blonde poker forum

This week we go back to The Grosvenor Casino in Walsall for their monthly £300 NLH event - June 2007

So let's take a look...

The Tournament

Environment:          Live Game
Type:                      Double-Chance Freezeout   
Players:                    92                           
Buy-in:                      £300
Starting Chips:          3,500 + 3,500
Prize Pool:                 £27,600
Blinds:                       200/400
Remaining Players:    75
Average Chips:         8,587

This hand occurs after the first break with the blinds at 200/400 so all double-chance chips have been taken.

History

We doubled-up early in the second half and are currently sitting quite comfortably on 15,800 chips. We have a tight but aggressive image which has been cultivated by entering very few pots...but playing the ones we do enter well.

Our opponents in this hand are two local players we will call Sam and John.

Sam is a highly experienced and excellent player who will take the aggressive route if invited to. When he raises pre-flop he is loathe to surrender the hand without a fight. John is less experienced than Sam and is a bit of a novice in comparison. Having said that he can certainly play and is not afraid to pull the trigger should he think he's ahead.

The Players

Mantis:     15,800     Small Blind
Sam:        17,200     Early Position
John:        12,500    Middle Position

The Hand

Sam makes it 1,600 to go from early position and John calls the bet. It comes round to us in the small blind and we look down to see...

 9s  9d

So what is your thinking here? I am interested to hear your thoughts about playing a hand like this from such a poor position. Considering the insufficient pot-odds to flop a set is this an easy fold for you? If you do call would you therefore call with any pair or do you have a "pair" threshold in these situations? And does your table-image and lack of activity have any bearing on your decision?

Would you consider re-raising and if not what pair would you need to adopt this strategy? Does the fact that Sam raises affect your thinking?

So the question is fold, call or re-raise and most importantly...why?

We decide to call the extra 1,400 and go to the flop three-handed after the bb folds with 5,200 chips in the pot.

The Flop

 Ahrt  3c  9h

What is your strategy now? Would it be worthwhile to bet out into the aggressive pre-flop raiser or check to conceal the strength of your hand?

We check and Sam also checks. What do you make of his reluctance to bet?

John decides to take the initiative and makes a bet of 2,500. What is your plan now?

More action and the turn card comes on Wednesday.

Can I ask how many are at the table? (not been to Walsall so not sure if they are 8/9 or 10 seater tables) only this may make a difference to the range we would put the early position raiser on - 10 seater probably limits him to a big Ace (ak or aq minimum) or a decent pair 10's upwards whereas 8-seater may allow him to consider slightly lower than this.

Pre-flop I personally don't mind the call from the SB with 9's as it's a hand with possibilities and the call doesn't pot commit you given your stack.

After the flop I'd like the set but on this board given your descriptions above I'd be just slightly worried about the chance one of either Sam or John had AA and also the fact you're not yet HU in the pot - therefore I'd now reraise to 5,000 and see what Sam does. If Sam calls the 5000 I'd probably be shutting down and thinking he did indeed have AA. The fact John has led out on the flop suggests he's either got a single ace or a large pair and is trying to define where he is in the hand (at the moment it's Sam I'm worried about given the post-flop play).

If Sam folds and John stay's in that's fine as I think I'm ahead now (but slightly wary of possible heart flush draw) - if they both fold then at least you've taken down a reasonable pot without getting into too much trouble.

With your chips in this position I would not fold 99, I would flat call and turn it into a set mining exercise- had the raise come from late position I might be tempted to re raise....

After the flop we've hit out set. I personally like leading out in this spot and fast playing the set. With players in the pot I would expect someone to have an ace. The lead out also looks weak and is building the pot at the earliest opportunity. Probably bet between half to three quarters of the pot

With Jon leading out, I would put him on Ax or maybe a flush draw.... I would re raise here too again wanting to scare out draws but also to buld the pot should I get a call....

It's a full ten-handed table this one. Sam is a very experienced player and it is unlikely he is raising from early position with anything other than a premium hand imo.

Thanks for that - then what I've said above definitely stands as I don't think John would play AA like this so at the moment we can only be winning or losing to Sam's AA (if he has it).

Definitely minimum re-raise John's bet to find out where we are against Sam IMO.

