YTD: +$41029.90
I guess you all prefer PLO hands then! Thanks for Simon for his thoughts on the hand...here's my reasoning through the streets:
Party Poker 15/30 Hold'em (10 handed)
Preflop: Hero is dealt Ks As
UTG raises, SB calls, Hero calls.
The standard play here would be to reraise. However I have no clue as to how these two foes play. More than likely I will still end up with three players to the flop, but with my hand more exposed and caught in a sandwich between the SB and the UTG. Normally I would follow the typical pound, pound, pound Abdulian strategy, but in this spot I would be somewhat exposed to tricky plays from either side. So I am sacrificing some short-term EV and gaining some deception by just calling instead.
Flop: (1.66 SB) Qd, 5h, 8s (3 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB calls, Hero calls.
I may have check raised here if headsup. I want to see what the SB *really* has.
Turn: (2.33 BB) 5c (3 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, UTG bets, SB folds, Hero raises, UTG calls.
Now the SB is gone I can spring my trap. By check raising here it puts real pressure on nonsense no pair hands and *may*, although very unlikely, make an AK or small pair pass.
River: (6.33 BB) 2d (2 players)
Hero bets, UTG folds.
I'm committed now. It's very hard for him to cling to AK in this spot, which is his most likely holding.
Final Pot: 7.33 BB
The nice thing about this play is that I end up losing about the same against a stubborn pocket pair, but also give him the chance to pass a hand that splits the pot. Also the % increase of him passing that underpair is now significant, as opposed to the "I'm putting him on AK so I'm calling all the way down" which mostly happens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi Dave,
Apologies for not commenting but I'm off-line w.r.t. poker discussion for a while - I'm focussing on other things at the moment. It's been overkill and I'm bored reading my own posts and logic, so I need to freshen up. My focus is drawn more towards sports betting which has been very weak lately. My attention in both poker and SB has to be geared towards processes rather than discussion and technical thinking. The trouble with poker discussion is,as I've commented before, it can make you very skilled at analysing a problem and working through perfect solutions. In OR terms we develop gold plated solutions on the forums when really what is required is a quick and dirty solution at the table. I'm digressing, on to your post.
When I read your post I wasn't sure whether you were value betting or bluffing. In fact I would say it was a semi-bluff, something that Paul Phillips rather arrogantly suggested couldn't occur on the river. In such an instance you could easily be called by hands you can beat or get hands to fold that you can't. Since we don't have perfect information it's a bit like that guys (Schronbroems?) cats in Quantum theory. You were neither bluffing nor value betting til he turned over his cards.
As for the hand playing - I like it, but I certainly wouldn't have played it that way with suited AK.
You are right, it gives you options, sometimes the game can seem predictable, you can get called the whole way down with the PP and it leaves one feeling frustrated.
There is a danger that your analysis is tailored to the pluses here.
For example, 3 betting preflop might have encouraged a PP to fold on the flop with the SB to act.
Check-raising, rather than calling, the turn may not shift the small PP and so you pay the extra bet. Becasue the 5 arrives on the turn, and this is the hand that it makes sense for you to hit, you are not going to find out if you are up against a Q or an overpair.
Consequently you pay that hand an extra bet.
So the question is whether or not the gain in EV at getting an AK to fold and possibly a small pair is worth the loss at paying more for the small, top and overpair that calls you down.
With Ako calling pre-flop it is a lot more attractive because it is always good (w.r.t. image) to stick an extra bet in on your big blind, so suited is simply too tempting to just flat call pre-flop.
I like the play because it allows you some freedom you and you are probably more likely to get hands to lay down that beat you than 3 betting. Also, of course, you don't get paid the extra bet pre-flop when you hit an Ace or King (so there is much downside). The play should certainly be at your disposal though particularly if you have at least a locally tight image.
As I said I like the play but the anlysis does weigh the beneifts rather than the costs. However, there is plenty of implied value if you advertise, which you should have, and so maybe its worth playing this way 1 in 5 (but off suit imo)?
chaos
Thanks for the detailed response Chaos. I wish I could say that this was a pre-planned play, but it just kinda evolved around the circumstances of the hand. One point though - I wouldnt say it is more expensive getting to the river in my version vs the standard play, as you would be at least 1/2 BB extra from the preflop and you may get raised on the turn when betting out, but decide to go to the river anyway. So it should be a wash, as our american friends say
gl
Dave
Dave you may be right about it evening out, but I suppose I was thinking more on the seperate play on the turn. You could still have flat called pre-flop and chk called the turn. I like the 3 bet pre-flop coupled with the chk-raise on the turn, that may shift the small pair. In many respects the pair of fives on the board hinder you somewhat, because that's what it appears you have.
The paired 5 enable you to shackle your opponent and make thin value raises, with say 10-10, without worrying too much about the 3 bet (especially in a ring game). So I suppose it's hard to work out where you are which is why I feel you may pay a little too much to your opponent. That said the chk raise with AK can be seen as a thin value raise - particulalry against a later rasier.
AK can be a very frustrating hand and it can be tough to shake the small pairs, chk rasing the turn is often the only hope you have.
To often we get caught in the 'turning the handle mode'.
For me the question isn't whether or not it is a good play, it is when and at how often should it be played.
Post a Comment