NLHE hand - was I unlucky or just baaaad?

El Stuntman

Was playing 1 1/2 NL table on Vegasbaby and a couple of .50/1 and had clawed my way up to a stack of about $350 on the 1/2 NL. Was down about $100 on the two .50/1 tables combined.

There was a maniac on the 1/2 table who I had identified as my 'double me up' target, he literally could not release a draw to a flush and had already caused major damage to another player when one of these hit - J2 sooooted - so he was sitting on about $400. I was on the Button on K9o which I would normally throw away without a blink but hey 4 limpers so I limped in and the SB min-raised to 4 (idiot!) so I came along for the ride with everyone else . Flop came down K97 with two hearts. Checked around and I bet the pot (24) and everyone folded except the maniac - there's now $72 in the pot and this is shaping up to be 'the hand'. I put him squarely on a flush draw which I sure as hell am going to make him pay for.....
Turn comes a black 3. No help for him there surely? I blast out a large bet of $95 and he calls. There's now $262 in the pot and this is looking interesting. He can't have a set surely?

River comes a black 7. Hmmmm, go with my instinct - he has a busted flush draw right? I bet out another $100 and he raises to 175. Make the crying call and he tables Qh 7h. That's right, he caught trips on the river chasing his non-nut flush!!

Opinions/advice please.

Am I a monkey???:mad:

Bandana boy

there is a bad beat sticky at the top of the page

Hectorjelly

River is very bad, you put him on a busted draw then bet so much he wont bluff you, then you get raised in a spot where almost noone bluffs and you call.

Your "read" is a little silly as well, even bad players sometimes dont have flush draws.

El Stuntman

Hectorjelly wrote:

River is very bad, you put him on a busted draw then bet so much he wont bluff you, then you get raised in a spot where almost noone bluffs and you call.

Your "read" is a little silly as well, even bad players sometimes dont have flush draws.

I bet 100 into a 262 pot - why is this 'too much'?

and my read was correct!!

Hectorjelly

El Stuntman wrote:

I bet 100 into a 262 pot - why is this 'too much'?

and my read was correct!!

If he has a busted draw he cant call anything on the river, so you should check to allow him to bluff. Since the 7 paired on the rivera check is even better, as it keeps the pot small if he happens to have one.

FastMachine

Nothing wrong with the way you played the hand. He could have been calling with Kx as well as a flush draw so that's a standard value bet on the river.

FastMachine

Hectorjelly wrote:

If he has a busted draw he cant call anything on the river, so you should check to allow him to bluff. Since the 7 paired on the rivera check is even better, as it keeps the pot small if he happens to have one.

I think El Stuntman worded the last bit of the post a bit confusingly. He was on the button so the villain must've checkraised him on the river. I'd check it oop position too.

El Stuntman

FastMachine wrote:

I think El Stuntman worded the last bit of the post a bit confusingly. He was on the button so the villain must've checkraised him on the river. I'd check it oop position too.

correcto - he check-called on both the flop (24) and turn (95) with bottom pair and a non-nut flush draw. So to give you an idea of how this dude plays he has stuck $123 into the pot before the river with bottom pair, non-nut draw!! Maybe this will better explain my play in the hand to date

I really don't think I played this one badly except for the river, got bitten by the fish is all....:(

Hectorjelly

FastMachine wrote:

I think El Stuntman worded the last bit of the post a bit confusingly. He was on the button so the villain must've checkraised him on the river. I'd check it oop position too.

Correct as always

Hectorjelly

El Stuntman wrote:

correcto - he check-called on both the flop (24) and turn (95) with bottom pair and a non-nut flush draw. So to give you an idea of how this dude plays he has stuck $123 into the pot before the river with bottom pair, non-nut draw!! Maybe this will better explain my play in the hand to date
(

He had a pair and a flush draw which is quite a strong holding, if you just had 1 pair your hands would be 50/50 on the flop.

On the turn his call would be fine if he can assume to get a chk raise in and called should he hit 2 pair/trips - in this case hitting 2 pair would of cost him some money.

El Stuntman

Hectorjelly wrote:

He had a pair and a flush draw which is quite a strong holding, if you just had 1 pair your hands would be 50/50 on the flop.

