blonde poker forum

GAME #1401746936: Texas Hold'em NL Tournament 2008-03-12 23:29:08
Table 144959862 (Tournament: $25,000 Guaranteed R/A Buy-In: $200+$15)
Seat 1: P0nt00n86 ($42,433.00 in chips)
Seat 2: ALICAT1230 ($28,345.00 in chips)
Seat 3: jafaha ($20,900.00 in chips)
Seat 4: johnie5tits ($6,365.00 in chips)
Seat 5: GABIN1110 ($26,662.50 in chips)
Seat 6: Papilla ($15,030.00 in chips)
Seat 7: blukaspa ($6,467.00 in chips)
Seat 9: baldiniubeatable ($8,010.00 in chips) DEALER
Seat 10: HandofDeath ($6,090.00 in chips)
HandofDeath: Post SB $400.00
P0nt00n86: Post BB $800.00
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to P0nt00n86 [ Js  Jc]
ALICAT1230: Fold
jafaha: Raise $2,000.00
johnie5tits: Fold
GABIN1110: Fold
Papilla: Fold
blukaspa: Fold
baldiniubeatable: Fold
HandofDeath: Fold
P0nt00n86: Call $1,200.00
*** FLOP *** [ Qd  7d  6c]
P0nt00n86: Check
jafaha: Bet $2,400.00
P0nt00n86: Call $2,400.00
*** TURN *** [ 9s]
P0nt00n86: Check
jafaha: Check
*** RIVER *** [ 5s]
P0nt00n86: Check
jafaha: Bet $15,200.00
P0nt00n86: ....?


i was ready to call his river bet then he overbets should i still call?

wow i should really pay more attention!!! 88 obv... didn't notice at the time lol

I definiteyl bet the turn to protect my hand here. Roughly 9k in the middle and he aint checking a strong made hand here very often. That comp has immense value though i thought........

you're out of position though.

3 bet preflop? You must be ahead of his range unless he is a total nit.

Postflop is fine I think, though i dump it on the river.

Are you suggesting donking the turn Alex? Thoughts on why we are doing this its not a line I use very often, I presume its for value.

meh, need to read hand histories more thoroughly. EEK. This hand perfectly illustrates why being oop sucks bigtime. Stick this in the learning centre longy, its a great example to mull over imo.

This is exactly the situation i have real trouble with and im sure i leak a fuck load in these spots. I guess 3bet pre negates positional disadvantage. I also dont mind leading the flop tbh, purely because im going to hate being oop on later streets on this board and dont mind taking this down. This a tough cookie imo.

the key here for me is image and being fearless.

If you have the right (tight) image the flat call pre-flop already means that on the flop you can take the pot. You HAVE TO bet out on the flop or check raise here. I hate the check call here to be honest. if you have the wrong (loose) image you can get paid off pre-flop if you re-raise.

It's tough because it's completely situational but I think howing some aggression at some stage before the river will be better than check calling all the way through.

ive got 52 big blinds and hes got 25 big blinds do we really need to get it in pre flop? what does check raising all in on the flop achieve? what hand am i getting him to fold?

you don't have to get it all in pre-flop..there's nothing wrong with re-raising him pre-flop though and leading out almost any flop.
Also nothing wrong with representing a hand that's not scared of the board by check-raising the flop after he bets out.

I also never said all-in on the flop.
I just don't like this idea of "There is one overcard so I'll just check call my way through the hand" I also can't believe your oppo checked the turn as i never would have done that in position after raising pre-flop and on the flop so in all you would still get loads of your chips in the pot...unless you would have folded had he continued to bet the turn and river?

Like I said it's situational and in this case against this oppo you might very well have done the right thing..I am not doubting that for a minute. In most cases however I would probably get chips in there some other way than check calling through the hand though. (I could of course be completely wrong doing that so would love to hear others ideas on it)

Personally I re-raise preflop, or check-raise/bet out on the flop.  But then I do have a tendancy to overplay JJ from time to time.  If you check-raise on the flop and get called/raised you can assume you are up against KQ minimum and get out of the way, but most missed hands and smaller pairs fold here. By check-calling through the hand you are allowing any potential over cards/draws time to hit.  He has free cards all the way down.  But a raise from you on the flop would prevent him catching a draw on the turn.  It's better to win a small pot, than lose a big one, especially against an opponent with a healthy stack, so I try and take it down, whilst being prepared to lay down to a reraise if I must.

