Hit from the BB

bmc

I really can't make my mind up about this hand. Opinions please...

Fitz Sunday night €20 rebuy madness game. (After the break though so madness has died out a little.)

Before the break I had amassed a nice stack of chips. It was hard not to when I was dealt QQ twice in two looney tune three way pots.

After the break on a nine handed table I have the chip lead. One other player is close though... directly across the table from me. Let's call this player "Player X" since he may not want to be discussed on the inter-puter and a lot of us would know him .

Its my BB and we're at 100-200. I have about 10000 in chips (exact details on stack and bet sizes are hazy). There have been two limpers... Player X and one other in later position. SB completes.

I have Ts 2s. I check.

The board comes Tc7s5s. What's your move? Why?



I expected that the aggressive player X would make a stab at this pot so I checked. (I'm very unsure that this was a good idea.) My plan was to raise him when he did.

Anyway, Player X bets 800... LP folds and SB folds. Back to me so I raised... to 3000. Before my chips had hit the felt. Player X moved all-in for about 8500 in total.

Now what?

All input appreciated.

fuzzbox

Obviously call the push.

Lead the flop and 3-bet all in is probably better. It gives you more fold-equity, which is what you really want, because if he plays, then you dont figure to have the best hand with top pair+2 kicker, so you would much prefer to be the one making the all-in move.

Hectorjelly

You could just check call the flop and play poker on the turn and river. Theres not much in the pot and if you do manage to get all in on the flop its likely to be a coinflip. With more in the pot id recommend a more aggressive approach.

Gholimoli

deffo lead the flop here.
i think people are missing out on so much value here by check raising.
you have a very strong hand/draw here and thats exactly what your suggesting witch check raising.
your not giving your opponents a chance to make a mistake.
yes they may take a stab(which they can afford) at the pot but will fold to your raise ,unless they have a hand which has you beat.
when you lead the flop,they will either fold in which case you were never going to make much out of them,or they on of them mayput you on a standard BB steal and decide to take you on.if that happens then your laughing.
also remember the fact that as things are now,you have a pair of tens so you should be happy with taking any pot with that hand.
having said all of that,you will have to call the all in ,based on odds alone.

P.S. i think your check raise was far too big .the pot was about 1600 maybe after his 800 bet and you bet 2xpot size on pair of tens???
you have a big stack and i think it can be used in much clever ways.

fuzzbox

Hectorjelly wrote:

You could just check call the flop and play poker on the turn and river. Theres not much in the pot and if you do manage to get all in on the flop its likely to be a coinflip. With more in the pot id recommend a more aggressive approach.

Theres 1600 in the pot when it gets back to hero.

That represents 16% of the stack he started with, which is not to be sniffed at.

I dont like being OOP here and just smooth calling with this hand. I would love to be the one making your opponent fold (or trying to)

RoundTower

fuzzbox wrote:

Obviously call the push.

Lead the flop and 3-bet all in is probably better. It gives you more fold-equity, which is what you really want, because if he plays, then you dont figure to have the best hand with top pair+2 kicker, so you would much prefer to be the one making the all-in move.

I don't think this is correct; in this tourney you will probably not get your opponent to pass a hand that is currently beating you. Maybe T9 and down, even that is marginal. If you bet he will fold a lot of hands where he would have had a stab at the pot. So check-raising allows you to win more when you are ahead. Check-calling would be my second choice, but I also would rather get it in as a coinflip than play the rest of this hand out of position.

Hectorjelly

If you check call you can get action from hands that you beat, ie he might keep bluffing

Gholimoli

Hectorjelly wrote:

If you check call you can get action from hands that you beat, ie he might keep bluffing

if he is taking a stab and is in anyway decent,then he wont keep bluffing at the pot once BB has called.

fuzzbox

Gholimoli wrote:

P.S. i think your check raise was far too big .the pot was about 1600 maybe after his 800 bet and you bet 2xpot size on pair of tens???
you have a big stack and i think it can be used in much clever ways.

Pot is 1600. Hero calls the 800 bringing the total pot size to 2400. Hero an now raise an additional 2400 (if he wants to raise pot), bringing the total "Pot raise" to 3200.

3000 is a good size.

Lex

Gholimoli wrote:

if he is taking a stab and is in anyway decent,then he wont keep bluffing at the pot once BB has called.

You're saying a decent player wont fire a 2nd shot with air, if it's checked to him again and the turn is not a spade, just because the BB called the flop bet??

ntlbell

Gholimoli wrote:

if he is taking a stab and is in anyway decent,then he wont keep bluffing at the pot once BB has called.

If it's the same player X I think it is, then yes he certinaly would and has plenty of form for doing just that.

