Running Better
Things have gotten a lot better since my last blog, I actually don't think I've had a losing session since then. I don't think I'm running above expected, just running normal. Kings have been my nemisis the last few days though, have lost some big pots with them getting it all in pre flop against junk. But other then that I'm playing pretty good, I'm not running into a cooler every other hand and seem to be getting back into the swings of winning. I've played a few heads-up sessions and haven't done too bad.. there was one hand I played that has been bugging me for a couple days now because I'm not sure if I made the proper decision or not. I'll post the hand up to where I was put to a decision and you guys can tell me what you think you would of done. Other then that I really can't think of too much else that's gone on, oh yeah.. it was kinda funny, I had Bruce Buffer sitting at one of my tables the other night.. He's the UFC annoucer. We ended up chatting about the UFC for quite a while which was pretty cool. We were basically talking about the last event where Brock Lesnar fought Frank Mir and I thought it was retarded of the UFC to put Brock's first fight against a ju jitsu expert, especially since they are really trying to hype him up. And in like a minute and a half Frank put him in an ankle lock to submit him. So that was dumb of the UFC., but was nice to talk to Bruce.
Also on Full Tilt the last couple days there's been some sick High Stakes action going on thats been fun to watch. Phil Ivey has been playing and the money these guys get on the table is ridiculous. If you have Full Tilt check it out, you can watch these high stakes games... really entertaining.
Alright here's the heads-up hand I was talking about. The guy I was playing was fairly loose aggressive. I was beating him this point in the match and I felt he might be starting to tilt. During this match I've yet to see him play a hand like this so I hand no real reads from past hands to go on.
FullTiltPoker Game #5189748929: Table Cyst (heads up) - $0.50/$1 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:18:49 ET - 2008/02/09
Seat 1: Goodfella_84 ($262.65)
Seat 2: BBV07 ($316.10)
BBV07 posts the small blind of $0.50
Goodfella_84 posts the big blind of $1
The button is in seat #2
Holecards:
Dealt to Goodfella_84 [
]
BBV07 raises to $3
Goodfella_84 calls $2
Flop:
[
]
Goodfella_84 checks
BBV07 bets $4.75
Goodfella_84 raises to $21
BBV07 calls $16.25
Turn :
[ ] [ 
]
Goodfella_84 bets $36
BBV07 raises to $156
At this point he really put me to a decision for my whole stack. And as you can see I was sitting over 250 BB's deep. That played a big role in my decision... we were both sitting fairly deep, and deep stack poker can be a lot more complex.
So post a comment on what you would do in this situation.... Then I'll post what I did.
Alright I'm going to shoot a little more now before I go to bed..
Later
Also on Full Tilt the last couple days there's been some sick High Stakes action going on thats been fun to watch. Phil Ivey has been playing and the money these guys get on the table is ridiculous. If you have Full Tilt check it out, you can watch these high stakes games... really entertaining.
Alright here's the heads-up hand I was talking about. The guy I was playing was fairly loose aggressive. I was beating him this point in the match and I felt he might be starting to tilt. During this match I've yet to see him play a hand like this so I hand no real reads from past hands to go on.
FullTiltPoker Game #5189748929: Table Cyst (heads up) - $0.50/$1 - No Limit Hold'em - 19:18:49 ET - 2008/02/09
Seat 1: Goodfella_84 ($262.65)
Seat 2: BBV07 ($316.10)
BBV07 posts the small blind of $0.50
Goodfella_84 posts the big blind of $1
The button is in seat #2
Holecards:
Dealt to Goodfella_84 [
]BBV07 raises to $3
Goodfella_84 calls $2
Flop:
[
]Goodfella_84 checks
BBV07 bets $4.75
Goodfella_84 raises to $21
BBV07 calls $16.25
Turn :
[
] [ ]Goodfella_84 bets $36
BBV07 raises to $156
At this point he really put me to a decision for my whole stack. And as you can see I was sitting over 250 BB's deep. That played a big role in my decision... we were both sitting fairly deep, and deep stack poker can be a lot more complex.
So post a comment on what you would do in this situation.... Then I'll post what I did.
Alright I'm going to shoot a little more now before I go to bed..
