WRGPT signups

[johnnya24]

Well, we both checked and the 5c came on the river. Now, I'm thinking he has a small pair. I'm thinking checking again, but coming over the top if he bets out.

Thoughts?

Now you have 2 options .. you can:

1. Throw out small stopper / value bet ... about 6K

2. Hope you're J's are good and check call

Pick you're gamble. Both have pros and cons.

Putting out a small stopper bet has two advantages ... it allows you to choose how much you are prepared to lose ... so rather than checking and calling a 10K bet or an all in shove, you can throw out a 6K bet that looks like a value bet. It will help prevent your opponent from bluffing. If you bet 6K, and lose, you still have 17K back ... plus it looks like a strong bet. You might even get a call from an AT, 88 type hand. There's not much you are beating. If you bet 6K and he shoves, there is very little chance you are good.

Check-calling is less predictable. You could be beat by a better hand, it could go check-check and you save 6K (best base scenario if you are beat). But check calling risks putting yourself in a tough spot. He could see your check as more weakness, and throw out a value bet and put you in a tough spot. He could shove with a huge hand (AQ etc) or nothing, putting you in a very tough spot.

I don't like shoving, because there is a high % chance you are beat, and most of the hands that beat you are not folding.

[DMT]

Johnny I'm really not seeing why you are approaching this hand so conservatively. Why would his opponent check the turn with a made hand? I would say it's about a 80% chance that ITC has the better hand.

[johnnya24]

Johnny I'm really not seeing why you are approaching this hand so conservatively. Why would his opponent check the turn with a made hand? I would say it's about a 80% chance that ITC has the better hand.

I really don't get why you are being so cavalier

The point is to win the hand or get out as cheaply as possible if you're beat. His opponent could have nothing, a better hand and is pot controlling on a very draw heavy board, or turned and monster and is trapping (AQ).

The advice to check-raise the river with second pair on a draw heavy board is utterly insane. Maybe if both players were deep stacked, and this was a cash game, and you had a stone cold read. That is some crazy thin value to be making a move like that, especially with your tournament life at stake. It makes no sense, because even if you are right with the read, your opponent cannot call the check-raise if they have the kind of hand you are assuming they have. It's a pointless check raise ... they either fold and you gain nothing, or they call and you are out.

This is tournament poker, not a cash game. Survival and pot control are the most crucial aspects of the game, especially when OOP. Making crazy check-raises on the river with second pair on a dangerous board is just plain bad play.

He's OOP against a PF raiser on a really dangerous board with nothing but second pair. Check-raise? = banzai poker

I see this as a very difficult spot for ITC ... 8h, 10d, Kd Js 5c

He could be beat by AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, KJ, KT, JT, AA, KK ... 55, 88, TT, JJ, QQ are still possible.

If he checks, ITC beats and gets nothing extra from: AT, J9, QT <44, 66, 77, 99 ... those hands will check behind almost all the time ... unless his opponent turns them into a bluff, and that's unlikely given that those hands still have some showdown value with all the possible busted draws (flush and straight).

What is the point of a check raise? Are you hope he thin value bets AT or a medium pair on that board? No way, especially at this level. If he bets he's either bluffing with no showdown value (errr ... A9? A7? A6?
Madness

[DMT]

You list all of those hands that can beat him but I don't see why any of them would check the turn? Not a single one of them would be safe if he hit a flush draw and most of them would lose to a straight as well, so IMO his check on the turn shows weakness and since the 5c was very unlikely to help him, I maintain that it's a much-better-than-even chance that ITC has the better hand. So if he bets the river after drawing a blank, I would put him on a medium pair or A-blank trying to steal a pot since ITC has not shown any strength throughout the entire hand. It's unfortunate it's just us because I'd like to see how others would approach this spot. I do see where you're coming from but I think it's fear-based play and you gotta be fearless in NLH.

