doesn't show [ Ac, As ] a straight, ace to five.
PartTimeJob wins $113.50 from the main pot with a straight, two to six.

SirWatts

I would raise the flop, with 4 players in the pot with who knows what it's time to make the weak draws pay to stay in. The trap has failed and now we need to fight just to win the pot, being fancy might win us an extra bet sometimes, but it's going to cost us the whole pot too often. After just calling the flop the rest looks ok. Do you call a turn 3-bet? I think you have to since you have 8 outs against 2 pair . I hate limping aces preflop in a limit game but that's another debate....

ScoobyD

BB could have pretty much any 2 cards here which makes it tough. 2 spades, an A with a pair (A3 or A8 maybe?) I think I probably would have went ahead and raised the flop there, BB could easily be betting an 8, 2 pair, a set, a flush draw etc, if he does happen to have flopped a monster, I think I'd rather find out sooner than later.

ScoobyD

I hate limping aces preflop in a limit game but that's another debate....

Ditto, for a typical game. However in a tight-aggressive game I think I might need to work the occaisional limp-reraise into my game since (as Hork said) raising UTG too often picks up ONLY the blinds. And b) the chances of a raise behind in this type of game are a lot greater than a typical LP game. But another reason why I hate the limp-reraise play is that against opponents that are paying attention you are practically telling them what you have while being out of position for the rest of the hand. Definitely a risk/reward decision in a TA game, and variance will be a bitch as well...

magithighs

I just read an article in Cardplayer about playing hands backwards where the betting by the hero is in reverse order of how it should have gone. I believe that's what's happened here. Fortunately, there are really no online games which necessitate a limp-raise with aces these days. I really don't see any level where this would be effective. Go back two years when Paradise first put the stats in, and the %age seeing the flop was around 18-22% -- the limp-raise was a beautifull thing.

Raise pre-flop. Raise flop. I put PTJ on 67 sooooted of course and not spades.

Cheers
Magi

Hork42

btw - Pokertracker tells me that I raise preflop with AA 97.99% of the time, so this is not a common play for me. (I also think that at least a couple of times the action was capped to me so it doesn't count as a preflop raise) I can't think of another instance where I didn't raise preflop, but I would believe that over the years it has happened, at some point...

and no magi, this is not a reverse-hero case.

magithighs

You may have alread read this.  Try reading http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=15124&m_id=65577 .  Up to you to decide, but it looks like you've already decided.

Cheers
Magi

BBC Z

Up to you to decide, but it looks like you've already decided.

Speaking of already decided, thats exactly what you've done witht his hand. Hork told you that he plays this hand 97% of the time with a raise. How can you then link to an article which imples that he is a backwards longterm losing player based on a one-off situation?

magithighs

I've been asked by many players to continue posting.  I'd like to do that, but I find it difficult when someone reads/writes something I haven't posted.  That was always my biggest beef with the stuff we disagreed about.

I did not call Hork a long time loser.  I pointed him and others to an interesting article.  I'll quote my original post "I believe that's what happened here".  To me, that would indicate that I believe that he played the hand backwards, and suggested to raise pre-flop and raise flop.  Pretty standard.  For me it's a pretty standard hand.  If he mistook my post as me saying he is a long-time loser, then I humbly apologize.

Cheers
Magi

pkrfce9

magithighs wrote:

I've been asked by many players to continue posting.

Please continue posting. I value your insights.

Hork42

I've added the result in white to the OP.

Chugs

Not looking into the decision to limp aces which i think is a useful tool every so often (your current 2% rate seems about right)

Well the way it played out i think the villian had likely a pair and a draw. Meaning something like suited cards with an 8. Flop top pair and a flush draw. Or he has a bunch of baby cards which give him a pair and some sort of inside or gutshot straight draw.

I'm still assuming the typical fact that with two pair or a straight he would wait till the turn to come to life.

stpboy

I have to be honest here, I'm really not sure what you want to get out of this post. You didn't play the hand well at all and you obviously are aware of it

Pokertracker tells me that I raise preflop with AA 97.99% of the time

You made a play that you make 2% of the time and want to learn from it? In a LHE game how many players do you typically want to the flop with Aces? You are virtually guaranteeing yourself 4-5 players preflop when not raising from UTG with them.

Ok, I know you were looking for a limp-raise opportunity but you didn't get it and got beat. Even if you did get a raiser preflop, check raising him would only further define your hand and make it that much easier for the player to dump his hand. I'd like to see what you think of the hand and how it played out Hork.

stp

Hork42

stpboy wrote:

I have to be honest here, I'm really not sure what you want to get out of this post.

Actually, I'm just trying to generate discussion. Some of the best posts on this forum are hand analysis and rather than pick one that was played perfectly, I thought I'd throw one up that did have some flaws or alternative ways to play it and see how people reacted. There have been too many nonsense posts lately about subjects that really don't have any merit to them and I just wanted to get back to some constructive talk on here.

I'd like to see what you think of the hand and how it played out Hork.

Ignoring the actual results of this particular hand. The limp-reraise attempt preflop is not something that should be attempted often. In this case, I'm not concerned about defining my hand as strictly AA/KK if the limp-reraise is successful. What I am trying to avoid given the current table texture is the UTG raise only taking the blinds as has been the case for the typical EP raise at this table. I am inviting action, and with it, accepting variance. If people know I have AA and I take down a slightly larger pot on the flop, fine. I accept that. If they want to tag along and try to outdraw me, that is acceptable too, I probably still lead in pot equity.