Preflop is a really marginal spot for me, I like to have implied odds of around 15 to 1 to simply set mine as we are not guarenteed to stack someone everytime we get a set and also our hand doesn't necessarily always hold.

 I don't like re raising too much here the stacks are awkward that shoving is overkill, but if i had to re raise shoving would be my preferred option ,as raising to another amount simply leaves us with horrid post flop decisions oop or calling off the rest of our stack probably miles behind. I also think our hand is not necessarily behind here and as long as we have a solid post flop game we can make a call profitably. I would advise a beginner to chuck this away as this hand isn't going to be easy to play oop against 2 players.

On the flop we have hit gin and while if we were deeper 50bb-100bb's i might lead out to build a pot im happy to slowplay our hand with the intention of getting the chips in probably on a later street, so i like checking.

Once sam has checked i think he most probably has a pair aa-66 lets say, John more likely has an ace. So i have his range something like any ace,33, a flush draw, a pair trying to pick up the pot.

Given these ranges we are only worried about the flush draw, sucking out as well as some random 2 outers and aa. So im happy to flat call this raise and allowing the pot to grow with such a strong holding as well as continuing to disguise our hand.

Pre-flop I call, its above what you term a "pair threshold" for me there with your stack against a potentially aggressive Pre-flop raiser. I don't re-raise OOP there re-raising to encounter a r-r-raise where you know you'll be dominated is burning chips, see a flop and proceed accordingly

The characteristics of Sam mean I would tend to lead out on this flop too. Firstly it would be unexpected for many to lead with a set there and although you have a passive image you can reasonably hope to get action from an Ace in either of the other spots and you are denying a free card to hearts. Something like a "weak" lead, 60% of the pot or so.

As it is you check, and sam does too. When the bet comes in position I am thinking A-x there. Sam could be trapping, could have hearts of course. Could have air, you'll have more idea once you've responded to the flop bet from the third player

A check raise here telegraphs your hand given you don't seem to have shown any signs of playing nut draws like this having entered few pots

So I call, assume Sam calls, and then fire on a blank (no heart) turn

I was going to say exactly that Tighty!

With John in the pot, I'd call preflop, I think the implied odds are there to hit a set and get paid off.   Without John in the pot, I'd like at least JJ to call preflop really.   

I don't mind the check from early position on the flop, but I'd be weary of letting people in cheaply for flush draws and if you just call here, you're making it better for Sam to continue in the hand.  I think a raise has to come here to narrow the number of opponents and I'd raise to around 6000.

Sam's either hit a monster or nothing.  Perhaps he has Kings and wants to see how things pan out on the flop.  Perhaps he's hoping for everyone to check so he can take the lead on the turn.  I'd expect John to have a decent ace, a flush draw or bottom trips - it's  a feeler bet for me hoping to take the pot here.

The problem with taking the pot here is that you don't win enough to justify the call preflop. If you call because of "implied odds" you have to do your best to build a big pot when you hit.

This is why I don't like checking the flop - it makes it hard to make a big pot. A check raise is likely to scare off any action because, as tighty says, it telegraphs your hand.

If you bet out not only to you start to build the pot, but your force others to react to you.

the presence of the Ace disguises your hand, betting out, beautifully

Bet out!

Fair point, I've learned something there but...

If you bet out on the flop, surely you are risking not getting the required implied odds too though, at least taking it down on a potentially risky board you are at least getting some return even if it's not what is expected/required to make it +EV.  If the flop came rainbow, I'd be more inclined to check/call.

How much are you betting out to ensure that the others stay in the pot but enough to get somewhere near value for the preflop call?  I guess just over half the pot is the correct amount which would then create the required pot should the others decide to stay at the party

Looking forward to seeing how this unravels now. 

Some really insightful opinions so far.

I think Bongo's comment...
...is an excellent one.

Good players make the very most of the opportunities that present themselves during the course of a tournament and get paid to the max. This is what I'm trying to do here.

It is interesting to see the different ways we can go about achieving that goal. Like TightEnd, I am a big fan of betting out with strength and if I was HU with Sam I would almost certainly adopt this tactic. He is without doubt capable of recognising the opportunity, as the pre-flop raiser, to represent a hand like A-K and come back over the top.

