52s in SB - Ugly
 

I think I botched this hand pretty badly. Maybe my vacation made me a little passive.

Hero has 5[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] in the SB at a typical lp table. 5 callers, Hero completes, BB checks.

7 to the flop (7sb) Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Checked to MP who Bets, 2 callers, Hero peels, UTG calls.

5 to the turn (6bb) 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Checked to MP who bets, 1 caller, Hero chickens out and calls, UTG calls.

4 to river (10bb) blank - Checked around

I think somewhere in my brain I was thinking that bottom 2 pair on a draw heavy board is very likely to get drawn out on, so I didn't want to invest 2 bets on the turn, but that is weak thinking. I think that as played not donking the river is terrible. Thoughts?

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

You can't peel this flop properly if you're not going to make more than this when you spike on the turn.

-McGee

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

Well, raise the turn. But you already know that. And yeah as played absolutely bet the river. What was the question again?

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

C/R the turn. Fire the river. I don't mind the flop peel, FWIW.

Firing the turn is ok too, if the original bettor can't be expected to bet again.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

Please raise the turn and bet the river. This is the second- or third-best result you could have hoped for PF. But then you knew that..

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

No real question, just a reality check. Thanks.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

I'd raise this turn. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can't peel this flop properly if you're not going to make more than this when you spike on the turn.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

getting 11-1 on his call, i disagree.

but that doesn't mean he made as much as he should have...

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't peel this flop properly if you're not going to make more than this when you spike on the turn.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

getting 11-1 on his call, i disagree.

but that doesn't mean he made as much as he should have...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

You may be right. Don't forget, however, to count the times that he hits and is still behind to a flopped set/two pair; the times he hits and his "out" gives someone a better hand; and the times he hits and gets chased down on the river.

-McGee

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

Fold the flop, as played CR the turn and bet river.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

I agree with the others; two pair is a decent hand so I'd check/raise the turn (or perhaps bet out if I was worried it might check thru) and lead the river if just called.

[ QUOTE ]
Fold the flop, as played CR the turn and bet river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hero is getting 9:1 with only one to act behind him. I count about 6 outs (2 Twos, 3 Fives although might have to discount a bit for a spade plus a weak backdoor flush draw) so needs about 7:1. Easy peel, no? In fact, at my passive 2/4 table I'm probably calling this flop getting 9:1 even with lots to act behind me (although I'm not 100% that's correct).

GcluelessnoobG

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, at my passive 2/4 table I'm probably calling this flop getting 9:1 even with lots to act behind me (although I'm not 100% that's correct).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure that's not correct.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't peel this flop properly if you're not going to make more than this when you spike on the turn.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

getting 11-1 on his call, i disagree.

but that doesn't mean he made as much as he should have...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nit. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

You may be right. Don't forget, however, to count the times that he hits and is still behind to a flopped set/two pair; the times he hits and his "out" gives someone a better hand; and the times he hits and gets chased down on the river.

-McGee

[/ QUOTE ]

sure this happens. but calling the flop doesn't commit us to calling the turn(not that you were inferring this). combine this with the fact that the bet size doubles on the next street and our implied odds if we hit on the turn are very good as are our effective odds if we don't hit.

the problem here is we hit our hand and fail to maximize value. this is what you were initially getting at, i think. if we can't raise the turn when we hit our hand, it's conceivable that we shouldn't be there in the first place. in this hand we can raise the turn, we just don't.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
if we can't raise the turn when we hit our hand, it's conceivable that we shouldn't be there in the first place. in this hand we can raise the turn, we just don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rather, If we *don't* raise the turn when we hit our hand, it's conceivable that we shouldn't be there in the first place. In this hand we *should* raise the turn, we just didn't.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

You didn't say what limit, but maybe okay PF - in games where the SB is 1/3rd the BB, I often fold this pf. It's crap - not even on my starting hands chart.

Flop: Woowiee. Bottom pair, no kicker. How proud you must be. With backdoor baby flush gives you about 5.5 outs. That's barely enough to call (if even), but why not, you called PF with crap, call here too for a crapola fest!

Turn: Either bet out or check raise (then bet out river). WTF. No one has [censored]. You are best here nearly always. You're playing like a passive old lady. What makes you think MP has 2 pair?? WTF???

RIver: Retarded. After the weakness shown on the turn, you should be betting out here, unless you really think you can check raise.



General: The play here is weak/loose/passive. I don't mind slightly loose play, but for christ's sake get aggressive. Otherwise, please sit at my table so I can bleed you dry.


Cheers


AB

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
You didn't say what limit, but maybe okay PF - in games where the SB is 1/3rd the BB, I often fold this pf. It's crap - not even on my starting hands chart.

Flop: Woowiee. Bottom pair, no kicker. How proud you must be. With backdoor baby flush gives you about 5.5 outs. That's barely enough to call (if even), but why not, you called PF with crap, call here too for a crapola fest!

Turn: Either bet out or check raise (then bet out river). WTF. No one has [censored]. You are best here nearly always. You're playing like a passive old lady. What makes you think MP has 2 pair?? WTF???

RIver: Retarded. After the weakness shown on the turn, you should be betting out here, unless you really think you can check raise.



General: The play here is weak/loose/passive. I don't mind slightly loose play, but for christ's sake get aggressive. Otherwise, please sit at my table so I can bleed you dry.


Cheers


AB

[/ QUOTE ]

This is really uncalled for. There's about, by my count, two sentences of actual poker-like content here, all of which has already been said multiple times by other posters.