If we raise at any point preflop or on the flop we are virtually pot committed, so if we raise we have to call imo.

Yeah, say we re-raise to 7500 total on the flop villian will be shoving 10k into a 20k pot.  But I think most of the time, only a better hand shoves, partly because their chances of getting called here are quite high.  Villian passes here most of the time.  It's still possible for us to pass, depending on any info we have on the player, and it's even slightly cheaper than letting it get to the river and calling the river bet. 

So basically we should just turn our hand into a bluff rather than a hand with showdown value?

Is it a bluff? We bet because we think we have a stronger hand than the opponent, and we don't want to get into a situation where our hand isn't better than the opponents.  JJ needs to be protected, it can be a very vunerable hand.

That's why i re-raise pre, well not to 'protect' it but because i think slow playing is too hard OOP with JJ

mid or late position raise im repopin pre, but i really dont think im that far ahead of an early position raise. what would you do with 10's or 9's in this situation?

That's why I think it's better to raise on the flop, not pre.  You are mostly likely being called preflop, and then the pot is already quite big on the flop, perhaps too big for this situation.  The opp has more invested and will be more reluctant to fold.  If you raise on the flop, or bet the flop, it is a lot easier for the opponent to fold.  If he wants to call then its bad play by him and its unlucky when he makes a straight, but at least your money is going in when you are infront and not behind.  You are a big stack which means you can spare a few chips to try and pick up small pots here and there, but at the end of the day you have to be protecting your stack and not letting yourself get outdrawn unnecessarily

1010 or 99 I flat call pre and bet out on flop, pass to a raise.

ok lets be devils advocate and say we check raise all in on the flop. i feel these hands call us.... qq+ aq & 77 all of which are beating me. the only hand he may get fruity with is 10's if he thinks im at it.

as for flat calling pre then betting the flop surely any decent player is going to raise this bet?

By no means am I suggesting check-raising all in on the flop.  Like you say you are only getting called by a better hand.  I'm just saying raise.  Raise a decent amount that is enough to get him to pass but not so much that you are totally committed if he wants to get clever and ask you the question.

As for 99 or 1010, I suppose a check-raise here is ok too, although there are more hands beating you.  The only situation where I check-call this down is if I am up against a player who appears to be without a fold button.

Correct




Surely you have to be growing your stack?



That is the time i would be check jamming.

Yes of course you need to be growing your stack, but protecting it in vunerable situations with vunerable cards against a player who can take a serious chunk of it.  Which means we want to be trying to control the pot size a little so it doesn't get out of hand and we can get away from it if necessary. The flop bet by opponent looks weak, but I am not jamming because AQ or better is still plausible.  The joy of both players being fairly deepstacked means that we do not need to get all of the chips in the middle to take down this pot.  It also looks incredibly weak, and it's pretty obvious we are probably not making this move with a queen in our hand, but we probably don't get a call.  I've said what I would do, but basically the hand just needs to be played more aggressively at any point up until the turn, otherwise it's just down to the luck of the cards.  If you bet it and get outdrawn, c'est la vie, 50p please, but if you don't bet you are letting him make his hand for free.  Give him a chance to fold is what I am saying.



Out of interest, what do you do on the flop if you get a caller from the reraise? 

No-one has come up with a good plan for this hand yet given stack sizes and position. Someone call LL.

I am saying give him a chance to bluff

If you have say 15k in chips then I would agree, you could do with a double up, but there's no need to risk being outdrawn in any way with 40k.  You are already in good shape and can still win the pot, albeit a smaller one.  With JJ on not a terrible flop, do you really want him to see anymore cards?  If he bluffs he can't get away from it.

Happy days!

And you quite possibly end up losing a 40k pot instead of winning a 10k pot.  There has to be a balance of getting the most out of this hand whilst minimising the risks of losing half your stack.  I think reraising pre is ok, I just prefer to raise the flop.  The opponent could quite easily have AK or similar, so why on earth would you want him to see all 5 cards?

im still happy with the line i took and was calling any bet under a pot size one.

