WSOPC, 1k event hand

[RichC.]

This hand was from a while back, so forgive me if some numbers are a bit off.

Reads: villain is new to the table, but is a known 2p2er and has a tight solid image from his posts as i have very little history to go off of but that. He also is to my immediate left.

Me: I have been aggro but not crazy and have villain covered.

Starting stacks were 2500, blinds, 25-25, 60min levels.

The hand:

Hero is MP1 with ~6500
villain has ~3100

UTG and UTG+1 limp in. They are both older players, meh, one is a nit, the other is decent but both limp in a lot and try to see flops.

I get AQs and I raise to 275, villain calls, fold around to UTG+1 and he calls. 3 players to the flop.

board is Qxx.

UTG+1 checks. I bet out 2/3rds pot. villain thinks and calls. This bothers me, because villains call leaves him with a little more than a PSB left. UTG+1 folds.

Turn: bricks.

Hero? There are no flush or straight possibilities. If it makes a difference I'll post who villain is later.

[timex]

Maybe my reading comprehension is bad... but did you raise to 11x?

[nath]

Check behind? If he checks the river I might put him in for value. If he bets, I think I call.

I'm trying to think if this is worrisome, because he's either trying to hang you with a big hand or he has something mediocre. Sooo... I think you have the best chance of getting the most money in ahead if you check the turn.

[RichC.]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe my reading comprehension is bad... but did you raise to 11x?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, my posting ability just sucks. blinds were 25-50, 2nd level.

[AdamBragar]

I would check turn, his bet sizing matters a lot on the river, but if he pushes, I'd fold (assuming blank river).

[Bond18]

Sounds like theres only 7 cards in the deck that will shut down your action (4 K's, 3 A's) i'd check and hope he puts me on AK or a mid pair and pays off on the river when i "try to bluff him"

[DJ Sensei]

turn is a check for sure

i would like to know what xx and the turn were, though i'm not too sure if they matter.

if he checks behind turn, i'd bet the river to appear deliberately strong, hoping he levels and calls with an underpair.

[Exitonly]

can't we know more than 1 of the 4 board cards? and who are we playing against?

i agree the turn is usually a check, but it should get bet some % of the time depending on how you've previously played some hands (i.e. if you've recently double/triple barreled)

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I would check turn, his bet sizing matters a lot on the river, but if he pushes, I'd fold (assuming blank river).

[/ QUOTE ]

we're oop, and probably not making any river decisions because we're easily check/calling this turn.

if he checks behind I think a tiny 'call me bet'/call, shove or check/call are about equal on a brick river.

[Bakes]

"because villains call leaves him with a little more than a PSB left."

then if he knows you are a thinking player this is actually not too bad for you. You can't bet anything on the turn without committing to calling an all in really, so he can call you with a mid pair (or maybe nothing) to see what you do. Chances are you check your monsters as well as hands that won't call a shove, and since u have more of the latter in your range he doesn't necessarily have to have a strong hand here.

I would check...you have a monster!

[RichC.]

[ QUOTE ]
can't we know more than 1 of the 4 board cards? and who are we playing against?

i agree the turn is usually a check, but it should get bet some % of the time depending on how you've previously played some hands (i.e. if you've recently double/triple barreled)

[/ QUOTE ]

The other board cards are somewhat unimportant, and, i dont really remember them and hate to just make up a bunch of cards. I think there was a 9 on the flop, maybe a J on the turn, but again, I am not 100% sure on those.

As to the villain, it was UCLA.

[hamnegger]

i am the rare guy who likes a bet here. the pot has grown fairly large and you only have 1 pair (i think its best most times )i really dont mind losing him here

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
i am the rare guy who likes a bet here. the pot has grown fairly large and you only have 1 pair (i think its best most times )i really dont mind losing him here

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not about "losing him", it's about maximizing the chance you have the best hand when the money gets in. This is simple WA/WB, and if we check the turn and he checks the river, we both a)have more information to conclude we probably have the best hand and b)increase the chance he calls our river bet with a worse hand. One of us is drawing slim; let's find out who before we put money in.