Later
Interesting spot. He raised on the button which doesn't mean much, and his range could include hands like 22, 33, 55, 57, 45, 46, 57. It's possible he could have a hand like AK or AQ and peeled the flop and bluff raised the turn. I think with hands like AA -QQ he would reraise the flop. He could have 44 or 66 - he would probably play those hands like he did, picking up an OE or gutshot straight on the turn. I think a hand like 88-TT would just call the turn bc the turn hits so many hands you'd checkraise with. But given his range I think mucking is correct with no other reads. That said I would probably shove and win with a 9 on the river
Reply to this
I guess the question I have is was he loose-aggressive good, or loose-aggressive bad?
In any event, unless I thought he was a real donkey, I would have folded. There were too many good hands he could have played that had you beat. AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 77, 55, 22. He might have made a small bet pre-flop with any of those hands. He also might have made a small raise pre-flop with AK, AQ, AJ, AT.
Maybe he was playing loose with KQ, KJ, KT or maybe 99, 88, 66, 44, 33.
Then there’s also a bunch of bad hands that had you beat that a real donkey might have played (75, 72, 52).
It was a good flop for anyone holding AA through 88. After your check on the flop, he could have bet with any of those pairs. You raised him and he called. Maybe that eliminates AK, AQ, AJ and AT and maybe some of the smaller pairs. But, maybe not, depending on how (or even whether) he had a read on your hand or playing style. If you eliminated AK through AT and the lower pairs that did not hit the board, I think there is still a good chance he has an overpair or trips. Or he’s bluffing with a drawing hand.
After the turn, you fired a big bet at him (3/4ths of the pot) and he raised. He’s beating you with AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 77, 55, 33 and 22. If he was playing Ax and he thinks you’re bluffing, he still has 4 outs to the straight and 3 Aces as outs—7 outs if he’s behind. If he’s playing A4, he has a straight.
The best argument for calling his raise to $156 would be pot odds (2 to 1 based on $120 to call a $240 pot). If you’re behind, you only have 2 outs (the two remaining 9s). You’ll hit that on the river 4% of the time. So, if you think you’re behind, you aren’t getting the odds to call.
Phil Gordon says that if you never get bluffed, you’re calling too much. Plus, as you say, when you don’t have a real read on the guy, you have to play straight, fundamental poker. There are very few hands that I would give him credit for that he would raise with on the turn that didn’t have you beat. The fact that he played consistently aggressively says that he’s got you beat. And, if he stone cold bluffed (e.g. KQ) or he played 86 while consistently getting the wrong odds to chase a straight, then that’s life.
So, what did you do?
Reply to this
Good replies guys... Believe it or not I had 1 minute in my time bank to use when I was in the hand and basically went over everything you guys wrote in my head before deciding to fold. I think folding is leaning more towards standard, especially since later in that match he played a hand very similar and showed down Kings. I did end up grabbing the guy for a good amount and completely made him go crazy calling me every name in the book though.
Thanks for the replies.. I'll try this again in future posts
Reply to this
Hi Jay:
I was thinking about this hand later and comparing it to legal disputes. In some cases, the opponent's path is very clear and when that path leads to a good result for the opponent that's a problem for my client. In short form: easy road for the opponent to a good result is bad for my client.
My job at that point is to, what I like to call, throw muck in the water. I'm mixing my metaphors now, but my job is to make the opponent's clear path to easy victory seem a lot more difficult and a lot more unsure. I have to create the feeling of risk for the opponent, even if there is very little real risk. That's how I get leverage in a bad situtation.
This hand is an example of muck in the water. There was no clear path to victory for you. You have no way of knowing whether pressing forward would have been smart or stupid. And you were playing for (on a relative basis) big stakes (your whole stack).
I would have a hard time advising a client to push aggressively forward in a dispute unless there was a pretty clear path to a favourable outcome. If no clear path presented itself, I would aggressively search for the right path and if I didn't find it, I would switch to aggressively pushing for the best settlement possible.
In my mind, there was enough muck in the water that even if he was flat out bluffing, your fold was the correct play.
If the goal of a poker dispute is take the opponent's stack, this hand wasn't the right path. I think you did the smart thing and went looking for another path.
Reply to this
Thats a very interesting way to look at it, I've never looked at a hand through a legal point of view.
Theres a couple poker programs out there where basically you enter the hand information, then put in all the ranges of hands the player could have, and it will give you the equity in proceeding or folding the hand. Something like that would probably be best for a situation like this.
Another thing looking back is that I wished I would of 3-bet(re-raised) him pre flop and that would of really helped narrowing down his range. I'll probably post this hand in the cardrunners.com and hopefully get some good insight from the pros there then I'll post it on here.
Reply to this