And only because it is who it is I call this in a second.

My guess is you called he had Q7 and you sent him home.

wp nh gg :P

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Pot is 1600. Hero calls the 800 bringing the total pot size to 2400. Hero an now raise an additional 2400 (if he wants to raise pot), bringing the total "Pot raise" to 3200.

3000 is a good size.

the pot is not 1600 before the 800 raie.
blinds 100/200 .
2limpers + SB+BB=800
BB checks ,villian bets 800 which makes the pot 1600 .this is where hero makes a 3000 check/raise. i think this is over betting the pot.

ollyk1

I check call 800 and see whether he likes the turn card to see if my flush draw is good. I'm really hoping for a 2 here. I don't like coin flipping for most of my stack unnecessarily when I can play a lot of poker yet.

Gholimoli

fuzzbox wrote:

Pot is 1600. Hero calls the 800 bringing the total pot size to 2400. Hero an now raise an additional 2400 (if he wants to raise pot), bringing the total "Pot raise" to 3200.

3000 is a good size.

the pot is not 1600 before the 800 raie.
blinds 100/200 .
2limpers + SB+BB=800
BB checks ,villian bets 800 which makes the pot 1600 .this is where hero makes a 3000 check/raise. i think this is over betting the pot.

Gholimoli

Lex wrote:

You're saying a decent player wont fire a 2nd shot with air, if it's checked to him again and the turn is not a spade, just because the BB called the flop bet??

that is what im saying yip.
the pot at this stage is 1600.
to take a second stab at this you really have to bet at least 1K to be representing anything at all.
the BB here is not short stacked so is not under any pressure and can well afford to see yet another card.
to fire another shot here on a bluff is just letting chips fly IMO.
i dont think the a decent villian would fire another shot here with anything that dosent have hero beat.

Culchie

Ghoili, this particular villian would.

brianmc

Thanks for all the replies folks.

Interesting diversity of opinions.

The only part that I was unsure about really... bet, check-call or check-raise on the flop seems to be the only point that people are divided on anyway.

I do prefer to be playing the aggressor and so I never really gave the check call much consideration.

Anyway, as it played out... I called his all-in in a flash. That's a given. Player X had KhTd. Fortunately I hit a 2 on the turn (much more satisfying than a spade )

Gholimoli... Having gone with the check-raise, I'm quite happy with the size of my raise... A pot sized raise (as calculated for the purposes of a Pot limit game) would be exactly as fuzzbox calculated it. My intention here was to take the pot there and then. Also, the villain - (you're at a disadvantage not knowing him...) is very capable of firing on the turn again so the check call is certainly worth consideration. He is also very capable of calling a min or other small raise with the intention of playing me off on the turn.

I guess my doubt was because the check raise committed me to the coin flip whereas leading on the flop may not have.

By the way, I've changed my name.

5starpool

Am I the only person who dislikes the use of the terms villian/hero? It implies that one is implacably right, and the other totally in the wrong. I know it is probably not used in the most part for that reason, and just to identify the protagonists etc. Still doesn't stop me disliking the terms.

Anyways, back on topic. I don't think your bet size was too large there Brian. You would only bet smaller if you definitely wanted to suck 'X' into the pot, whereas although perfectly will to call an allin when either ahead with TP or with bigger draws, you would have been happy to win it there either.

Once you had decided to raise substantially then it was very difficult for you not to commit yourself to the hand, and especially since you were playing like a rock (for once), you made the right move imo.

Gholimoli

brianmc wrote:

Thanks for all the replies folks.

Interesting diversity of opinions.

The only part that I was unsure about really... bet, check-call or check-raise on the flop seems to be the only point that people are divided on anyway.

I do prefer to be playing the aggressor and I so I never really gave the check call much consideration.

Anyway, as it played out... I called his all-in in a flash. That's a given. Player X had KhTd. Fortunately I hit a 2 on the turn (much more satisfying than a spade )

Gholimoli... Having gone with the check-raise, I'm quite happy with the size of my raise... A pot sized raise (as calculated for the purposes of a Pot limit game) would be exactly as fuzzbox calculated it. My intention here was to take the pot there and then. Also, the villain - (you're at a disadvantage not knowing him...) is very capable of firing on the turn again so the check call is certainly worth consideration. He is also very capable of calling a min or other small raise with the intention of playing me off on the turn.

I guess my doubt was because the check raise committed me to the coin flip whereas leading on the flop may not have.

By the way, I've changed my name.

i dont see how you raising 3K in to 1.6K pot makes this pot sized bet.
i would usually ckeck raise pot size but this is more than pot size?
i must be confused?