This is most certainly wrong. Id like to see the number of re raises called pre in a multi, but im damn sure it isn't 'most likely'

Re raise pre and commit yourself. You still have half your stack left if you are wrong...

My line of thinking is that it will be easiest to win the pot on the flop


Surely this statement is a contradiction in itself

Blocker bet the river! 6k, is hard for him to raise unless he has it, taking away the bluff element of overbetting the pot and leaving you in a tough spot like you are!

I would be raising pre-flop almost every time. I have the advantage of a bigger stack and prob a better hand...and I want to press that advantage. The reason to press is because I am oop and my hand isn't going to like lots of flops, so it's going to be tricky to play post-flop. If my oppo calls me with a worse hand then good. Pre-flop is the BEST chance that you're going to get called by worse!

If you flat-call the pre-flop raise oop there must be a good reason for doing so. Are you trapping? If so, risky but ok. But the problem with the trapping mentality with medium strength is this...


I don't think you can play trappy like this if you're going to second guess yourself at the business hand. You were ready to call because you have given worse the chance to bet into you. Well here it is. The bet on the end is the situation you manufactured by playing the hand this way. If you don't want this decision then play the hand another way.

What do you think your oppo puts YOU on? Because it's not J-J...and not a Q either. You look like you have a hand that can be pressured from the prior soft action. YOU HAVEN'T SHOWN STRENGTH AT ANY POINT. So your oppo can be jumping on your weakness as much as he has you beat. If your oppo has outdrawn you then it is the risk you take in playing this way. And it would be impossible to know whether you are beat or not now. But you still have to call...because that was your line.

Alternatively, you can raise pre-flop, play this hand in a more standard pressing way, and not face a tricky decision like this on the end.

Do you always disregard the size of the river bet? If so i think that's a rather major flaw!

The bluff would work against his idea of our range if he bet 1/2 this amount so why does he bet this much?

Posted by: Royal Flush

Our oppos river bet is all-in either to maximise the pot size because he has it or to maximise pressure because he doesn't. As an unknown I am not sure I could decipher which is which.  But if you can then please feel free to share.

FWIW I didn't discount the bet size in this hand and this is because I am very thorough with poker theory and my brain is quite massive. I think that we have given our oppo no inclination that we have a hand that can call this size of bet...so why bet that much? The SIZE of the bet actually gives me more inclination to call. Tough though and is why I suggest raising pre-flop and getting it in on the flop. I am sure we aren't behind on the flop.

he overbet as he has 88 if he bets 80% pot i snap call his bluff.

Posted by: UpTheMariners

So 80% pot is a MUCH better bet with 8-8.

Exactly. If i am in his shoes i bluff 3/4 pot as it is going to get you to pass all the hands i think you have.

If i have made a nut hand/near nut hand i am just going to shove because people think this is a bluff all the time (2 years ago it pretty much was) and they make hero calls.

Not really, the internet is full of idiots who 'check to call' regardless of the bet size so shoves still get called.

I agree that shoves get called, but you still need to have some semblance of a hand to call with...even if you suspect a bluff. If we c-called a turn bet as well as the flop, the all-in would make more sense to me because it looks like we have something. Here it looks like we have nothing....a fd perhaps.

For the 80% pot bet to be the better one you will need it to be called with more frequency...and it will be.

FWIW the internet is full of people who pass when you go all-in.

FWIW the line you took in this UpTheMariners is not one I like. I understand the philosophy and think it has merit...but not with a hand as vulnerable as J-J. I think you have tried to be too clever with it. The flaw in the strat is you are setting yourself up to be faced with a major decision at some point in the hand and in this example it comes on the river. The truth of the matter is it is impossible to put your unknown oppo on a hand now. Like I said, he can be playing your weakness as readily as he is playing the board. You wouldn't know. To suggest otherwise is to tag every value bet a bluff and every all-in the nuts.

Poker is a game about decisions and in this hand you choose to make them all. You have voluntarily opted to see all 5 cards with Jacks and never prompted your opponent to make a mistake with his inferior hand. Jacks are vulnerable and that's the simple nature of the hand. By falling in love with your line you have just let your Jacks get caught, simple as. I think the standard line is better, play them fast and ask worse if he wants to make a mistake early. As played villain doesn't get asked a difficult question and as such doesn't make any mistakes.