Being mean and disrespectful is counterproductive to what we're trying to accomplish in the strat forums.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

i don't like a flop peel here b/c of the discounted 5 spade, drawy board and the good chance that 2 pair may not be good when you hit. BUT since it's low limit you can arguably play to maintain a loose image so that when u hit, showing down these types of hands to tilt ppl = +ev.

and of course as you already know, raise turn bet river etc

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if we can't raise the turn when we hit our hand, it's conceivable that we shouldn't be there in the first place. in this hand we can raise the turn, we just don't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rather, If we *don't* raise the turn when we hit our hand, it's conceivable that we shouldn't be there in the first place. In this hand we *should* raise the turn, we just didn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, what i meant was if we don't feel as if we are good often enough to pop the turn maybe we shouldn't be there. i agree with the second part(that we *should* raise the turn).

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

Maybe this is a leak in my game, but I would also fold this flop.Any spade or any card higher than an 8 puts a flush or srt8 on the board and you may already be behind to 2 pair, or set(not likely, but possible).I like the call pf, but I'm looking for 2 pair trips, or str8, flush draws to continue.With this many players in the hand I think you'll make your hand and still lose very often.Even with the harmless river 4, someone will turn over Ts4s.
As played, what everybody else says.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

Hey AB - Thanks for the helpful words. I'm such a terrible player that I'm sure you would bleed me dry in no time.

Anyways. Preflop is an easy call in 4/8. I don't think this is debateable. I think the flop is an easy call too. We have a pair and a bd baby fd giving us sufficient outs to peel - especially getting 11:1. The issue with the hand is that I got stupid passive when I made my hand. I'm rarely passive in this spot, and hated the hand - hence the "Ugly" in my initial post. I took close to a month off from playing and thought I'd post some hands I played poorly during my first 2 sessions back to get some opinions and get my brain back in the game. There's no need to be condescending.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyways. Preflop is an easy call in 4/8. I don't think this is debateable. I think the flop is an easy call too. We have a pair and a bd baby fd giving us sufficient outs to peel - especially getting 11:1. The issue with the hand is that I got stupid passive when I made my hand. I'm rarely passive in this spot, and hated the hand - hence the "Ugly" in my initial post.

[/ QUOTE ]


You didn't mention the limit - as I said, you can call here PF if the SB is 1/2 the BB as it is in 4/8 or 8/16, but I'd fold at 3/6 or 6/12, 9/18 where the SB is 1/3rd the BB.

Think about this: Yea, okay you are only completing with these garbage cards, but you will also be out of position for the rest of the hand. Bad combination.

You got lucky that it turned into something this time, but mostly, just fold this crap.

You have 5.5 outs with bottom pair, no kicker and BDBFD. I used to play these hands alot when I first started - but it is still a garbage hand. Your outs are not clean - (far from it) and you are doing yourself a disservice if you count them as full outs.

Calling the flop, with 11-1 seems like a good deal, but only if you plan on check/folding the turn UI. with 5.5 outs (probably should be discounted to around 4 for math purposes) times 2 makes you 8% to improve on the turn (with 4 outs) to a max of 12% (with 6 outs, which is an overestimation - you HAVE to discount these outs as they are NOT clean).

Getting 11-1 on an 11.5 to 1 (if you are discounting your outs as you should) is still marginal - and only good if you can consider getting value from your implied odds - which playing passively you did not.

And your passive turn and river play gave up at least 2 and more probably 4 BB or more..

[ QUOTE ]

I took close to a month off from playing and thought I'd post some hands I played poorly during my first 2 sessions back to get some opinions and get my brain back in the game. There's no need to be condescending.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I thought I was being funny - but I was kinda drunk last night having come from a celebration that my biopsy was negative and I'm NOT going to die a slow horrid death from cancer after all...

Cheers

AB

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

I can see folding the flop here, but whatever.

Not raising the turn is a sin. Yes, "weak thinking" as you called it.

The river would have less people in it if you did and not betting the river with 2 pair also blows.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

If the flop is rainbow it's a close peel but as is I think it's a pretty bad call on the flop. Checkraise the turn fo sho once you make it there but this flop is not one where your pure odds are really the main basis for the call/fold; your implieds aren't great and you're going to be subject to so many redraws multiway that your only real trustworthy outs are trips/bd draws.

Rob

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]

You got lucky that it turned into something this time, but mostly, just fold this crap.


[/ QUOTE ]

AB, seems like you don't quite understand poker. Of course Scar got lucky, and most of the time this hand will flop nothing! That's the whole point of calling when getting 14:1, we only need to hit a whooping 7% of the time. Folding here isn't a terrible move, but Scar's mistake in this hand wasn't not folding preflop, it was not maximizing his profit now that his hand came through and no one else showed much strength.

Seeing as how he stated that this was his mistake in the OP, your tone is pretty out of line. A simple "Yup, you should have pushed your value" would suffice (plus it would keep you from making dumb comments that demonstrate a lack of skill)

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the flop is rainbow it's a close peel but as is I think it's a pretty bad call on the flop. Checkraise the turn fo sho once you make it there but this flop is not one where your pure odds are really the main basis for the call/fold; your implieds aren't great and you're going to be subject to so many redraws multiway that your only real trustworthy outs are trips/bd draws.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

now this is some good advice. Thanks Rob.

Re: 52s in SB - Ugly
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You got lucky that it turned into something this time, but mostly, just fold this crap.


[/ QUOTE ]

AB, seems like you don't quite understand poker. Of course Scar got lucky, and most of the time this hand will flop nothing! That's the whole point of calling when getting 14:1, we only need to hit a whooping 7% of the time. Folding here isn't a terrible move, but Scar's mistake in this hand wasn't not folding preflop, it was not maximizing his profit now that his hand came through and no one else showed much strength.

Seeing as how he stated that this was his mistake in the OP, your tone is pretty out of line. A simple "Yup, you should have pushed your value" would suffice (plus it would keep you from making dumb comments that demonstrate a lack of skill)

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. Thank you for saying this.