Rich,

This hand is a good example of why including all the details is important. A QJ96 board is VERY different than a Q842 board. And knowing the villain is UCLA and not just "A 2+2er" definitely affects how this hand plays.

FWIW, vs. Paul I would definitely check the turn and if he shoved the river I would have to consider folding. I probably don't, but I at least think about it.

[RichC.]

[ QUOTE ]


Rich,

This hand is a good example of why including all the details is important. A QJ96 board is VERY different than a Q842 board. And knowing the villain is UCLA and not just "A 2+2er" definitely affects how this hand plays.

FWIW, vs. Paul I would definitely check the turn and if he shoved the river I would have to consider folding. I probably don't, but I at least think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I wish I could really remember all the details of the hand since its been a since mid-Feb when we played this tourney. I know the was a possible draw on the turn, but I really dont remember the card, J, 9 or T is best I can do here as I know there was one of these on the turn. I should have posted this a while back but kept putting it off.

[nath]

Oh yeah, for some reason I thought villain was a limp/caller and not cold calling directly behind you. This obviously changes how you should play the hand, but my other points are still relevant as general ideas.

I think it's more likely you're good now. I'd check/call the turn and bet the river if the turn checks through.

[RichC.]

Well, FWIW, I ended up betting the turn, about 2/3rds again and Paul tanked for a long time before pushing for about 400 more. Trivial call and MHIG as the river bricks. Talking to Paul later that night, he thought I had JJ and that AQ was a slight possibility. He had KQ.

This hand has bothered me for the longest time though, even though I won the hand, I felt like I played about as bad as I could and still got it all in ahead. When Paul pushed, I thought I was beat for sure but cant fold for 400 more. I ended up busting near the bubble when QQ<AK AIPF.

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, FWIW, I ended up betting the turn, about 2/3rds again and Paul tanked for a long time before pushing for about 400 more. Trivial call and MHIG as the river bricks. Talking to Paul later that night, he thought I had JJ and that AQ was a slight possibility. He had KQ.

This hand has bothered me for the longest time though, even though I won the hand, I felt like I played about as bad as I could and still got it all in ahead. When Paul pushed, I thought I was beat for sure but cant fold for 400 more. I ended up busting near the bubble when QQ<AK AIPF.

[/ QUOTE ]

This beat was actually VERY thinly veiled, nh

[tubasteve]

I was gonna say I thought he had something more like a QJs. You sort of gave away that he didn't flop a set by saying the board was Qxx. I think responses would be a lot different if the board was like Q24 vs Q78 since ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

Since you didn't specify, I just naturally assumed he had one pair of Qs, but its still possible that he would flat call with a set if the board was really dry.

As to the actual play of the hand, I like a turn check, planning to CRAI on the turn or open shove the river.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he's raising either range behind someone who has made it 5.5x behind two limpers.

[RichC.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he's raising either range behind someone who has made it 5.5x behind two limpers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with Nath here. Also, his call PF caught me off guard too. Maybe if Paul checks this thread he can add more to it.

[uclabruinz]

I don't remember exactly the non-Q cards either but I also don't remember any kind of draw coming in on the turn. I thought it was like Q842 or something like that.

My thinking was pretty straightforward, I just didn't see you playing AQ+ that fast on this dry board. Your turn bet folds out every single hand you are beating except KQ (against me, and I knew you knew that), and even folds that out sometimes, and usually only gets called by hands that have you crushed.

If I were you, I definitely check the turn to try to induce that pot sized bet out of me that's left in my stack. With your image, you could have appears to be cbetting out and then giving up. If it checks through, you can then bet the river with about the same chance of getting that bet out of me that you had on the turn, but now I'm more likely to see you as taking a last stab with AK or something.

At any rate, the bottom line is that the turn was a clear check IMHO with AQ+ which is why you got me to call. AH, LEVELED! /images/graemlins/wink.gif