When he fires 80% of the pot on the river with AJ he has made a fairly major mistake in your favour!

There is a decent chance you can play J-J vs 8-8 for ALL the chips pre-flop or on the flop. But instead we choose to see all 5 cards in the hope that our oppo bluffs a few k on the river instead. All the time risking an outdraw and playing our vulnerable hand in the most difficult way possible. Sorry, this isn't very good tournament poker.

personally i 3 bet preflop, but as the we have called i like the check call on the flop.

I think the best line may be to lead/call the turn, that is giving your opponent a chance to bluff the hand or call, each way we are betting for value.

If we C/R the flop we are not getting called by a hand that we are beating.

Since Dan has played it passively there isnt much wrong with your line, river is a fold though in how you have played the hand.

I re-raise pre.

The idea that check calling isn't very good tournament poker though is very backward thinking.

Posted by: Royal Flush

Posted by: Royal Flush

indeed.

My quote in full i believe was

Eh, wow at some of the posts here.

Since Harrington, you can assume that unknown preflop raisers continuation bet a variety of board textures waaaaaayyy too much. What they don't do as often is double or triple barrell particularly light; or overbet the river as a bluff. The fact that they fail to balance their range on the later streets; or check call medium hand strength often is what provides good thinking players with value in tournaments.

As such, I like a check - call on the flop as played very much against most random opponents. Looking to end a hand quickly is often not the decision that maximises EV. Our objective should not be to make decisions that make our subsequent decisions easiest - but make decisions that allow us the greatest scope to win the most chips.

If you donk at this flop with the intention of folding or check raise the flop you are allowing him to fold hands you beat or play for all the pretzel monies with you drawing to two outs / runner runner / or drawing dead off the flop.

Talk of hand protection from the poster pocket lady is something I strongly disagree with. If he has Axdd then all the money goes in anyway. If he has 2 - 6 outs then fine. He's unlikely to outdraw us and may be prone to bluffing the turn or river  / going for thin river value with a hand we beat / calling a thin river value bet from us.

All of the above might change depending on the opponent of course. But the original poster hasn't added any information of value on his play. So we can just assume random ipoker tournament donk until proven otherwise.

----------------------

So, postflop I like check - calling that flop. I would probably check fold a lot of turns and would have called bets sometimes on the river but I like just folding to that shove. There's nothing to be ashamed of in the way the hand played out. It's a tough spot oop and we are not getting a good price to call against that rivershove. We beat basically nothing that he shoves for value there and, as I said, it seems reasonable to assume that the overbet river shove these days is more often for value than with air – largely for the reasons flushy states above.

Thing is though, I still don’t understand why we don’t just re – raise preflop and go to war with a hand that:

-   should be ahead of any non – ridiculously tight opening range;
-   will be very difficult to play out of position with these stack sizes;

Pop him to 7 – 8k (the larger the 3 bet the weaker your holding will be perceived) and get it in. Variance heavy, but definitely plus EV.

May I note that I feel like I am re – writing the same basic post over and over on this board. There are many regular posters here who still want to overplay marginal hand strength and are overly concerned by hand protection and “weak” play. Calling is really cool in a variety of situations. As is having your opponents drawing to 2 – 6 outs with a lot of their range after the flop.

ok so whats your play with 10's and 9's? is jj really that far ahead of a utg+1's range?

Think of it like this:

If he finds QQ - AA; AQs+ then he is definitely going to open the pot for a raise right?

Now, surely you can add in 99 - JJ and AJs aswell? And often, KQs+ and smaller pairs / aces some of the time. Whether he should raise those hands or not is moot. The fact is people do raise into the pot with them.

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

 160,956,576  games     0.015 secs    10,730,438,400  games/sec

Board:
Dead: 

   equity    win    tie          pots won    pots tied   
Hand 0:    54.861%     54.09%    00.77%          87062567      1240408.00   { JcJs }
Hand 1:    45.139%     44.37%    00.77%          71413193      1240408.00   { 88+, AJs+, AcTc, KQs, AJo+, KQo }


ok against his estimated range i should be reraising. but lets say i reraise and now he shoves on me his range is alot smaller. another thing is in a sng pushing aa in the first hand is +ev but would you not agree theres better ways of playing the hand, like in this situation (seeing the flop texture)?