However, with a trio of players in the hand I decide against this strategy. With three players in the pot I am looking to use and exploit the "sandwich effect" in order to get chips into the pot. I am thinking that if I do bet out Sam is going to be "sandwiched" between me and John and will find it very difficult to make a move with anything other than a big Ace. If he has this sort of genuine hand he will c-bet anyway if I check (with John still to act)...but if he has anything else we loose him due to the sandwich.

Now if John bets and we call after initially checking it gives the aggressive pre-flop raiser the invitation to use the sandwich effect for his own benefit with whatever he holds. He may well put us on the obvious draw and feel that he can shunt John off his A-x by pressuring him with a re-raise. John will now be caught in the sandwich effect with me acting behind and Sam knows that if he gets through John I am likely to give up my draw...and the pot.

These three-way pressurising situations throw up some interesting possibilities to look at. In this particular one I think you may loose aggressive Sam if he doesn't have the Ace because of the sandwich whereas check-calling may allow him to try to take advantage of it.

The other thing with betting out of course is that a call could allow A-x to represent the flush should it come.

Any thoughts on this appreciated.

Really interesting stuff from everyone so far...

I am not reraising with 99 OOP if Sam is likely to hold a premium hand. I would re-raise with QQ or upwards. Against someone whose range I knew to be wider I don't mind re-raising with 99. In this instance, with 99 and two opps, I am happy to flat call. Even if I don't hit a set, it's potentially playable OOP depending on the texture of the flop.

I agree with Mantis on the post flop play. Against one, definitely lead out. But in the spot I'm loving the check. It's likely that someone is going to bet this flop. I also like the call after John's bet. Then...

1) Sam raises strongly, and you re-raise him. Given your table image, I don't think you'd gain anything from flat calling the re-raise, he'd shut down.

2) Sam calls. Unlikely, but it would get me thinking...

3) Sam lays down. John may be inclined to put you on a draw and as long as the turn doesn't bring a heart, a second check might encourage him to bet again. If he bets the turn fairly strongly, a raise is in order. If John checks behind on the turn, a thinnish value bet on the river would probably get a call from a decent ace.

i flat call and lead at the pot for about one half to three quarters of the pot. Im obv willing to go broke with middle set on the flop. There are very few cards that can appear on the turn which will get your opponent interested in, if he isnt on the flop, unless ones that are beating you like TT JJ etc.... lead weak after a litte dwell, i half expect a reraise here, in which instance i call and check raise the turn all in.

Yeah not leading has some problems imo and makes your hand a bit transparent if you then check/raise.

Leading with a weakish half pot bet almost ensures that a big ace will riase to protect against the flush draw and a smaller ace may well call.

If he doesn't raise, well at least you are building the pot to a size where you will have a better shot at stacking him.

Another factor is if you don't bet you risk letting a hand like QQ KK JJ make a bigger set. Whilst this seems unlikely and he would only have 2 outs to do so, the problem is he is unlikely to put many, if any chips in with these hands unless he improves but when he does, you will go broke. So the reverse implied odds are problematic as by slowplaying vs these big pair hands you either win pretty much the current pot (maybe plus a smaller bet on a later street) or you get stacked.

I like Actionman's play of the hand personally. It's deceptive and gives a player plenty of chances to hang himself into playing for his stack.

Some good points regarding both checking and betting out so far.

Just out of interest...for those who bet out here...if you get one caller how do you play it if the flush card hits the turn...is it bet out again?

Part II

So I went the other route and checked my set, Sam checked,and John bet 2,500. I dwelt up and re-checked my cards before making the call. Sam scowls at me and John, counts chips and then mucks his cards in disgust (I think he had Kings).

So we go to the turn with 10,200 chips in the pot and a remaining stack of 11,700.

The Turn

The turn brings the....

 Js

and we have a board of

 Ahrt  3c  9h  Js

What is your move now? Do you lead out or do you continue to slow play?

I decide to remain consistent with my strategy and check to John...but he now checks behind as well. What sort of hand could he be holding? Doesn't A-x fire again here? And what is your strategy now for the river? What will you do if it is a heart and what will you do if it is a blank?

Further action and the river to come on Friday....