[johnnya24]

You list all of those hands that can beat him but I don't see why any of them would check the turn? Not a single one of them would be safe if he hit a flush draw and most of them would lose to a straight as well, so IMO his check on the turn shows weakness and since the 5c was very unlikely to help him, I maintain that it's a much-better-than-even chance that ITC has the better hand. So if he bets the river after drawing a blank, I would put him on a medium pair or A-blank trying to steal a pot since ITC has not shown any strength throughout the entire hand. It's unfortunate it's just us because I'd like to see how others would approach this spot. I do see where you're coming from but I think it's fear-based play and you gotta be fearless in NLH.

There is a massive gulf between fearless and reckless. Your approach is way over that line IMO ... you're a mad man

The suicide shove on the turn? The pointless valueless check-raise on the river?

Even if they work, that approach to the game cannot last for long ... you'd just be biding your time before eventually getting KO'd ... and in order to make it work, you'd have to keep doing it in monster pots and hope to luck out in a ginormous pot.

The best NLHE tournament players play cautious smallball ... minimizing risk, staying alive, playing position, maximizing value, aggressive pre-flop/ cautious post-flop (Negreanu, Ivey, Mercier, Elky etc etc).

Someone's been watching too many WPT final tables

[DMT]

There is a massive gulf between fearless and reckless. Your approach is way over that line IMO ... you're a mad man

The suicide shove on the turn? The pointless valueless check-raise on the river?

Even if they work, that approach to the game cannot last for long ... you'd just be biding your time before eventually getting KO'd ... and in order to make it work, you'd have to keep doing it in monster pots and hope to luck out in a ginormous pot.

The best NLHE tournament players play cautious smallball ... minimizing risk, staying alive, playing position, maximizing value, aggressive pre-flop/ cautious post-flop (Negreanu, Ivey, Mercier, Elky etc etc).

Someone's been watching too many WPT final tables

It's funny you say that because I really haven't been watching much poker in the last 2 years or so. But IIRC many of the pros talk about each hand telling a story...what in this hand makes you think the opponent's story is that he has a strong hand? A PF raise in the button with only 1 caller? His continuation bet? His check on the turn? I'm quite confident his opponent would have folded on the turn if ITC had shoved and a check-raise on the river will make his table think twice about trying to bluff him again. Sure, I could be wrong and you could be right, but my read is that his opponent is weak so all of my recommendations have been based on that read, and the way the hand has unfolded I'm even more confident with that read. I really hope we will get to find out

[baldgriff]

Well here is my thought on this... keeping in mind the stack sizes of both players.

The buttons check in this hand is likely more of a weak play. Neither of the players in the hand have big stacks. The Button raise was likely to pick up the blinds. The check on the turn likely is because he didnt get better on the turn - and is afraid he is behind and looking for a free card to his hand. The blank on the river more than likely doesnt make his hand. So the problem for ITC is this. Can he lead out after the river expecting the button to fold? If he leads out, will he call a raise from the button.

If you think your pair of J's is good, you still may have to call a raise from the button, one that could cripple you if in fact he has you beat.


I think the button is weak - but I dont like any of the following choices for ITC:
Check
1/3 pot size bet
All in

Why:
Check is weak and can I call a bet
1/3 pot - is a bet that looks like a feeler and can you call if the other guy pushes?
All-in - if your wrong well your done.

All in all - you may have the best hand ITC - but position on this is not great. Hope your opponent plays weak.....

[johnnya24]

It's funny you say that because I really haven't been watching much poker in the last 2 years or so. But IIRC many of the pros talk about each hand telling a story...what in this hand makes you think the opponent's story is that he has a strong hand? A PF raise in the button with only 1 caller? His continuation bet? His check on the turn? I'm quite confident his opponent would have folded on the turn if ITC had shoved and a check-raise on the river will make his table think twice about trying to bluff him again. Sure, I could be wrong and you could be right, but my read is that his opponent is weak so all of my recommendations have been based on that read, and the way the hand has unfolded I'm even more confident with that read. I really hope we will get to find out

I think you're a closet lunatic

My thinking is ... he doesn't need to have a strong hand to beat me because my holding is weak (second pair, average kicker on a draw heavy broadway (raisers) board), I'm OOP, and my chip stack is perilous ... that's why caution is default position on this hand. I wanna try and see if I can win the hand while risking as little as possible.

