Good Call/Bad Call??

eoghan104

A hand i played last night got me thinking......... When is a call good or bad??

Last night i made a call in a big pot with 2nd pair and the guy i beat started berating me saying it was a bad call. Then i got thinking of all the times i hear players say " oh the donkey couldnt lay down middle pair" or something similar.

Then you can here the same players commend others that they know or view as good players with stuff like " wow you made a great call there with middle pair".

I was just wondering what people think of this or how they would judge the same call by two different players as good or bad?

El Stuntman

it depends

The Sheriff 101

details of hand?

eoghan104

1/2 NLH 6 max

Me (180)ish
Villain (300)ish

He was playing a lot of pots and not afraid to bet. Quite LAG.

Im on the button and 4 limpers including me. Ive A 10

Flop 7 4 10 2hearts (ive no heart)

Villain bets 10. All fold to me and i call.

Turn J non heart. He bets 30 and i call.

River 3 non heart and he bets the pot (90)

I think about it and put him on a missed flush and called. he showed Kh 4h.

5starpool

I think in this case it is quite different to a lot of hands where people might call with second pair as this was top pair on a flop that he was betting. I think that with the flush missing it was reasonable to call his bets, though the J would have put the sh1ts up me for a 89 holding. I think the above hand is fine Eoghan.

padser

Its a reasonable call, however in an unraised pot with 4 limpers you have got to be worried about the BB or SB making two pair or a straight on that kinda board. You havnt mentioned whether the villian is one of the blinds, if he was id certainly consider folding.

Incidently I cant understand why you didnt raise on the flop. You had TPTK and there was a possible flush draw. Auto raise imo

padser

5starpool wrote:

I think in this case it is quite different to a lot of hands where people might call with second pair as this was top pair on a flop that he was betting.

He didnt bet on the flop, he called.

El Stuntman

raise the flop

5starpool

padser wrote:

He didnt bet on the flop, he called.

He being mr flushdraw, not he being Eoghan.

padser

5starpool wrote:

this was top pair on a flop that he was betting.

Mr flushdraw didnt have top pair :rolleyes:

5starpool

padser wrote:

Mr flushdraw didnt have top pair :rolleyes:

My tongue is nearly bitten in half trying to obey the forum rules, but I am sure you get the inference.

eoghan104

El Stuntman wrote:

raise the flop

I agree i definatley should have but i think that this villain bets the turn regardless so thats why i just called in position. oh yeah and he was in the small blind.

El Stuntman

eoghan104 wrote:

I agree i definatley should have but i think that this villain bets the turn regardless so thats why i just called in position. oh yeah and he was in the small blind.

surely all the more reason to raise the flop?

eoghan104

El Stuntman wrote:

surely all the more reason to raise the flop?

yeh but i felt i was ahead and he was going to bet any rag turn so i didnt want to raise the flop and have him fold? is this bad play in the long run against a LAG player?

Gholimoli

eoghan104 wrote:

yeh but i felt i was ahead and he was going to bet any rag turn so i didnt want to raise the flop and have him fold? is this bad play in the long run against a LAG player?

What your saying is not right and not a reason not to raise him.
You have TPTK but are likely to be outdrawn with any J/Q/K and any heart.
You need to protect the pot. The fact that you have position makes this easier but it shouldn’t discourage you betting.
If he is betting with draws like that you can be sure he will call bets as well so if your putting him on a flush draw and he is willing to pay then it’s a sin not to charge him.
If you don’t think he is on a flush draw then it becomes a different story but a raise still goes here.
If you had a stronger hand and which that was not so prone to be outdrawn then perhaps you could give villain a bit of rope to hang him self.

El Stuntman

Gholimoli wrote:

What your saying is not right and not a reason not to raise him.
You have TPTK but are likely to be outdrawn with any J/Q/K and any heart.
You need to protect the pot. The fact that you have position makes this easier but it shouldn’t discourage you betting.
If he is betting with draws like that you can be sure he will call bets as well so if your putting him on a flush draw and he is willing to pay then it’s a sin not to charge him.
If you don’t think he is on a flush draw then it becomes a different story but a raise still goes here.
If you had a stronger hand and which that was not so prone to be outdrawn then perhaps you could give villain a bit of rope to hang him self.

I would have said that too but my typing finger is sore

very evangelical of you Gholi?

padser

5starpool wrote:

My tongue is nearly bitten in half trying to obey the forum rules, but I am sure you get the inference.

Im confused, and reading back over the posts I reckon something must be mistyped (Eoghan didnt bet once in the course of the hand, he called 3 times) .


Anyways to get back to the original topic,

Eoghan, the call on the river wasnt recessarily a bad call.

However on the flop and the turn you either think you are ahead (due to him being on a flush draw or a lower pair) in which case you must put pressure on him by raising.

Look at it from his point of view.

I get dealt K4 hearts.
Im in the SB and there are 4 bets in before me, leaving me in a pot odds of 9-1 to complete my blind. Automatic call for me.

Flop comes 7 4 10 with 2 hearts.

Im first to act, I have bottom pair, one overcard and the 2nd nuts flush draw.

