Betting when a player is all In

Hoki

What are peoples opinions on this , when i first started playing poker a couple of years ago i used to bluff bet with Ak / Aq etc.. when a player was all in so id be heads up with that player . However after getting berated by some player online for doing this i realised he was right and what i was doing made absolutely no sense , since then check it down with another player to knock out the all in .
Iv now become the person who gives out to people for bluff betting a pot when a player is all in , iv come so far :rolleyes:

However recently ( last weekend ) a hand occurred in the westwood €500 event that i would like peoples opinion of , Im in mid position with JsJh in my hand , i raise it 4 x BB , person after me calls then BB goes all in for an extra 1000 ( Blinds 300/600) , the 2 of us call , flop came out 9s 6h 9c , i check it to him and he goes all in having me covered , i think for a while and lay my J J down , he turns over 5 6 os , no improvement for him on turn or river , my Jacks would have taken down the pot . He won beating the all ins A 10 .

Did i do the right thing or should i have bet the flop , this hand affected my play for about 6 hands after and even at the break i was still kicking myself .

BigDragon

Welcome to Boards David

Hoki

Ty Big Dragon

TheSpaniard

Unless knocking that player out is going to improve your payout or the all-in player is someone you want specifically to be knocked out I play on regardless of him being all in and try at all times to improve my chance of winning or extracting maximum value from that pot.

ianmc38

Bet and protect your hand. I think betting with AK/AQ is fine, as tahtw ill often be ahead of a shortstacks pushing range. If it's the river and you have 9 high, there isn't much point in betting

Hectorjelly

You should bet if you have a hand to protect, but not bluff

Hoki

I was very close to going all in after the BB's all in but because the guy after me was the table chip leader and the fact he called my initial raise led to me just flat calling the all in , would going all in pre flop have been the right thing to do , i was average stacked .

Fatboydim

I would have re-raised the all in player. After all the caller to your initial raise is likely to be weak as he has only called you. He might be slow playing a monster but you can only answer that if you have been studying his play and know the type of player he is. [as you give no info on the type of player he is we'll assume he's tight passive. Though I think that's generous and it was probably Paul Corrigan if he had 56 ] The player acting behind you can only call your all in if he has a premium hand. That would have got you heads up with the all in player.

However you didn't do that.

It is kind of an unwritten rule that you check down a pot when a player is all in unless you have a strong hand. You had a strong hand given that flop as the player behind you is unlikely to have a nine and even less likely to have pocket nines. You needed to bet that flop to see where you were. His play was correct when he bet his 6 as of course if he puts you on overcards he doesn't want you to hit.

I also think it can be correct to bet with nothing in this position if you think you have a better hand than the all in player. IE: you have AK and you think all in player has Ace rag.

In short there are lots of variables and no steadfast rules. The etiquette is there to stop collusion and stealing. But it should not stop you from taking down a pot with the best hand.

5starpool

Hmmm, judging by this my play last night in the PP game wasn't as stupid as I thought, but I in general agree that bluffing at a dry side pot is stupid, but betting when you likely have the best hand is a different matter.

dvdfan

I think that gentlemans agreement of checking it down is more applicable when your near the bubble as its benificial to keep both of you in the pot until the river to increase your odds of one of you having the better hand. If its early or mid tourney and i have a good hand im not checking down my hand if i think im ahead and theres a shortstack all in, i want all the chips and its no great benefit to me to see a shortstack off if theres still lots of play to come and i have to make the best of my strong hands when they come, more so in a 9 handed stt when you only have a shortwile to accumulate chips before the blinds get you.

bohsman

Its ok to bluff if theres a decent sidepot.

kincsem

Fatboydim wrote:

I would have re-raised the all in player.

This is what I would do.
Although last week when I isolated an all-in Ad2d with my AJo and flopped a Jack I lost to a flush.

I also think if you flop big you should bet. Don't give free cards and give away the pot.

It would be very bad form / possible collusion to say "lets check it down".

Hectorjelly

You dont need to flop big to bet, you just have to be reasnably certain that you beat the all in player (or you are likely to). If theres a side pot then that changes things considerably

connie147

Hoki wrote:

I was very close to going all in after the BB's all in but because the guy after me was the table chip leader and the fact he called my initial raise led to me just flat calling the all in , would going all in pre flop have been the right thing to do , i was average stacked .

If you raised 4 x BB (2,400), when the BB went all-in for the extra 1,000 you were not entitled to reraise pf as his reraise was an under-raise.

As played I would definately have bet that flop.

Goodluck2me

I think HectorJellys performance in the Board First monthly game in the Emporium shows this. a guy bluffed a dry side pot with 9 high and kept him in it which he went on to win!

phantom_lord

goodluck2me wrote:

I think HectorJellys performance in the Board First monthly game in the Emporium shows this. a guy bluffed a dry side pot with 9 high and kept him in it which he went on to win!

results oriented thinking

Gholimoli

i dont think ppl should check it down blindly any more than i think they should bluff at it blindly.

1.how big is the pot
2.is there a side pot
3.do you need to protect your hand.
4.do you need to value bet.

the bigger the pot the more i think you should be inclinced to do what you can to win it.
if that includes a bluff then it's fine.
if there are 3 ppl in the pot and for example you have 33% of winning and x has 33% and y has 34%,then by knocking y out you will have an extra 17% chance of winning the pot.
the bigger the pot the more than 17% means something.

2.obviously if there is a side pot then by knocking the other player out you will win it automatically.

3.if you feel like your hand is a winner now but over cards/flush/str cards may turn your hand in to a loosing one then you should proceed to protect as normal with a bet.

4.is your hand so strong that you may want to extract value from it.
as in do you think the other player may call your bets with a worse hand?
if so then bet away.

Clareman

my take on it is that if you don't hit you don't bet, if you hit it's fair game. In your hand I would have presumed that the other guy hit a 9.

Don't forget that the object of poker is to win chips if the guy didn't get you off the pot you would have won the chips, so the end result of the player being knocked out and him winning chips was ok. If the A 10 guy hit a 10 I wouldn't have been at all happy

How far into the tourney were you at this stage? The other thing to remember is to forget the hands, this seemed to have affected you for a long time after.