30/60 QTs

[highlife]

[ QUOTE ]
OMG!!! How can you call that river? More importantly how can you call that turn???

[/ QUOTE ]

This is how.

[DeathDonkey]

So Jason had to twist some details to make this hand postable, but it hardly matters. I was the button and I played this hand poorly. I should have bet the flop and since I didn't I should have just not tried to make a play for such a small pot. But when the UTG player checkraised the turn I think I played the hand great. I did not bet the river because the river was a heart, I checked behind and he won with a flush. I told him I had Ace high. His turn checkraise is abysmal.

-DeathDonkey

[flawless_victory]

if the river was not a heart u wouldve won this pot.

[DeathDonkey]

I know!! I cried a little.

-DeathDonkey

[Clayton]

[ QUOTE ]
In an amazing live Bellagio 30/60 game, Hero limps UTG with Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]. Three more limpers to a smart, thinking LAG who limps otb. The SB completes and the BB checks.

Flop: J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].
Checked around.

Turn: J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]
Checked to the Button who bets, SB folds, BB folds, Hero check/raises, folded to Button who 3-bets, Hero calls.

River: 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Check, bet, fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought it would do justice if I posted the real results of the hand had river not been a heart. I mean, just saying.

[volcano1976]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OMG!!! How can you call that river? More importantly how can you call that turn???

[/ QUOTE ]

This is how.

[/ QUOTE ]

WOW [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[PokerBot123]

I think utg played the hand very well in the first example of the hand. To all the people who think this hand was played horrible: You need to think more about poker.

[DeathDonkey]

A turn checkraise is incredibly obvious as the hand he holds against a thinking player. He is always going to get tested with this action and a better hand will never fold. He should have just went ahead and bet out on the turn.

-DeathDonkey

[PokerBot123]

It is much more obvious that the button has nothing then the utg player. The utg player could have A high which would be way good in this situation. The chance that utg has the jack is higher then the button having one, given the way it played out.

Betting out might work, but there is a lot of players in the pot. When all the players between utg and button check again and then both blinds fold the relative strength of utg's hand has gone up greatly. None of the blinds slowplayed the boat and none of the 3! players between you and the button has a pair and probably not even ace high.

How can you say that a checkraise will allways be tested. How can he test the utg when he doesn't have anything and there is nothing he can represent with his betting pattern. Your opponent has to be weak/tight and non thinking for it to be correct to keep playing in that spot.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
So on the turn the pot was 3.5 BB and including the 3 BB that UTG put into the pot on the turn he spent 4 BB trying to win those 6.5 BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a small problem with this part of the post because it is mathematically misleading. It ignores something I think of as "recovered equity". While I'm sure you understand what's going on here, I sometimes see this mistake for real on these forums in preflop reasoning.

When contemplating the turn 3-bet, the button knows he has the option of checking the river if it is -EV. Therefore he must feel any river bet is +EV. So he is not spending 4 BB to win 3.5, he is spending 3. Actually he is spending even less than 3 on the turn, since he is recovering some of the equity on the river.