I think my more critical mistake on this hand is not raising the flop to at least attempt to protect my overpair against the flush draw. Other than that, I think the rest of the hand is fine.

You didn't play the hand well at all and you obviously are aware of it

Yes, I agree with this statement. Again, I'm just trying to post a hand to talk about, if the veteran players on this forum don't get anything out of it perhaps some of the newbies will gain some value out of the discussion that follows. If you think this hand is too clearly defined as being only playable one way, then that can be your opinion. I do intend to post more hands on occasion. I will take the feedback I'm getting and in the future I will try to find "better" hands with perhaps more marginal decision points. Sorry to bore you, stp.

Chugs

Actually i like the slow play on the flop also, your hand is in no way defined as an overpair, let alone the ultimate overpair. I would expect to get betting from a range of medium pp and drawing hands (likely flush, straights less likely on that board, except for what a random bb could have). The flush card is a risk, but you still hold the Ace of spades, which does deserve some consideration.


The thing that did you in was really the location of where the betting came from, the BB. It eliminated most chances you had to use the ability to check raise, by also not wanting to lose players still to act.

PokerKai

No significant reads on individual players

So why are we limp raising if we have no significant reads? id like to be somewhat sure that there are a couple 20-30% PF raisers sitting around behind me before i go for it.

I raise the flop. Youve already slowplayed one street (preflop) and underrepresented your hand so your likely going to get a lot of action from anybody holding a medium pair or a flush draw with two overcards.

ScoobyD

I think my more critical mistake on this hand is not raising the flop to at least attempt to protect my overpair against the flush draw.

Except you're not going to "protect" your hand vs a flush draw, since a flush draw isn't going anywhere. I actually don't mind the flop slowplay THAT much, if the situation were headsup, but I hate letting the 3rd player to act peel one cheaply on the flop (maybe with a gutshot or something). I think the slowplay has some merit, since risking losing the pot isn't the total disaster some might make it out to be (unless you're apt to go on tilt). The pot is small, so maximizing your chances of winning doesn't necessarily maximize your EV, but I don't think I'm a fan of it in this case since the pot is multiway.

BBC Z

Everyone seems to have slightly missed the point on this hand.

We are sitting in a game where UTG raises are well respected and it appears our opponents are half-decent with preflop hand selection. This means that we are very likely taking the blinds with a preflop raise or we are winning a tiny pot on the flop.

Now, what everyone seems to forget is that tight players preflop can be completely crap players past the flop. The key is getting them into the flop to exploit thier weaknesses. It seems that everyone wants to limp-reraise these things and then when it fails start raising every street. The limp re-raise failing is merely a footnote in this hand. You got 4 players to the flop when you hold a large equity edge and your hand is completely concealed. Sounds to me like it's better than the blinds in EV already.

Given the ragged flop in this example, I wouldnt want to raise the flop bet. We're too likely to knock out th eplayer behind us and leave ourselves against the player who has enough of a hand to lead out. I'd wait for the turn to pop it as hork did in this hand. Then when the board gets ultra scary, I'd call the river too.

C'mon guys, the books are great for typical/LL loose situations but you've got to know when to put them down and play some real poker.

I have to be honest here, I'm really not sure what you want to get out of this post. You didn't play the hand well at all and you obviously are aware of it

Where the heck did this come from? Did you mean to post in that useless 'folding AA preflop' thread?

Hork42

you're not going to "protect" your hand vs a flush draw, since a flush draw isn't going anywhere.

Flush draw for the late pos players: if I raise on the flop, it's a mistake to call 2 bets to continue with a flush draw. They may stick around, but if my action causes them to make an error, then I make money off that play.

But...

At what point do you try to shut out the players acting behind you? The bet comes from the BB who could be in the hand with any two cards since there was no PF raise. The rag flop may have hit him hard. The other two players are less likely to have hit a flop like this. Do you just call the flop allowing them to possibly pair a paint card?

ScoobyD

Maybe you shouldn't have posted results Hork, since it's easy to jump all over a failed limp-reraise.  FWIW, he DID manage to get in the turn raise vs a guy that had a tiny pair with a gutshot, and just managed to catch one of his 9 outs on the river. Tough break.  I still think I'd have raised the flop due to the semi co-ordinated nature of the board.  Given a board with less draws, I think a slowplay is probably worth more in terms of EV.

BBC Z

At what point do you try to shut out the players acting behind you? The bet comes from the BB who could be in the hand with any two cards since there was no PF raise. The rag flop may have hit him hard. The other two players are less likely to have hit a flop like this. Do you just call the flop allowing them to possibly pair a paint card?

That would be my approach. The flop in question has a flush draw and then RAGS. No one likely has much of anything.

Now, turn it into a flop with a K or a Q and I'd like raising the flop bet because you may be up against two hands with odds to draw for 1 but not 2.

Hork42

ScoobyD wrote:

Maybe you shouldn't have posted results Hork, since it's easy to jump all over a failed limp-reraise.  

It's ok. I didn't originally post the results and it was jumped all over anyway

Reading the results is optional.

ScoobyD

if I raise on the flop, it's a mistake to call 2 bets to continue with a flush draw.

The 3rd guy to act would be getting 3.5:1 on a flush draw which strictly speaking isn't enough for a 4.75:1 draw. But factor in the chance that EP will likely call gives him 4:1 (yes, it gets uglier if he raises) plus some implied odds, and the fact that the person will have position on later streets, and I don't think calling with a flush draw is a mistake here.

ScoobyD

The flop in question has a flush draw and then RAGS.

True, but a board of 832 with a flush draw is more co-ordinated than one like Q73, especially since the BB is involved.