IMO you're both trapping, I reckon John has AJ although may still be worried if a heart (other than the 3) comes down.

If a blank lower than a jack comes on river I'd be tempted to push all-in which after the check on the turn looks a) weak and b) a steal and then pray for a call. Anything else and you have to be careful of either being behind or if a queen or King comes down he may think you've hit a straight or bigger two pair in which case you either put a stop bet or a small sweetener bet in.

I check on the turn hoping he'll have a little tickle with his ace.

With AK he probably reraises pre. With AQ I'd expect him to fire here again on the turn. He *might* have flat called pre flop with AJ and then checked behind to trap. He might be on the flush draw, though if he'd taken a stab on the flop with that instead of checking behind, I'd have expected the bet to be bigger. Can't discount it though. Also, with the Ah out - do you think he'd call a raise from tight Sam with a suited connector?

I wouldn't put JJ or TT past him here. Potential weakness shown on the flop, why not have a stab at it? With you calling, TT is the kind of hand he probably wouldn't fire with a second time with on the turn, and if he did hit a set of jacks, it's very likely he might check it (although I think he makes a mistake if he does).

If the river comes a blank, I put in a value bet. Stacks aren't deep enough to make it 2/3 pot, really. I'd make it about 4k. If he comes over the top he might just be putting you on a busted flush draw and thinks he can move you off the hand. Or he might have something bigger than you. But having played the hand this way, I call a push. Middle set is good enough for me. If a K or Q comes I'm not worrying. He raises both of these pre flop.

If the river comes a heart, I put in a similar bet and probably fold to the push unless I have a really good reason not to. But I don't see that he can discount the possibility of you being on a draw and I think he'd have to have a flush to push.

IMO he has AA or a flush draw.

I would have checked as well with the view to check raising all in, goddam him checking behind. I think he bets aa,jj and aj again here with the lead in the betting why wouldn't he especially as our hand looks like a flush draw. So i reckon he has a flush draw or a weak ace here or total air that has given up.

As for the river a non heart is simple to play by making a value bet of around 2/3 to 3/4 of the pot with a view to calling a shove, this looks good as well as it looks like a busted flush draw trying to pick it up after missing. A heart is more tricky and may well be best to check/call with the view to catching a bluff or two pair hand value betting, the other option may be to bet/fold to a push where we know Sam will only push over the top with a hand that beats us, while at the same time getting a call from ax,2pr hands etc.

Some good quality replies about the hand this week.

I think that it would be a tricky situation if the flush card appeared on the river. Check-calling is what I would be inclined to do after John's check on the turn. But if the flush came...we checked...and John bet/all-in I would find that a tricky one? Considering I have played my hand like a flush draw what hand could John do this with that we could beat?

I call preflop, with your slight discount from the SB and the fact that its 3-way making up for the fact that your implied odds arent huge. But they are still good enough.


What hand do you think he has here? What hand are you trying to represent?
IMHO i hate not leading here, you are inviting a scary heart card shutting down your action from an ace. This is one of those interesting scenarios where i like the simplicity of betting your hand, odds are one will have a heart. A nice chunky 2/3 pot bet could get AK or AQ to commit the ultimate mistake.


When you check and he bets 1/2 the pot its slightly unusual. I think we can rule out AX or AA on the turn when he checks behind but for me we should get here. He either has a pp lower than AA, probably a high pp like JJ-KK or a big heart draw which is most likely. When the pot gets to approach my remaining stack size i see no problem with shoving and taking whats there. Playing oop i would be very worried about giving a free card in this large pot. Oh, and im never ever ever worried about Aa here for those that were concerned.

For those that check call the river if a heart hits - what's your calling limit? Can you call a shove? If you do and lose you're down to just over 3k. Checking is an open invitation for him to bluff at you. If you're prepared to call any bet, then that's fine. But if you're not, leading at the pot for 4k suggests that you might be pot committed and makes it more unlikely he's going to put all his chips in without a hand. It's a semi-blocker semi-value bet.

It seems odd to me that given these stack sizes and given the pre flop action he would lead for just under half the pot with a flush draw on the flop. I don't really put him on two hearts at the mo.