Its pretty much automatic for me to bet the pot. If i get called im getting 2-1 on my money (and i have rounghly 13 outs to leave me with two pair, trebs, or a flush - or over 26% chance of that on the next card alone - or around 44% if I can see the river as well). Granted my outs dont leave me with the nuts but they should win around 80% of the time. Finally there is a chance a pot sized bet will pick the pot up there and then, its a low board.

* If I was not acting first I would try to bet 1.5 times the pot as there would be a good chance someone who had checked might be trying to see a free card for a flush draw and 1.5 times the pot should drive them out.

I get called. I dont hit my flush and the card is a J. Im in exactly the same position (with one card to come). (around 27% now to hit an out).
I have two real options, bet the pot or check. I would favour betting the pot for the folding equity.

So up to this point Mr Flushdraw has imo played the hand correctly and it is a +EV play for him.

The reason he has been able to do this is because you were far too passive, calling when you should have been raising.

If on the flop when he bet the 10 you should have raised to around 50, the correct play for him at this point would have been to fold imo.

Gholimoli

El Stuntman wrote:

I would have said that too but my typing finger is sore

very evangelical of you Gholi?

i would make a comment about your cheeky remark but i donno what it means???

El Stuntman

Gholimoli wrote:

i would make a comment about your cheeky remark but i donno what it means???

neither do I!!!

but dictionary.com defines it as follows:

e‧van‧gel‧i‧cal  /ˌivænˈdʒɛlɪkəl, ˌɛvən-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ee-van-jel-i-kuhl, ev-uhn-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1. Also, e‧van‧gel‧ic. pertaining to or in keeping with the gospel and its teachings.
2. belonging to or designating the Christian churches that emphasize the teachings and authority of the Scriptures, esp. of the New Testament, in opposition to the institutional authority of the church itself, and that stress as paramount the tenet that salvation is achieved by personal conversion to faith in the atonement of Christ.
3. designating Christians, esp. of the late 1970s, eschewing the designation of fundamentalist but holding to a conservative interpretation of the Bible.
4. pertaining to certain movements in the Protestant churches in the 18th and 19th centuries that stressed the importance of personal experience of guilt for sin, and of reconciliation to God through Christ.
5. marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause.
–noun
6. an adherent of evangelical doctrines or a person who belongs to an evangelical church or party.

what would we do without the interweb eh?

eoghan104

Gholimoli wrote:

What your saying is not right and not a reason not to raise him.
You have TPTK but are likely to be outdrawn with any J/Q/K and any heart.
You need to protect the pot. The fact that you have position makes this easier but it shouldn’t discourage you betting.
If he is betting with draws like that you can be sure he will call bets as well so if your putting him on a flush draw and he is willing to pay then it’s a sin not to charge him.
If you don’t think he is on a flush draw then it becomes a different story but a raise still goes here.
If you had a stronger hand and which that was not so prone to be outdrawn then perhaps you could give villain a bit of rope to hang him self.

yeh i understand now i should have raised and tried to take the pot right there. Maybe i was just being greedy as this guy was very loose. Is this terrible? if a flush hits i get away cheap and if not i get 2 more bets from him?

Anyway the original point was what makes the difference between someone bein called a donkey for making a call and another player doing the exact same thing getting praise for it? is it just our perceptions of players abilities that tell us whether it was a good or bad call? I think it is and i dont think it makes sense!!

(sorry that paragraph even confused me!! its hard to explain what im trying to ask!)

The Sheriff 101

eoghan104 wrote:

it just our perceptions of players abilities that tell us whether it was a good or bad call? I think it is and i dont think it makes sense!!
QUOTE]

I disagree i believe our perception of a player gives us a good idea if it was a good call as if a poor player makes a good call for the wrong reasons it is still a bad call.
whereas if a good player makes a bad call for the right reasons it is still a good call and vise versa.

Dont think of it in terms of results.
So to speak a bad player can get lucky
Ask yourself this have u ever played in a home game or whatever
where a poor player has called you with next to nothing and won caught you bluffing where you represented the nuts.ie not playing a hand for 2 hours raising under the gun getting called missing and getting called by some1 with a pair of 2's 7 kicker with the board KQJ102 4 hearts?

Even though that not to say a poor player can make a good call every now and the same can be said for a good player making a poor play

eoghan104

The Sheriff 101 wrote:

eoghan104 wrote:

it just our perceptions of players abilities that tell us whether it was a good or bad call? I think it is and i dont think it makes sense!!
QUOTE]

I disagree i believe our perception of a player gives us a good idea if it was a good call as if a poor player makes a good call for the wrong reasons it is still a bad call.
whereas if a good player makes a bad call for the right reasons it is still a good call and vise versa.

Dont think of it in terms of results.
So to speak a bad player can get lucky
Ask yourself this have u ever played in a home game or whatever
where a poor player has called you with next to nothing and won caught you bluffing where you represented the nuts.ie not playing a hand for 2 hours raising under the gun getting called missing and getting called by some1 with a pair of 2's 7 kicker with the board KQJ102 4 hearts?

Even though that not to say a poor player can make a good call every now and the same can be said for a good player making a poor play

yeh i suppose your right...... in that same hand above though against phil ivey would you say wow good call he read me like a book?

The Sheriff 101

eoghan104 wrote:

The Sheriff 101 wrote:

yeh i suppose your right...... in that same hand above though against phil ivey would you say wow good call he read me like a book?

In a word yes:D