Shortstack

brianmc wrote:

Anyway, as it played out... I called his all-in in a flash. That's a given. Player X had KhTd. Fortunately I hit a 2 on the turn (much more satisfying than a spade )

I have a new hero. wp gg.

brianmc

Gholimoli wrote:

i dont see how you raising 3K in to 1.6K pot makes this pot sized bet.
i would usually ckeck raise pot size but this is more than pot size?
i must be confused?

I guess it's what you mean by "pot-sized".

In a pot limit game, you include your call as part of the pot and raise the pot (including your call) on top of that.

I.E.

if there is 300 in the pot preflop and on the flop 100 is bet into you then the pot (according to a pot-limit game) would be

300 (the existing pot)
+100 (the bet)
+100 (your call of the bet)
= 500

so to make a pot sized raise would be your call (100) + the pot (500) making 600.

Gholimoli

brianmc wrote:

I guess it's what you mean by "pot-sized".

In a pot limit game, you include your call as part of the pot and raise the pot (including your call) on top of that.

I.E.

if there is 300 in the pot preflop and on the flop 100 is bet into you then the pot (according to a pot-limit game) would be

300 (the existing pot)
+100 (the bet)
+100 (your call of the bet)
= 500

so to make a pot sized raise would be your call (100) + the pot (500) making 600.

i get it now,
now all i need to know is who the villian was?

5starpool

Gholimoli wrote:

i dont see how you raising 3K in to 1.6K pot makes this pot sized bet.
i would usually ckeck raise pot size but this is more than pot size?
i must be confused?

Gholimoli - a pot sized bet is calculated based on taking into account the chips you use to call the original bet and including that in the pot for raise purposes.

In this case 800 (pf) + 800 (x) + 800 (bmc). The pot is therfore 24 for raising purposes. Brian bet 2200 on top of the original bet (3000 in total), so therefore making a slightly less than pot sized bet.

Edit: Dammit, too late.

brianmc

Gholimoli wrote:

i get it now,
now all i need to know is who the villian was?

I'll point him out to you sometime, although there can't be too many bald, noisy, bus drivers spending most of their evenings in the Fitz.

(Did I say that out loud?)

ollyk1

brianmc wrote:

I'll point him out to you sometime, although there can't be too many bald, noisy, bus drivers spending most of their evenings in the Fitz.

(Did I say that out loud?)

In fairness he's more of an SE man these days although I'm not sure he's mad about Bernard judging by the grief he was giving him last night

fuzzbox

Gholimoli wrote:

the pot is not 1600 before the 800 raie.
blinds 100/200 .
2limpers + SB+BB=800
BB checks ,villian bets 800 which makes the pot 1600 .this is where hero makes a 3000 check/raise. i think this is over betting the pot.

I didnt say it was 1600 before the 800 raise.
I said it was 1600 when hero had to call 800.

5starpool

brianmc wrote:

I'll point him out to you sometime, although there can't be too many bald, noisy, bus drivers spending most of their evenings in the Fitz.

(Did I say that out loud?)

Thank Fowler for that!!!

Ah no in fairness I get on well with X and have never had a major bone to pick with him, cranky and all as he can get.

fuzzbox

5starpool wrote:

Am I the only person who dislikes the use of the terms villian/hero? It implies that one is implacably right, and the other totally in the wrong. I know it is probably not used in the most part for that reason, and just to identify the protagonists etc. Still doesn't stop me disliking the terms.

Noooo, Hero is inherently GOOD, and villain is inherently EVIL.

Both are right, but one is downright EVIL.

Booo hisss

5starpool

fuzzbox wrote:

Noooo, Hero is inherently GOOD, and villain is inherently EVIL.

Both are right, but one is downright EVIL.

Booo hisss

Is villian alwys 'BEHIND YOU' or 'IN THE ATTIC'!!!!!!???

fuzzbox

brianmc wrote:

I'll point him out to you sometime, although there can't be too many bald, noisy, bus drivers spending most of their evenings in the Fitz.

(Did I say that out loud?)

Hell, its a +EV move to deliver a bad beat to such a person.

Shania is increased threefold, and you are almost certain to be carried out of the cardroom on the shoulders of your peers.

marius

fuzzbox wrote:

Hell, its a +EV move to deliver a bad beat to such a person.

Shania is increased threefold, and you are almost certain to be carried out of the cardroom on the shoulders of your peers.

I really am going to have to pay a visit to the Fitz at some point......

fuzzbox

5starpool wrote:

Is villian alwys 'BEHIND YOU' or 'IN THE ATTIC'!!!!!!???

Sometimes ... he/she is UNDER THE TRAPDOOR !!

I wonder who is old enough.