 In line with how you have played it so far i imagine you lead and face a hefty reraise. I put him on a flush draw 40% of the time here, but i have a good feeling he has JJ, his flop bet was to see where he was and he hit his set on the turn and is prob going to stack you on a brick river. Think you have played the hand badly tbh.

I think this is the trouble that NOT leading on the flop gets you into, when he checks behind on the turn its potentially disastrous.

On a heart river I check call I think, I doubt he has two hearts and his turn check could indicate an attempt was made to take the pot by a steal on the flop as much as trying to get a free river for a heart

On a blank I value bet and call any re-raise. If he has AA (surely not) or JJ (more likely) then so be it

really fancy JJ here. Only hand he can have that makes sense to me. Surely a bluff on the flop he would bet a bit more. or fire the turn again.

I have him on JJ as a distinct possiblity as well, maybe even the most likely. But it's not the only hand he could have. AJ he might check behind. He might have taken stab on flop with any two. I'm same as Tighty, it's a definite value bet and call raise on a blank river, and if he has you beat, so be it. And the more I think about it, the more I figure he doesn't have any hearts.

I like the way the hand has been played. Risky but potentially more rewarding than trying to take the pot there and then. If you'd led out on the flop he might have called with JJ anyway and you'd still stack off to him if he has it.

Yep, lots of interesting situations with a hand like this.

The big strategy question here is whether to lead or not on the flop. In this example it is safe to assume we would loose Sam and his Kings this way...but that was always the likely result with the A on board anyway. If John does have a hand like J-J they would probably follow the Kings into the muck. Obviously, there are associated risks with both plays. If you lead you take the risk that you may not get paid at all (don't forget we have a tight image right now) and if you check you take the risk of leading yourself into trouble later in the hand.

Quite often I find that we scare ourselves unnecessarily by what we see out on the board. In this example the flop brings 2 hearts. But this doesn't necessarily mean either of our two opponents have a draw to the flush. We see the danger and think about how we can safeguard ourselves against it. If you lead I don't imagine you get a flush draw to go away and so if the board brings another heart you will be faced with the same predicament whether you bet or check-call the flop.

The only way to avoid a tricky turn/river decision in this hand is to check-raise the flop I think. But as has been said this makes your hand rather transparent and again you probably wont get paid. I think it's ok to gamble that the flush WONT come and IF it does my opponent wont have made it...because that will be the case most of the time.

The thing I don't like about leading with the flush draw on board is that your opponent can call with A-x or 2 pair and then use that flush to his advantage should it come. Maybe, check-calling allows you to use the flush to your advantage should it come. Not sure really, it's a tricky one. Obviously, a far better and more likely scenario is no heart on the turn and this is where I was looking to check-raise all-in but John's check prevented me from making this play.

Certainly an interesting one though and I think this is a good example of how many ways a particular hand can be played out.

A quick question about the best play on the river

Is there not a case, considering the way I have played the hand (like a flush draw), for checking the river should a brick come? If John IS on a flush draw himself then checking will give him an invitation to try and buy the pot with his busted draw. If we decide to bet out we will loose him and this will mean no extra $'s after playing it so risky. Are we only ever going to face either a re-raise from a better hand or a fold from a busted draw if we bet the river?

Yes deffo induce a bluff v him if you get to river. But i dont think with the pot 10k and your stack 10k we should let him get there.

Is he likely to bluff? Your description doesn't make him sound much of a bluffer to me.


Now given that our hand looks like a flush draw, then if we bet it looks like a complete bluff.

This might get him to call with a marginal hand he would check behind (even something like the nut flush draw) or maybe even raise us.

Bongo sums it up perfectly there. Have to bet the river.

I'm still going with the all-in on the river bet hoping it looks like a steal and it get's called - about the only cards I'd check to are another ace or another jack as I've still got him on ace jack hence his check on the turn.

Part III

So I check the turn hoping for John to fire another bullet but he elects to check behind and we go to the river.

The River

The river comes...

 Tc

Making a board of

 Ahrt  3c  9h  Js  Tc

The action is on me and I consider how much to value bet. I think Bongo is spot on with his comment about the "type" of opponent we are playing in this pot. If my opponent in the hand was Sam I may well check to induce a bluff but I know John may well check behind unless he has a monster. I count out 3,900 and make the bet....but John beats me into the pot with a super quick all-in.