Obv when we re - raise his range narrows but we need less subsequent pot equity for putting the rest of the chips in to be plus EV.

Guys, imagine that you are 60 years-old and learnt how to play poker yesterday. It is your very first live game and your very first hand. You nervously look down in the bb after a raise and find a pair of Jacks.

The strategy you would use is check-calling.

I'm not trying to be funny or clever.....this is exactly what you would do and I see it all the time at the casino from weak or new players. Now if you have been playing the game for a number of years and you find yourself playing this hand in the same manner as someone playing their first ever hand of poker you need to wondering what's up.

People are always trying to re-invent the wheel.

In reality it really doesn't matter how fancy you think your thought process is....you are playing the hand like a novice. Some contributions on this thread have suggested that checking to call is really innovative thinking and the bet sizes your unknown oppo throws out will give you all the info you need. That's just tosh. I agree with Lloyd in so much that checking to call is good for a variety of situations....but a vulnerable tournament hand, oop, against an unknown opponent who probably gets it in early with worse anyway, just isn't one of those situations.

As a tournament player I get a lot of encouragement when I see a cash game mentality fogging the mind of tournament players.

When you run bad people suggest that you analyse your game. When you do this you often find that you are over-complicating your game and you should just get back to basics and stop trying to be too clever.

As much as i find your posts quite irritating, i couldn't agree with this line more...

When you run bad people suggest that you analyse your game. When you do this you often find that you are over-complicating your game and you should just get back to basics and stop trying to be too clever.

So true

Mantis, if there was a way to stick posts in the PHA board on ignore yours would be the first on my list.

Problem with flat calling flop is if vilain has any hand reading skills ur totaly fked on the later streets.

Posted by: LuckyLloyd

...your poker strat plateaus when you stop listening to people Lloyd. Remember, the game takes a lifetime to master.

We need Kristian Kjondal here!!!

Equally, unless he's a total muppet playing the flop aggressively will allow him to play you perfectly. Pick your poison.

This hand is a pandora's box tbh. Unless we know what level of thinking villain operates on we cannot find a truly optimal way to play this hand.

Check calling flop and turn gives good villain so much information that when you check the river (blocker bet will look just like that/you cant bet profitably so can only c/c) he can overbetshove a huge chunk of the time with 100% of his range and little/no fear of being called. Get these situations a lot in cash and impossible to outplay a good player oop on this sort of board and that kind of betting preflop.

I like how mariners played it tbh, but dont mind a check raise on the flop either, to protect our hand and finish an ugly situation.

Posted by: AlexMartin

I think you bullseye with this comment Alex. Against an unknown, defaulting to a standard line has got to make sense. If you do something different then you've got to ask yourself why are you doing something different? In this example there isn't any particular reason you can point at to try and get clever.

If you oppo is an aggressive player who c-bets big but who has shown a tendancy to fold to pre-flop re-raises then the op line is a good one.

If you checkraise what are you checkraising to? Do you just give up thereafter?

By the way, the "standard" line is to check, call this flop.

We are checkraising to get him off the hand.  JJ is a dangerous hand, it can be outdrawn so easily (usually by overs obv)  And look, oops, we've been outdrawn on the river.  I just can't understand anyone wanting their opponent to see all 5 cards for free with JJ when we are most likely up against two over cards.  Ok let's look at this from a simple point of view.  We are winning pre flop, on the flop, and on the turn.  But then we don't even know where on earth we stand because we havent done anything to find out.

If you manage to get him to stick it in with the worst hand pre or on the flop then that's all good.  And unlucky, bad beat from the turn and river.  But don't just let him have it.

What hands that you aren't already beating do you get him off?

scaredofoutdrawaments vs stackingabluffingopponentaments

One is very poor tournament poker

That's the funny thing floppy, the idea is to get them off their 6-2 outter!

Did you call or fold to the bet on the river btw?

I'll put Floppy's questions as simply and as clearly as possible:

If you check / raise this flop or lead for the pot on this flop:

1) what better hands do you believe they fold?
2) what worse hands do you believe they call with?