The check back on the turn is exactly what I wanted, because although I'm OOP, I can now take control of the pot on the river with a lead out bet. Checking the river (even with aggressive intent) gives control back to my opponent. If I check and he checks behind with a hand I beat, then I lose value; if I check and he has nothing there is a higher % chance he puts me in a horrible spot with an all in bluff ... I'm now calling off my tournament with second pair and an average kicker ugggh. Maybe it's 50-50? Who knows? Why put myself in a 50-50 spot when I can make a small lead out on the river and paralyze him from shoving? I will be the one who looks like I was trapping with a big hand. If he calls and has me beat, I'm still alive with 17K and a punchers chance of getting back in the tourney.

The stopper bet (a) keeps me alive if he has me just beat (pair of K's, AJ, 2 pair+) (b) gets me some extra value if I have him pipped, plus it's such a small bet that he could call with a small pair just in case if I had a busted flush draw (c) reduces the chance of him shoving on me because now it looks like I was the one trapping with a big hand.

You're assuming that the check-back on turn means that he is weak ... that is a dangerous assumption when we have such a weak hand ourselves. How weak is weak? It could mean that he's worried that I might be trapping him on a very dangerous board ... that is why I want to crystallize the idea that I'm trapping with a big hand by making a small "call-me" value bet on the river. That way I can get a bit of value if i'm ahead, lose the minimum if I'm beat, and hopefully reduce the chance of being put in a horrible spot if he shoves nothing at me.

[johnnya24]

Whatever ITC does, it's not going to be as risky as the 2 day old leftover Chinese food I'm about to eat!

[In the Corn]

Well, I bet out $7,500...waited about 4 hours for his response. He folded.

Now, I'm sitting at $50K.

Thanks for the help guys.

[DMT]

Well, I bet out $7,500...waited about 4 hours for his response. He folded.

Now, I'm sitting at $50K.

Thanks for the help guys.

I look forward to Johnny's response But I'll fire off first...your analysis wasn't off the mark, but your reading of the opponent's hand was IMO. This isn't the WSOP so just because someone is still around doesn't mean they are a great player. As I said, a button raise and a check on the turn screamed weakness and it made no sense even with a made hand to let ITC have a free card on the river.

ITC, I think if you had gone with your original check-raise you would have gotten an extra bet (as you had not shown strength the entire hand he knew that the only way he could win the hand was to get you to fold). Or maybe, unlikely IMO, he'd have checked it down. But that was a fun hand to discuss, hopefully we can help again.

[johnnya24]

I look forward to Johnny's response But I'll fire off first...your analysis wasn't off the mark, but your reading of the opponent's hand was IMO. This isn't the WSOP so just because someone is still around doesn't mean they are a great player. As I said, a button raise and a check on the turn screamed weakness and it made no sense even with a made hand to let ITC have a free card on the river.

Of course the check on the turn was weakness. That's what we wanted when we called the flop. But like I said ... how weak is weak? We only have second pair. You're talking about getting him to call a check-shove ... what could possibly call a check-shove that we can beat? He's never gonna call off with AT or 77 with 2/3 overcards. There's no value in the play, and we risk elimination.