This really surprised me. I thought he may pay me off with a weakish Ace and call the bet but his all-in is unexpected. So he has called a pre-flop raise, bet out on the flop, checked the turn and now raised me all-in on the river. What hand does John hold? He knows that I will find it very difficult to get away from my hand now because there is so much money in the pot and it is only another 4.5k to call...so why would he do this? I know that we are pretty much compelled to call his all-in but do you call with confidence or is it more of a crying call? If the stacks were much deeper would you still call a big all-in on the river? Is folding an option...and if you think you are beat then why would you call?

There have been some really smart opinions about the hand this week so thanks to everyone who has contributed. The final result will be posted at the weekend.

How much do you have left before you intend to bet the river?

If this were one of my level of tournament, John's pushed with the straight and holds KQ.  He's called preflop because KQ could be a nice hand against Sam and he's going to take advantage of his tight image, then when you've called, it's a nice pot.  When no one bets on the flop, he takes a stab by betting out.  This didn't work but he got rid of Sam.  Now he's worried what you have so he's taken the free card and checked the turn.  Miracle saver on the river and he's pushed all in knowing you'll call because you had a hand but can't pass because of the decent odds you're being offered.

Posted by: TightEnd 


I am sitting on a stack of 11,700 when the river comes and the pot stands at 10,200. So my bet of 3,900 is a little less than half the pot. I am hoping to encourage a call from a non-believing A-x...but the all-in was a surprise.

Call prefop is ok 3 handed but i'd have kept a close eye on the BB as the action came round.

Dream flop!!! now how do we get all our cash in?
You simply MUST bet the flop for several reasons, one of the others is certain to have an ace therefore you have a customer, if there is no ace then you are giving free cards for no reason whatsoever.
Always make people pay for their draws because it is the single biggest mistake in poker that folks pay too much to chase, help them make that mistake.

Post flop is irrelevant for me because i simply wouldn't be in that situation unless headsup but i would discount made hands by the river in YOUR position, i doubt very much you will get this far and be ahead to a river push.

So basically i have won the hand on the flop or got all my chips in by the turn, if i did neither of these then i would be kicking myself on the drive home.

BTW any clues as to identity because if i know them i'd  have had the option of the reraise preflop, a lot of the "good" regulars are indeed VERY good indeed and will run rings around many postflop.

He either puts you on a busted flush draw, is very confident in his read, and thinks you'll get off the hand, or he has JJ or TT.

I envisaged him betting the turn and us pushing then, and if he had bet the turn with JJ, our chips were going in then and there, and nothing has changed now. Except him hitting his set of tens :)

On this forum, having given the hand lots of thought, I might fold this. But IRL at the table - I'm not good enough to think about it long enough and lay it down. I call.

You might give someone a freebie. But you might well encourage a bet from KK and a re-raise from AK, AQ or, more unlikely, A9. You might encourage someone who would have folded to your bet to have a stab at the pot. And if you'd been lucky, you might have encouraged Sam to sandwich. I would agree with you v1 here, I think the check against two players is perfectly acceptable. Check call is more risky than check raise, of course, but I think the risk-reward ratio here is decent enough to warrant the risk. I think if I was happy to take the pot down every time I had the best hand on the flop, I'd never build a stack big enough to play with :)

Good post pswino. I think the risk of getting outdrawn has to be balanced against the risk of not making the most of what is a favourable situation. Hitting a set is a rare occurrence in tournaments and taking risks in order to maximise the situation is warranted here I think.

The most notable thing for me about the hand this week is to do with mindset. The flop comes down A-9-3 and we have a tendency to assume an Ace is out there. Why do we do this? I know a raise and a call pre-flop means an Ace MAY be out there...but it is not a certainty by any means. We make the assumption BEFORE we see any evidence to back it up and it guides our play. This can be risky in itself because fold-fold from two lower pairs is a distinct possibility. A LAG betting out strength here makes sense, but a TAG betting out his Ace gets respect from anything other than...a big ACE.

Not making anything from this pot on the flop is a more scary prospect for me than an unlikely heart on the turn....and I think the assumption that someone has just paired their Ace is a BIG one to make at this stage. So I like the check as well because it gets you a bit more information than you have now and allows the other players the opportunity to make a move they otherwise wouldn't have made.