Text results appended to pokerstove.txt

  11,880  games     0.005 secs     2,376,000  games/sec

Board: Qd 7d 6c
Dead: 

   equity    win    tie          pots won    pots tied   
Hand 0:    73.485%     73.48%    00.00%              8730            0.00   { JcJs }
Hand 1:    26.515%     26.52%    00.00%              3150            0.00   { AKo }

In my opinion, everyone should be scared of getting outdrawn in a tournament.  I know that one of my weaknesses in tournaments it that sometimes I play my big hands too strongly because I don't want to get outdrawn, but in this situation we have every reason to believe its possible. I am looking to get them off any hand that has not hit the flop.  The bet on the flop means nothing.  You have checked to him and he has put in the obligatory continuation bet.  Early position raise suggests we are beating AK AJ 1010 99 88 and losing to AQ AA KK QQ.  Either way, we can find out.  What happens if another overcard appears on the turn?  I'm sorry I just don't advocate giving free cards when we have the winning hand albeit not a very strong one.     

If we think we're are behind on the flop do we call?  If not then we are effectively slow playing an extremely vulnerable hand which is madness.

Played as it is until the flop comes:

We check, he bets. If we're ahead, why are we flat calling? Raise now, get his money in there! If we're behind, why are we calling again? Check calling is screaming "I've got a weak hand".  With Jacks on that flop I want to find out where I am ASAP. I would lead out, if I get raised, I'm done with the hand. If I get called, then I proceed with caution. If he folds, fair enough.

I understand what has been said about the chances of getting outdrawn, but why risk it.  There is no need.  If the turn comes an ace and he puts in a big bet you would almost certainly be thinking "I should have raised the flop"

Good post!

Your line vs a decent player means you just do chips in.


Lets see, you check raise me there i am only getting it in with better hands than you, so you get it in behind.

If you lead i raise you 100% of the time, unless i have a set. So you fold a better hand or get in a bigger pot where you are oop.

You never win chips with this approach.

Basically it works like this:

Say there are 100 players in a tournament who all start with 2000 chips, the player who ends up with 200,000 chips wins the most money.

I think you'll find the idea in a tournament is to win chips AND not lose them

If the standard line is to check-call the flop with Jacks with the intention of "check-folding most turns" then I'm glad I want no part of it....because that's just horrible. We check-fold here because the  9s appears?? I am completely befuddled by such a pointless chip-wasting strat.

I think we would make more progress on this thread if it was accepted that the "you only get worse to fold" idea is understood by the majority of posters but the reason it's not a great strat is because Jacks aren't a great hand and your position is vulnerable. You must risk assess in tournament poker. Voluntarily going through all the streets with just one pair, donating chips, while thinking you're somehow in control of the hand, is not good tournament poker. There are only so many times you can check-call and then check-fold before you have no more chips left.

Posted by: Royal Flush

Which is the very reason I lead geez.

I understand that we only get called by better hands.  But I am happy to win this pot on the flop rather than lose it on a later street.

Yeah lead 3 bet i like, i was making a point to the poster who wants to lead fold.



How often do you get the nuts?

Statetheobviousaments ;)

But if you go down to 0 chips you win NO money.Why risk a flip for half your stack?

I win chips if you pass to my check raise.

I lose less if I lead and you fold.

Either way, I have more chips than I do if I play it the way you do.

I do think the way you play it isn't bad, but in this hand I'd rather win less than lose loads.

Point taken, but I'm damn sure there are better opportunities to get mine and his chips in than with JJ on a board with an overcard.

The way you play it in his position is correct, but he's an unknown, he could be as tight as Tighty!

Then you are leading into a range of QQ+ on a Q high board, my guess is its not +EV

I like this too.  I'm just saying no freebies

Am I? Against an unknown, my range for him is 88+, A-J+, K-Q.

So we are saying he is an average player with no real flair.

You lead into him on Q hi he prob flats or folds with the smaller pairs, raises AA/KK and maybe QQ. AJ he folds, AQ he raises AK who knows. KQ raises.

Why let him off when he has smaller pair (2 outs) AJ (3 outs) or AK (6 outs)?

So check-raising the flop is probably the best play, yes?

I'm done posting in this thread. And this time I mean it when I say I won't be posting in the PHA board for a long time. I don't gain anything out of it tbh - and there is little reason to educate people when the knowledge all goes one way. I have little interest in winning poker debates for the sake of it.