On the turn his call would be fine if he can assume to get a chk raise in and called should he hit 2 pair/trips - in this case hitting 2 pair would of cost him some money.

it's not 50/50 though....and I really disagree with your analysis of his turn play, imho it was terrible play to call for 1/4 of your stack here.

odds on the flop 60/40 in my favour - pot odds against him

odds on the turn 75/25 to me - now the pot odds are really against him? call 95 into a 72 pot???

would you play his hand the same way? Personally, i wouldn't even be in the hand! This is not a bad beat tale, I am just looking for advice here - should I have pushed harder on the flop and turn? I accept your point re. the river play.

Hectorjelly

El Stuntman wrote:

it's not 50/50 though....and I really disagree with your analysis of his turn play, imho it was terrible play to call for 1/4 of your stack here.

he has no way of knowing that you have two pair, for all he knows you could have no pair (unlikely but possible). You might have the nut flush draw, or some other strange hand. The fact is that a pair and a flush draw is a good holding against your range.

El Stuntman wrote:

would you play his hand the same way? Personally, i wouldn't even be in the hand! This is not a bad beat tale, I am just looking for advice here - should I have pushed harder on the flop and turn? I accept your point re. the river play.

I wouldnt play the hand anything like he did, I would sometimes play Q7s depending on a number of factors, on the turn if I had of gotten there I would of folded, but his call is much better than if he just had the lone flush draw. His hand is much stronger because he has outs to a concealed hand.

I think you played the hand well, with some provisos. K9o is ok to limp with on the button if you play well after the flop but Q7s is a better hand! On the river I think you should fold to the raise without a read that he is capable of bluffing in spots like this.

El Stuntman

Hectorjelly wrote:

he has no way of knowing that you have two pair, for all he knows you could have no pair (unlikely but possible). You might have the nut flush draw, or some other strange hand. The fact is that a pair and a flush draw is a good holding against your range.

HJ, I have been playing (tightly!) for two hours with this dude and have only shown down strong holdings so again have to disagree that he might think I have no pair, nut flush draw or 'some other strange hand'. Although I doubt he thinks much about what his opponent might have....:)

This thread is getting boring so let's agree I butchered the river but my play up to then was OK and his was shocking - then at least I might feel better about it!!

ianmc38

I'd often raise with any pair and a flush draw, as in most cases if I hit a Q, 7 or flush, i'll have the best hand.

I'd probably fold to the river raise against an unknown.

El Stuntman

ianmc38 wrote:

I'd often raise with any pair and a flush draw, as in most cases if I hit a Q, 7 or flush, i'll have the best hand.

the only spot he raised was on the river (after he fluked trips) so don't really get your point Ian?

he didn't raise the flop or turn, he check-called large bets versus a 'solid' player's (;) ) pot-sized or better's raises.

ianmc38

My point is simply that a pair and a flush draw is an extremely strong holding on the flop, so calling/raising on the flop is standard and doing the same on the turn is ok sometimes depending on the pot odds and implied odds. His call for 92 was loose, though he obviously had the implied odds!

I like his check on the river.

Hectorjelly

El Stuntman wrote:

HJ, I have been playing (tightly!) for two hours with this dude and have only shown down strong holdings so again have to disagree that he might think I have no pair, nut flush draw or 'some other strange hand'. Although I doubt he thinks much about what his opponent might have....:)

the tighter your playing the more chance you have of having only having 1 pair

El Stuntman wrote:

This thread is getting boring so let's agree I butchered the river but my play up to then was OK and his was shocking - then at least I might feel better about it!!

It sounds like this guy is a bad player, but this hand is a bad example because he actually had a much stronger holding than you give him credt for, and played it in a creative manner (on the river anyway).

Hectorjelly

ianmc38 wrote:

I like his check on the river.

I dont, most players are checking behind KQ AK A9 and so on. He should open push if his opponent has any balls, 2/3 pot if he doesnt.

If El stuntman posted this hand and asked should we call the chk raise I would say no the guy has a 7, if his opponent open pushed the river I would say that he probably should call given the missed draws.

