panel hand - turn - panel review
 

You actually call and utg calls behind. 3 to the turn for 5.25 bb.

(3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]) T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Utg checks, emp bets, hero?

Turn:

Panelist One:

<font color="red"> Even though hero improved his hand, this isn't a place to raise. EMP's second donk into two callers very strongly suggests that he has a hand of some sort. You also have to worry about weak UTG calling along on the dry board. Hero has 5 outs to win and is getting 6:1, often 7:1 if you expect UTG to come along again. I'm not a fan of making loose turn calls. You can try to argue that you'll make up a bet or two when the bad players bet into you and call your raise on the river if you improve. But in my mind, it's bad because you don't know that UTG is in and you don't know that bad EMP will bet into a paired board or QJT board, so you will be short sometimes.
</font>

Panelist Two:

<font color="green"> We hit one of the cards we were looking for so folding is definately out of the question. Raising is certainly a possibility since the UTG limper called the flop bet. It is possible that our pair of tens is good but the pot will only be about 7 big bets when it gets to him if we decide to just call. It seems unlikely that he has any kind of legitimate draw so at best he is breaking even should he call the turn with a 5-outer. If we knew that he had more outs against us we would want to raise and make him pay the maximum. But when he has 5 or less outs he will probably fold for two bets (and not make a mistake) or call one bet and not make too much of a mistake. The other downside to raising is that he might have a jack (that he will not fold). So the "raise for protection" argument doesn't really hold any water for this hand.

OTOH we could raise here if we felt that it had value. I think that it probably does and a good side effect is that we will charge the most to anyone who happened to pick up an OESD on the turn. So if we are raising for value then I like it. That said I don't mind just calling either since the pot hasn't gotten to a point where weaker draws can call correctly.
</font>

Panelist Three:

<font color="blue"> We hit out T and have middle pair (I just noticed that I didn't assing any outs to the T on the flop, fortunatly, it wouldn't have changed my answer). I have no idea what emp has. He could be betting middle, top or maybe even bottom pair (who knows, he could have A high).
We could raise, which will probably make UTG fold and emp call (if he raise, I'm done with the hand).
Or we could call, which gives a better chance of UTG calling.

I think raising is our best option here. We will risk an extra bet compared to calling, but we will probably get UTG to fold and we also have the chance of getting emp to check to us on the river. Also, we don't risk having UTG hitting on the river.

</font>

Panelist Four:

<font color="purple"> Calls. This was probably the worst card we could have gotten. EMP could be on middle or bottom pair which puts us ahead, but it's also possible we are behind to a J. The pot is getting big enough I don't want to fold for one bet but I think raising here is spew.

</font>

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

I would like a turn raise if we didn't have to call a 3bet. Unfortunately getting 10:1 I would have to be pretty sure I'm crushed (meaning frequently up against 2 pair or better) to fold to a 3bet. Our hand is too good to fold just yet (even if we have to fold to a river bet, it's because emp will frequently check the river after getting called twice with his A4 or whatever).

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

I'd still fold.

EMP is a fish, right? I doubt he's firing two bullets with nothing. I don't think a fish would fire again with a 7 with 2 flop callers and another overcard for him to worry about. I assume we're drawing to two pair/trips, and 6.5-1 isn't enough.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

Unreal. We have at best 5 outs and we're getting 6 to 1. But we are so macho that having made a raise PF and fiddled a call on the flop, now we're thinking of *raising* because we have to fight for this pot. I wouldn't even be here but if I was, I'd fold without a second thought. I missed my BD draws and paired the wrong card. Mostly my opponent will have a jack and I am going to pay a minimum of two big bets to find out that I had no business staying in this pot.

What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

Another split panel. Two of them don't seem to even know what they want to do. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?

Would a raise/fold suck here? The average bad player (which we have to assume EMP is - see above) won't 3-bet without a really great hand, at which point we can safely get away from it, while if he just calls/checks the river we see the showdown for the same price as if we'd just called down (which I assume the panelists are generally advocating).

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Another split panel. Two of them don't seem to even know what they want to do. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?

Would a raise/fold suck here? The average bad player (which we have to assume EMP is - see above) won't 3-bet without a really great hand, at which point we can safely get away from it, while if he just calls/checks the river we see the showdown for the same price as if we'd just called down (which I assume the panelists are generally advocating).

[/ QUOTE ]

im pretty sure that if i gave you a bunch of info on the villains that the answers would be boring and all the same.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Again, any sort of postflop read on EMP would mean we can stop simply speculating that his flop donk = a good hand. It's a vital element missing from the hand. Is Fuji purposely not giving it to us?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I think some are assuming that this is a typical micro bad player (too loose, too passive) while others might be thinking of a 40/1/1 player. I defintely assumed EMP was a fish. Stakes might matter if there are no stat reads.

[ QUOTE ]

Would a raise/fold suck here?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think we can raise/fold, since we have 5 outs vs two pair and we'd be getting at least 10-1.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unreal. We have at best 5 outs and we're getting 6 to 1. But we are so macho that having made a raise PF and fiddled a call on the flop, now we're thinking of *raising* because we have to fight for this pot. I wouldn't even be here but if I was, I'd fold without a second thought. I missed my BD draws and paired the wrong card. Mostly my opponent will have a jack and I am going to pay a minimum of two big bets to find out that I had no business staying in this pot.

What I want to know is, why bother learning about pot odds etc if I ignore them when it suits?

I suspect this hand has been chosen because we river something though or our opponent chose this hand to bet bottom pair all the way, so all those who think there is anything to do here but fold will be rewarded. But I sincerely hope not. Most times, raising PF, calling flop, raising turn, calling river will cost 4.5BB. My way would have cost 1SB. I like my way.

[/ QUOTE ]
wow dude, at least read the reads he gave in the first post. also, realize that most of the time you dont end up in a hand like this, and this is why the hand is interesting.

"5 outs at best" notrly.

Re: panel hand - turn - panel review
 

[ QUOTE ]
the read is vague, and thus perfect to create arguments about the turn play here.

in the first post in this series, emp was described as "loose" and "bad in all ways, shapes and forms." it's easy to interpret this in ways that would lead to different turn plays in this hand. also, UTG is described as "loose and weak." i don't know what "weak" means, but if that means he would fold a low pair here after i call, then i can see how different actions result in different mistakes by the villains.

the reads are too vague and hard to interpret and this decision is too close for me to really feel strongly about any option here. im going to go with the assumption that the EMP player has any flopped pair or pocket pair, so i will basically assume that i am ahead of him on this turn about 60-65% of the time. given this assumption it would seem that raising is the best play. however, if the other player will make bad folds if i call (if that's what "weak" means), raising loses some of its benefits. hopefully everyone can see the dilemma i have here.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, basically, you're just going to assume whatever means you can raise or call. We don't know much about our opponent, although we all know that the default is that they don't bet if they don't have TP, but you're assuming *based on absolutely nothing* that he has a pair that you beat.

I think it's a characteristic of the fish that they take the most positive view of their cards. Well, they think, I have bottom pair and it might just be good. So they call down.

Well, he mostly has a jack. The times he doesn't, I can live with.