Did I Get Pwned by Sklansky? - Strange 2-4 Hand

[The DaveR]

Looks like DS has been reading Tommy posts.

[JJNJustin]

You got unlucky in an insignificant hand. If you had been playing with someone other than Sklansky heads up, would this hand have seemed so important to you?

Let me take a guess that DS is checking the river to induce a bluff, since he assumes you probably dont have much. Since you bet the flop, checked the turn, and bet the river DS put you on a hand that either "improved on the river" or a bluff trying to pick up the pot. Since the river card could make a better two pair and two straights, he opted not to raise. If you have a bluff you obviously wont call, and if you are lucky enough to have one of the other hands, you almost definately reraise. The odds of a raise being called isnt high enough to taking a chance of being reraised when a reraise will almost always be a better hand.

Thats my feeling about it... Yeah I know I'm a moron and have no clue...whatever.

-J

[andyfox]

"Since the river card could make a better two pair"

Seems to me there's no way David can put him on a better two pair.

Actually, it's hard to put poster on any hand here. But I would think by checking again, David might think poster would take a shot here with a lot of hands and that poster would know that David would know this, and thus be apt to call a check-raise from David with a bunch of hands other than air.

[shaundeeb]

With that thinking wouldn't it then be a good time to c/r and fold to a 3bet? some worse hands call and some better call but if he 3bets DS he can fold safely for that extra bet.

[Paluka]

I think the limp preflop and the flop check are fine. Many people make this preflop play, I don't understand why you guys are surprised by this at all. The lack of a river checkraise is baffling, however.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

It makes a lot more sense if he didn't notice he had 2p.

[oreopimp]

I think the open limp is fine. If u are defending liberally how are u reacting postflop. If u are defending liberally, and making life tough post then I can see limping. If u are defending liberally and folding a lot on the flop then he should raise.

[Robk]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that, if you are going to open-limp, then betting out on the flop is probably the right play, mainly in the hopes of inducing a bluff raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

it seems to me his opponent would have to bluff raise about half as often as he bluff bets for this to be true. very rare i would think, since most opponents bluff bet virtually every time.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the river play, either. Perhaps he could argue that your range consists only of hands that aren't good enough to call a check-raise, or luckbox hands like T8 that made a straight. But, that wouldn't be a very good argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

why not, this could easily be the case. if we assume for instance that he bets most of his pairs on the turn. or that he will fold weak 2 pair to the raise.

[DcifrThs]

well, one thing i haven't seen mentioned is the following:

how do you think kevin and others will react to david when he does show even mild aggression in similar spots (that tend to occur quite often)

imo they'll either give too much action (thinking "well he doesn't bet w/ the goods so he probably doesn't have 'em here") or too little action (thinking "jeez, if he doesn't even play 2pr strong he must have a monster now")

these are hyperboles but basically it can be possible that the bets he makes up in determining which opponents are thinking which way against him likely far outweight the one or two bet cost of playing this hand as slow as he did.

Barron

[Kevin J]

I think your analysis is pretty good and that was basically my take on it. I seriously doubt however, this is the way a typical 2+2er plays A7 here, hence the post.

Btw- I do not think the hand is important at all. I just thought is was very similar to hands that Mason has posted in the past. That is, a seemingly oddly played hand that turns out to be best.