El Stuntman

Hectorjelly wrote:

the tighter your playing the more chance you have of having only having 1 pair



It sounds like this guy is a bad player, but this hand is a bad example because he actually had a much stronger holding than you give him credt for, and played it in a creative manner (on the river anyway).

'Chase out the draws'.

fuzzbox

Hectorjelly wrote:

I dont, most players are checking behind KQ AK A9 and so on. He should open push if his opponent has any balls, 2/3 pot if he doesnt.

If El stuntman posted this hand and asked should we call the chk raise I would say no the guy has a 7, if his opponent open pushed the river I would say that he probably should call given the missed draws.

I would say fold in both situations !!

Waylander

El Stuntman wrote:

HJ, I have been playing (tightly!) for two hours with this dude and have only shown down strong holdings so again have to disagree that he might think I have no pair, nut flush draw or 'some other strange hand'. Although I doubt he thinks much about what his opponent might have....:)

This thread is getting boring so let's agree I butchered the river but my play up to then was OK and his was shocking - then at least I might feel better about it!!

What is the point in asking for advice, and then not accepting it when it is not what you wanted to hear? I also think the call on the flop was okay play with a pair and a flush draw, although I would not have called on the turn. He probably figures he had 12 or 13 outs making it a 50/50 call on the turn.

El Stuntman

Waylander wrote:

What is the point in asking for advice, and then not accepting it when it is not what you wanted to hear? I also think the call on the flop was okay play with a pair and a flush draw, although I would not have called on the turn. He probably figures he had 12 or 13 outs making it a 50/50 call on the turn.

whoa easy there big fella.

No disrespect intended to HJ at all, in fact I am very grateful that he should take the time to analyse the play of a poker idiot such as myself.

I've taken all of what HJ had to say on board, my only argument is that he is giving my opponent too much credit and he should have laid his hand down twice (if not 3 times)! I know I played the river all wrong, no problem there - my point is that I think up to that point I have played the hand correctly by not giving him pot odds to hit his outs.
If I had say bet 40 on the turn then I would be a lot more accepting.

Let me know if you don't agree although it sounds like you do seeing as you would not have called on the turn....

If poker is all about avoiding mistakes, I reckon I made 2 in this hand (both on the river) but he made 3 and got paid for it -those are the breaks!

Waylander

Sorry El Stuntman that post was not meant to come across as quite that stroppy, HJ is well able to look after himself:) .

My point was, although the call on the turn was bad, up to that point I felt he had made the right decisions (in this particular hand). I thought the call on the flop was okay.

El Stuntman

Waylander wrote:

Sorry El Stuntman that post was not meant to come across as quite that stroppy, HJ is well able to look after himself:) .

My point was, although the call on the turn was bad, up to that point I felt he had made the right decisions (in this particular hand). I thought the call on the flop was okay.

No problemo, we are friends again

The call on the flop was slightly out of line with pot odds imho, the turn call was plain stupid. The Forrest Gump paradigm at work I fear.

ianmc38

El Stuntman wrote:

he should have laid his hand down twice (if not 3 times)!

Sorry but that's incorrect. Flop he was getting 2-1. He thought that any Q, 7 or heart would put him ahead, therefore, calling or raising in that spot is fine IMO.

On the turn he made a loose call, perhaps thinking he'd stack you if he hit any of his outs. Maybe he factored in the implied odds into his call, as it turns out he did stack you.

TacT

given his play I would have put him all-in on the turn personally

cardshark202

TacT wrote:

given his play I would have put him all-in on the turn personally

"I'll put you all in"

Norwich Fan Rob

its a bit like golf if u ask me.........
u both hit solid drives down the fairway.
he snap hooked his 2nd out of bounds, hit a wall, bounced back in, and was in the rough, but he had a shot to the green.
u hit a safe 2nd into the middle of the green, but left yourself a putt.
he played a lovely 3rd out of the rough to a few feet.
u raced your putt 10 feet by and missed the one on the way back, he holed his and u are beat.
yes, just like golf.

fuzzbox

TacT wrote:

given his play I would have put him all-in on the turn personally

Why?

betting 300 into a 100 pot is not great play.