A hand against Swami...
 

Borgata 10/20 on a Saturday night, Swami is drunk, like a skunk in a bunk, playing real junk, against a bunch of punks.

Hero in middle position with a black 44, folded to hero in MP, hero limps, one other caller to an on the button Swami. Swami raises, two callers.

Flop is A [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], 4 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Hero bets, other caller folds, Swami raises, hero calls.

Turn is a 2 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], hero bets, Swami raises, hero reraises, Swami calls.

Rvier is a K [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] I check, Swami bets, hero?????

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

First of all, was it folded to you in MP, if so, I'd tend to fold pf.

I don't know who Swami or what your relative position is, but I'll assume that betting the flop is right. After he raises you need to threebet. Get as many bets in on the small street as possible.

As played I call the river.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Even drunk, does swami play junk? Not really.

I hate the open limp. Clear fold pre flop.

You have to pay him off because he can't put you on a set and he thinks his big ace is good.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Swami has AK around 50% of the time, especially given the way the hand is played. Would be quite surprised if he had a 5 or was on diamonds, but then again it could be player dependent. I have to imagine your good enough here to make a call. If he has AA, KK, or sucked out with some draw, so be it.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even drunk, does swami play junk? Not really.

I hate the open limp. Clear fold pre flop.

You have to pay him off because he can't put you on a set and he thinks his big ace is good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pay him off? After the turn, my intention is to check raise him on the river.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

PreFlop, In MP, I wouldn't open limp this. I'd usually fold it, and sometimes come in with a raise. I don't like the open limp.

On the flop, I would reraise his raise. Get more bets into the pot, and maintain control of the betting.

As played, I called the river, but:

I don't know Swami. But he is drunk? Drunk enough to think that AK, AQ, or AJ is worth a river value bet here? I don't think he has a 5. If he has a set, you have to just pay him off. If he hit his flush, so be it. The pot is huge. Folding incorrectly would be a much bigger mistake than calling incorrectly.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
PreFlop, In MP, I wouldn't open limp this. I'd usually fold it, and sometimes come in with a raise. I don't like the open limp.

On the flop, I would reraise his raise. Get more bets into the pot, and maintain control of the betting.

As played, I called the river, but:

I don't know Swami. But he is drunk? Drunk enough to think that AK, AQ, or AJ is worth a river value bet here? I don't think he has a 5. If he has a set, you have to just pay him off. If he hit his flush, so be it. The pot is huge. Folding incorrectly would be a much bigger mistake than calling incorrectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I opened limped this with a few loosie goosie types to my left, including a very drunk Swami who likes to raise on the button.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

I never understand why people slow down on the flop and then lead the turn.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I never understand why people slow down on the flop and then lead the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

to induce people to overplay TPTK and overpairs.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

cgrohman - some people play that way to charge what they think are drawing hands. i personally would just never stop raising this flop.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I never understand why people slow down on the flop and then lead the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

to induce people to overplay TPTK and overpairs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since he is drunk. He can blow a 3.0 after the case of beer he consumed.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Why not either a) raise the flop again and lead the turn or b) c/r the turn? I think calling and leading makes little sense.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why not either a) raise the flop again and lead the turn or b) c/r the turn? I think calling and leading makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if he has an ace, he may raise the my turn lead. Especially if he has a king or queen kicker or aces up.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not either a) raise the flop again and lead the turn or b) c/r the turn? I think calling and leading makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if he has an ace, he may raise the my turn lead. Especially if he has a king or queen kicker or aces up.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is the case, won't he put in more action on the flop? Why don't you just threebet then c/r or b/3b when he fourbets?

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not either a) raise the flop again and lead the turn or b) c/r the turn? I think calling and leading makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if he has an ace, he may raise the my turn lead. Especially if he has a king or queen kicker or aces up.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is the case, won't he put in more action on the flop? Why don't you just threebet then c/r or b/3b when he fourbets?

[/ QUOTE ]

My read is that he may put in more action on the flop, but maybe not, since the Swami is very deceptive.

