[FeliciaLee]

I haven't posted here in a long, long time due to an extended hiatus from Hold'em.

I was playing in a live 4/8 game yesterday when the following hand came up.

I positioned myself to the left of a southern California thinking maniac. She was the small blind, I was the big blind. I had Q4s.

The flop came with two hearts (my suit), and a straight already possible. She bet out, I called, we got four overcalls.

The turn brought my flush, she bet. I felt that my best move was to smooth call her, hoping for the overcalls. I didn't raise because of the loose/passive opponents left in the hand. I also felt that given the odd chance that I was beat, I would lose less. If I won the hand, I was hoping to get many overcalls by our passive opponents who were basically playing defense against the maniac and would call down with any piece of the flop.

On the turn, two passive players called her bet. On the river just one.

My first instinct, which was to go for the overcalls, seemed like the best at the time. There were seven big bets to start the hand. After the flop, there were ten. After the turn, fourteen. After the river, seventeen.

She showed J2s for the jack high flush.

Had I played the hand harder on the turn and river, maybe I could have gotten up to 38. But of course I didn't know her hand was that strong. I was focusing more on overcalls by remaining, passive opponents than her, knowing she could have any part of that flop and keep betting out.

Of course, getting 38 bets would have been ideal, in my fantasy land, but had she had the king or ace high, I would have lost a lot more bets as well. Instead of losing only 3.5 big bets had I been beat, I would have lost 9.5.

I was so focused on Ed Miller's "going for overcalls" that I never once put her on that hand. It could have been pretty much anything. She only folded or checked when she had absolutely nothing (no pair, no gutshot, no runner draw, no ace).

Any thoughts on this? TIA,

Felicia [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]