Someone wiser than me once said:

"Thinking you could be ahead is not usually a good enough reason to raise".

2nd best after check calling.

Why? If you CR, you know where you are. If you CC...you have no clue where you are. He could have any 2...

Check raising tells me i am either miles ahead or miles behind and it costs me about 8k in chips. Something i already know.

Check calling costs me 2k and keeps his range open to bluffing.

Why are you so determined to know where you are rather than win chips?

How often have you heard the top players in the world say "i raised to find out where i was"

I heard Robert Williamson 111 say this last night a few times.

FWIW I reckon the mistake in this hand was not 3-betting pre.  If we did then it makes our oppos hand a lot easier to define on the flop.  Assuming he calls that is. 

Quite a few times...

Knowing where I am is one of the important parts of the hand imo, because then I know whether I'm gonna win chips or lose chips. Much rather win a few than lose loads...

I think it's important to recognise that winning RISK FREE chips is ok in a tournament. On a perfect day, when the sun is shining and things are falling into place you will never get outdrawn.

But you do get outdrawn, and you get outdrawn a lot. If you pinch and pressure your oppo in order to take down chips with zero risk this builds your stack. Then, when you get a decent strength hand you can explore ways to get worse to dump into you in order to make the most of the opportunity. While you still acknowledge the risk in doing this you have padded your stack with earlier risk free chips...so on the occasions that you do get caught you are still alive.

If you take the high risk approach in every hand including e.g oop with Jacks, your tournament will just be a long-shot high-risk accumulation of plays. While it can be argued that in isolation each individual play has merit I think if you play tournaments like this as a whole you will make life very difficult for yourself.

Good post.  I couldn't agree more

The high risk approach with Jacks is to check/raise and hope.

interesting to see pab play this the same way as me pre flop on his vid 'in the well' hand 251.

In hand 251 pab c-raises his oppo all-in on the flop with jacks. In this hand you c-call your oppo on the flop with jacks.

How is that the same?

obv the flop play is different because the texture is not the same as my board.

Agreed that he called a bet pre-flop with Jacks.

But I think the essence of this thread was whether it was a worthwhile risk to c-call all the way. In hand 251 pab doesn't think it is and plays it strongly. I don't think highlighting that he played pre-flop the same provides evidence to show the strat is a good one for the hand as a whole. I think it only goes to strengthen the case of those who were looking to press the hand on the flop.

so it doesnt matter what comes down?

of course not

 ;technophobe;

I am thinking about the line you took in the hand Mariners. And the line you took in the hand is completely different to the line pab took. This is why I think saying look how pab played it the same as me is way off the mark.

Your strat was to softly c-call with Jacks because if you played them strongly only better would call. When pab strongly c-raises all-in it is reasonable to say that he gets worse to fold a lot and usually only better will call. So his mentality with the hand is completely different to yours.

Yes, the texture of the boards are different, but not to any great degree. One overcard, which is not an A or K, wouldn't change my strat so significantly from a pressing one to a c-calling one. So yes, he called a bet pre-flop with Jacks, but his strat with them after that is very different. So I was just puzzled why you would make a comparison with something that isn't the same.

In fact pab should have more scope to c-call with Jacks knowing that he is almost certainly ahead on that flop. So why would he want to play them strongly and get worse to fold?

He uses your strat in hand 58, and this is even though the texture of the flop is the same as hand 251. It is only the RISK of outdraw damage that is significantly different here.

The situation is dissimilar post flop.

OK but in this hand the pre-flop action wasn't a major talking point. The bulk of the strat and discussion was about the flop onwards...even though many suggested their preference was raising pre.

What I'm talking about is the line that if you play them strongly on the flop you only get worse to fold and whether it is a good line for tournaments with a hand like Jacks. Pab plays his over-pair jacks fast and strong on the flop and this demonstrates he didn't have this mentality at all. And that was even though he must have been pretty certain he had the best hand.

I think if you only take away from his hand that his pre-flop action was the same then you are missing the fact that he rejected the strat about getting worse to fold. And that was the main talking point in this thread.