The same mind-set goes for the flush draw. There are two hearts on board and we are naturally inclined to scare away the draws. But who's on a draw? I think that we tend to see the danger on the board and it manifests into a reality before we have any evidence to support it. If the worst possible scenario always governs your thoughts I think this can lead to playing your strong hands quicker than you might. On the other side of the scale...we give a free card and the turn is the  3h.....completing our full-house draw and someone else's flush. This is the best case scenario.

The most likely case scenario is that the turn is not a heart and so we don't have anything to fear. By checking we can see if an Ace is actually out there and wants to defend the pot against our set (played like a flush draw). No heart on the turn allows Ace-man the opportunity to push because he is ASSUMING we have hearts and is scared of the very outdraw we are when the flop comes down.

At least if the flush does come we can use our check-call as a way to represent it and win rather than allowing him to use it should he have called our flop bet.

If they have 2 lower pairs then you're never going to win a big pot anyway (unless they hit their set, which could make or break us), so is it worth it?

Not betting out:
Pros
You get a small bet from a player that has missed
A player that has nothing might make a worse hand and go broke

Cons
You make it harder to get the money in if they have a hand
The hand is harder to play
A player that has nothing might make a better hand

If there is no ace out then how are you going to win a big pot anyway?
The ace on the flop is either a big green light or a hand killer, if you allow people to draw to bigger hands than yourself for free then you are going to lose in the long run.

Yep, a couple of good posts there. Someone having the Ace is often going to make or break the hand and we probably wont win a big pot if this isn't the case. But our check does allow the Kings an apportunity to c-bet and represent one...with the potential of a genuine Ace behind him. Also, there are only 4 pairs that can improve to beat us (at least 2 of which would have raised pre-flop) and 7 that will improve and loose their stack to us...as well as one pair that turns 2 pair etc...So I think the rewards of offering a free card, if that happens at all, are probably worth the risks.

So your strategy relies on next to speak having kings??
I really hate to say this but this is supposedly a learning section, i really feel that your thoughts and notions are erm, wrong.
You over complicate everything and i see no lesson in it at all, we can all talk bollocks for 250 words that's easy but i really do believe you are giving very bad advice, stuff that can cost money.

Posted by: ifm

Strange question ifm. The strategy is to let the aggressive pre-flop raiser c-bet with any hand...but in this instance Sam told me later he had Kings...so I am using Kings as the e.g. But it doesn't mean your oppo has to have kings though?? This strategy is called slow-playing. You have hit a set and the question is whether to slow-play or fast-play. To say slow-playing a set is an awful tactic is a bit strange really. Loads of players will be checking a set here.

I understand the radical concept of which you speak, i just think it's unprofitable in this situation.
The trouble with this section is that is bereft of experienced winners willing to partake, except of course Dubai but he was ridiculed by yourself.

A friend of Dubai...say no more.

As I remember, it was Dubai who ridiculed me. I kind of re-ridiculed him...sort of like a re-raise.

Hand I played yesterday very similar to this which illustrates that slow playing a set does (sometimes) work. Bets are approximate but there or thereabouts. I have about 12k, cut off has about 10k.

9 handed table. Blinds 100/200. I limped from UTG+1 with 88. Cut off limps, folded round to BB who checks.

Flop comes   Ahrt  2h  8c.

I check, cut off bets 400, BB folds, I smooth call.

Turn comes  7s.

I check, cut off bets 1000. I dwell a little bit (I normally act quite quickly) and raise him to 3000. He thinks for a long time before pushing his remaining chips in. I call, he flips A7.

I appreciate the lack of pre-flop raising shifts the dynamics of the pot a little, although he definitely wasn't putting all his chips in on the flop with a weak ace like that.

I am in no way experienced enough to know whether this could be a +EV play over the long run. I do prefer the idea that there is a choice, though, and that there is no one "MUST" option.

Please click the link below for confirmation of the hand, the final reveal, and Mantis' conclusion.

http://www.blondepoker.com/index.php?q=node/12695 (http://www.blondepoker.com/index.php?q=node/12695)

Bad move by John if you ask me.