We got the same (more) information and outcome with a smaller bet, and we told a more coherent story ... if our opponent re-raise shoves the river, with little fold equity, after checking the turn, he has now put himself in a polarizing "nuts or nothing" spot. We can now make a more informed decision for our tournament life, rather than shutting our eyes and saying "all in". The story he's telling now is that he checked the turn with a monster hand ... AQ or possibly a set. Do we buy that story? He would call with any 1 pair or 2 pair hands, so we can now eliminate a large % of his range: AK, AJ, KQ, KJ, AT, JT. We can maybe even eliminate sets. It's much easier to make an informed call when someone shoves in a polarizing spot when they could have called with a showdown hand. Our small river bet leaves us with a simpler question ... does he have AQ? That is one of the spots were you can use position against someone.

If he had've re-raise shoved our small bet on the river, I'm think we're now 80%-20% favorite because I can now eliminate a bigger % of his range. If I check and he shoves, I'm stuck with a 60-40 decision.

Of the hands that we can beat, he will have some showdown value ... so there is less chance he will go nuts. From our opponents perspective, he bet the flop and we called it ... so we've got something ... but how much of something? The J on the turn was a big danger card for him clearly ... it brought in so many draws and 2 pair type hands, and our opponent is in the same dire chip position as we are.

It doesn't really matter what the outcome of the hand was ... if ITC ships or value bets ... his opponent still folds. But if ITC checked ... maybe his opponent sees weakness and thinks he can make one last desperation play to win the pot ... and our nice easy 30K pot is now an all or nothing 50K pot. By checking we can't eliminate the top-top / 2 pair, set type, hands. Bottom line for me is that you can't keep putting yourself in marginal spots with limited info. You can't be shipping it on every suspicion of weakness if you want to win tournaments consistently ... especially if you're going to be making moves in bad spots that make no sense (open shoving the turn, check-shoving with no fold equity). If that's the game plan, it'll look great 4/5 times ... then boom ... you're out.

Being capable of shipping in the right spot is not the same as being fearless and shipping at every sign of weakness. If I see someone ship ship ship I'm setting them up ... feign weakness ... stack 'em.

I'm keeping notes on your already

"DMT - shove happy ... trap 'n stack"

[DMT]

I see the smileys but you've said in multiple posts that I'm reckless/nuts/mad/shove happy and I'm not sure why you're taking my advice from this one hand to generalize my play like that? I simply made a read on the opponent's hand and acted accordingly...and was right. This doesn't mean I would act this way in every hand and I noted that my decisions would depend on how I perceived my opponent.

Also, a few of things in your last post are not necessarily true. First, your claim that 'there is no value' in the check is not true if it had induced his opponent to bluff (and possibly shove if he was feeling bold/desperate). Second, if our opponent put us on a marginal hand or missed draw, why are you assuming he would not raise with two-pair? I wouldn't make that same assumption so your claim that a raise from our opponent increases our chances of having the winning hand from 60 to 80% is simply you trying to fit the potential play into your narrative. Finally, calling his post-flop bet could just as easily been us chasing a draw rather than showing that we have something. People chase draws all the time, especially when they get to this point in the tournament where they need a big win to accumulate chips.

So, it's easy to say "the outcome of the hand is irrelevant" when you misread the hand (as you clearly did here btw ) but if ITC had been able to induce a bluff from his opponent by checking the river, he could be sitting with a lot more chips right now. And at this point in the tournament, just hanging on is not going to do much good in the end; players need to be building their stacks so they aren't playing shove-fold poker as the field narrows. IMO this was a good chance for ITC to do that by inducing his opponent to bluff but we'll find out soon enough.

Also, not to boast but just fyi, I've been pretty successful in live MTTs precisely because I don't have just one style of play. But hey, I'm taking notes too..."johnny24 - plays scared when his stack gets low, can easily be pushed off hands"

[heyelander]

finished 11th out of 205 yesterday at the World Tavern Poker NJ Regional Tourny... qualifies me for nations (which I had already qualified for)

[bryanbutler]

finished 11th out of 205 yesterday at the World Tavern Poker NJ Regional Tourny... qualifies me for nations (which I had already qualified for)

nice - congrats!