Even though the flops are a little different I don't think the appearance of a single Q should affect thoughts about your hand significantly enough to play the hand out completely differently. But if you are going to use this pab video as a reference I think it would be amiss not to mention that in an actual tournament situation he forced worse to fold to take down risk-free chips. And that has been my stance throughout.

Mantis I really want to learn how these chips are "risk-free". Thanks in advance.

You win them risk free as soon as you force your oppo to fold. Perhaps lower risk, or no outdraw risk would be a more accurate term. I don't think this really detracts from the point i'm making though Rob.

risk free but im like 55% at best against his range.

Posted by: UpTheMariners

Sorry Mariners, I don't know where you get this figure from. We have no history about the player in the op so this is just guessing.

so you dont know the player so he doesnt have a range?

Every player has a range. The more information you have about that player the thinner the range will be.

Unknown player = Unknown range

The less you know a player the wider his range, and thats why I say suggesting that you're 55% at best against an unknown range is guesswork.

Isn't every range guesswork though?

Your digging a big deep hole Mantis you'll need a JCB to get you out.  :)

Yes but that doesn't help the Mantis argument.

I know ;)

Look, Colombo, Miss Marple & Jessica feckin Fletcher could all bowl up to a murder scene together....but without clues they aint gonna solve the crime. Yes, they could just take a stab and say there's a 55% chance it was Colonel Mustard in the library with a candlestick...but with no body, no candlestick and no library I'd say they were skating on thin ice myself.

The more clues you have the closer to the truth you are.

No clues = guess imo.

They would be able to deduce it was the scene of a murder though.....

I've changed my Avatar for the first time ever, purely as a tribute to Mantis. This is absolute nonsense mate. If someone unknown to you open raises in ep of course you can make a "best guess" as to their range and play accordingly. That's basically what poker is. Making a best guess as to opponents ranges and playing your hand accordingly.

And if you can't see why check calling a queen high board with jacks and checkraising a raggy board with jacks are probably both the best plays then you might aswell give up!

who said the player is unknown? maybe i know what room the murder took place but why would i want to give out that information out muuuuuhahahahahaa...

Posted by: RobS

There are 169 combinations of starting hands an unknown can open raise with in ep. What factors are you using to discount most of these Rob?

Poker is a game of information and without information your "best guess" is just that...a guess. You eliminate scores of possible hands because you just do and you have no real justification for doing it.

Your best guess may be that your Jacks are no better than 55% but because this is based on nothing then allow me the opportunity to disagree with you.

Also, why is c-raising with Jacks on a raggy board the best play? Because as many have said on this thread...you'll only get worse to fold.

Posted by: Royal Flush

We can deduce Villain is raising with two cards

More likely AA than 72, i don't need to know that for sure i am quite happy stereotyping an unknown and treating him as a standard player on that particular site until i know better.

Cocoa FTW IMO

Do the people who hate a check call on the flop still hate a check call if weve 3bet pre?

I never just check call if I've three bet pre in this position....ever.

(moved the why not)

Sorry mate..I can write a longer post why I prefer the check-raise or to lead out tomorrow but in short;

What does check-calling accomplish when you've 3 bet pre-flop? (Other than pot control because you're playing OOP...which is something you should have thought about pre-flop when 3 betting him.)
I really don't like showing strenght pre-flop by 3-betting someone when I'm OOP and then just check-calling my way through a hand...It's a sure fire way of bleeding chips when you're already behind..or not maximising when you are in front (unless you are up against a serial bluffer)

theres no need for pot control here after a 3 bet preflop - hed have 15k left if we made it 6k
why let him pass worse by check raising if he bets  - its not like he can bust us but ive got to let him try to bust himself

lol this thread still kicking.

Posted by: Royal Flush

I think that is a fair enough point.

However, I would qualify that by saying it is really up to the individual player to ascribe a range for an unknown ep raiser and there really isn't a right or wrong here. It is quite reasonable to assume that the range of a competent player is textbook tight until you know better. However, I think in a $200 tournament at a stage when lots of pre-flop raises are getting through, and ep raises have extra credibility, a competent player wouldn't have a textbook tight range.

Personally until I know better I think someone who can play will raise with a wider range than 88+/A-J+......because he's competent (e.g. any pair). And that's why I question the 55% at best figure (think those stats are pre-flop anyway) and still fancy my hand is best on the flop.