However, I have seen him cap the flop, and then take a freebie on the turn, so I ain't letting him do that, especially if he had AK, he would most likely raise my turn bet, with the deuce turn card.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why not either a) raise the flop again and lead the turn or b) c/r the turn? I think calling and leading makes little sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if he has an ace, he may raise the my turn lead. Especially if he has a king or queen kicker or aces up.

[/ QUOTE ]
...or if you 3 bet the flop he may cap it thinking that you on the FD and raise you on the turn anyway. Openlimping on MP with 44 is pretty terrible, you did and got lucky, great! Now gas it and give your opponenet a chance to make as many mistakes as possible. This whole post seems to be one majot brag about how you outplayed drunk Swami and i hope that was a highlight of your session.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[quote This whole post seems to be one majot brag about how you outplayed drunk Swami and i hope that was a highlight of your session.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who says I outplayed him even though it sounds like I outplayed him?

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

a little off topic, but i think its kinda funny how when he's drunk he can be pretty tricky and good lagtag and when he's sober he's a completely predictable fit or fold TAG.

drunk swami = -EV! (for the table)

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[quote This whole post seems to be one majot brag about how you outplayed drunk Swami and i hope that was a highlight of your session.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who says I outplayed him even though it sounds like I outplayed him?

[/ QUOTE ]

No...it sounds like you outcard him and in the proccess outplayed yourself.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
a little off topic, but i think its kinda funny how when he's drunk he can be pretty tricky and good lagtag and when he's sober he's a completely predictable fit or fold TAG.

drunk swami = -EV!

[/ QUOTE ]

True, I was playing next table over from Swami this past Saturday, and he was drinking water. His stack was down to the felt.

That is very funny!!!

I'll tell him to suck down more Beck's as a helpful poker coach.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

I just called his river bet.

He tabled an 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

Drunk Swami=negative EV

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Go Swami!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I just called his river bet.

He tabled an 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

Drunk Swami=negative EV


[/ QUOTE ]

for what its worth the last time I played with Swami regularly was more than a year ago when he went on the wagon, he would never raise a flop with an A if he has nothing but a flushdraw after someone donked into the field, he was too weak-passive.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just called his river bet.

He tabled an 8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

Drunk Swami=negative EV


[/ QUOTE ]

for what its worth the last time I played with Swami regularly was more than a year ago when he went on the wagon, he would never raise a flop with an A if he has nothing but a flushdraw after someone donked into the field, he was too weak-passive.

[/ QUOTE ]

His hand ranges open up when he's loaded, as well as much more aggressive style emerging.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

lol Swami isn't betting this river with AK. At least not sober. He's the type of guy that autochecks AK/AA on the river because "the hand is over."

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Poker beer muscles. Interesting.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
including a very drunk Swami who likes to raise on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]

even bigger reason to muck preflop.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Why are you checking the river? I Bet/call 100% of the time here

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you checking the river? I Bet/call 100% of the time here

[/ QUOTE ]

Because I rethought my strategy of a check/raise. I had to consider that he was in fact drawing to the flush. If he held a set, he would have reraised me again on the turn.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[/ QUOTE ] "If he held a set, he would have reraised me again on the turn."

[/ QUOTE ]

If he had a set, he SHOULD have reraised, but w/4 straight cards on the board and the fd, it is unlikely. Drunk or sober, he won't 3bet unless he's 90% sure he's winning the pot.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

Ok- then why not jam the flop?

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Ok- then why not jam the flop?

[/ QUOTE ]

To get him to raise my bet on the turn. If I would have kept jamming the flop, he may have read me for a set and just called the turn, instead of raising the turn like he did.

Re: A hand against Swami...
 

I don't understand how just calling the flop then leading the turn is supposed to get more bets on average than jamming the flop and leading the turn. Is he really giving you a chance to bet/threebet enough to give up that extra equity?

From the description of this guy, it doesn't sound likely at all. I know it worked out this time, but it sounds like this was an outlier.