Help plug the leak...

[Supwithbates]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not being contrite...but are there not "first principles" of poker?

[/ QUOTE ]
I find these principles only hold true when you're playing with other players with a basic understanding of how to play the game. You never answered my question, and it makes a big difference: What's the buyin? Because I'm coming from the assumption that this is perhaps a 4$/180, but if it's even a 10$ buyin my advice would change.

[ QUOTE ]
I can take copious notes on several players but that does not mean my notes will hold true. Online players (the good ones) realize that they need to shift gears and not get pegged into a particular playing style.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but again, I'm coming from the assumption that this villian doesn't seem to be that amazing of a player.

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering if there was a "fundamental" problem in playing the blinds as a short handed situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, this is a case of pisspoor luck. Same situation happens to me all the time; if I see the opponent making similar plays with the nuts, then I'm folding; if I've seen them trying to bluff without telling a consistent story, then I call. I play in low buyins... if you play in high buyins, then ignore my advice, because it won't be valid against better competition.

OSU, I don't always bet this flop, but I don't see any reason not to either... position betting the flop into a paired board HU with a lower PP is +EV, no? If he folds, then we've taken down a nice-sized pot; if he calls, we know that there's a very good chance that we're beaten and can proceed accordingly.

Here's my defense for attacking his river push:
If I were the villian, my river range on the hero would be this, depending on whether he's been defending his blinds:
As/xs (9 combos)
A/Q (12 combos)
suited connectors xs/xs (4 combos--I doubt many 5s/4s would raise preflop, even to steal)
pocket pairs JJ and below (probably not 44-22) (7 combos)
So we have 5 of 7 PP folding, 12 of 12 AQ folding, and the flushes could go either way... a good hero would be able to fold, assuming the villian had hit his boat (and I think that the suited connectors besides JT would laydown almost every time). So I'd expect that out of a total of 32 hands, at best 12 of them are calling, and at worst 2 are calling. The villian's slowplay was too obvious here, and I don't think that I personally would call with anything but the boat. I'd call with the 6s only because of the flush potential on the board, but I wouldn't think it to be much better than a 50/50 proposition, read dependent (though winning 50% with a call at this point is extremely +EV over folding)

[J.A.K.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am not being contrite...but are there not "first principles" of poker?

[/ QUOTE ]
I find these principles only hold true when you're playing with other players with a basic understanding of how to play the game. You never answered my question, and it makes a big difference: What's the buyin? Because I'm coming from the assumption that this is perhaps a 4$/180, but if it's even a 10$ buyin my advice would change.

[ QUOTE ]
I can take copious notes on several players but that does not mean my notes will hold true. Online players (the good ones) realize that they need to shift gears and not get pegged into a particular playing style.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, but again, I'm coming from the assumption that this villian doesn't seem to be that amazing of a player.

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering if there was a "fundamental" problem in playing the blinds as a short handed situation.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, this is a case of pisspoor luck. Same situation happens to me all the time; if I see the opponent making similar plays with the nuts, then I'm folding; if I've seen them trying to bluff without telling a consistent story, then I call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha. This was PS $20/180. And Thanks by the way for the time. Given me something to think about.

[Sluss]

This is the varience of tournaments. You have runs where the BB has a hand in your SB. You steal, flop two pair and get counterfited when the river pairs.

The upside is you will also have runs where you just own the BB every orbit. Where you pick up the pot in all of your blinds and seem to get big pots when your steals hit.

These don't hurt so bad in a cash games when you can just wait a couple of minutes and get your money back. In a tournament you get on these bad runs and it costs you a couple dozen buy-ins. Whatcha gonna do? Just ride it out.

[PokerLearner]

I'm actually a little surprised more people didn't get on your case about the min-raise preflop. This is an absolutely HORRIBLE play with 66 preflop. First of all, no SB is going to fold getting 3:1 odds (if no ante), so all you are doing is building the pot. Now, some hands you like building a pot with, but 66 is not one of them. Unless you flop your set, you are almost sure to have a difficult board to play (overcards that may have hit the SB's relatively random hand). With more money in the pot, your opponent is less likely to fold if he hits, and you have to bet more on the flop so he can also try to trap you.
In other words, if you are saying these blind vs. blind confrontations are your undoing, I would guess it is mostly due to your preflop play. With 66, check behind or raise bigger. Yes, if you checked behind you probably still would have died on this hand (he'd check the river, you'd make a small bet, he'd call; turn would be check/check; river would be he would make a smaller bet, you'd raise, he'd go all-in, you'd call) but these type of full house vs. full house hands are rare.
If you want to practice your blind vs. blind play, play some heads-up tourneys. They are very useful in giving you a better feel for how to play these...

[neuroman]

LAP, TAP? What are these? The only thing I can think of is loose-agressive-passive and tight-aggressive-passive, neither of which make sense.

Pokerlearner is right about the insufficient preflop raise. Raise more or check. Also, regarding leaks in button/blind battles, just remember you don't want to get into a war for a small pot with a marginal hand.

This hand you're probably always going broke with the underfull, unless villain bets turn. So don't sweat it.

[Stumpy]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the minraise preflop but the rest of the hand is fine, you just got unlucky. I don't think villain played it too badly either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I misread the HH at first too, but it's not a minraise. The BB was 150, the SB called 300 more after the raise, so he raised 3x BB.

Anyone else see the irony that the poster's name is JK_LIMPER?

[Supwithbates]

that's what I've seen others calling loose/passive, tight/passive... don't ask me why, I just figured they knew what they were talking about

[seke2]

Well, you normally see LAG/TAG here, not LAP/TAP.

Anyways, on his hand, Hero has no big leak. Preflop is fine as long as the converter is right--if not, Hero should make a 3-4xBB raise, not a minraise.

Flop, cbet is fine here. Turn, check is good. River, you hit your miracle card, he pushes, you call, you got really unlucky. No major flaws here for Hero, just bad luck.

Any river card other than a 6 and you can fold easily. Oh well.

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like the minraise preflop but the rest of the hand is fine, you just got unlucky. I don't think villain played it too badly either.

[/ QUOTE ]

I misread the HH at first too, but it's not a minraise. The BB was 150, the SB called 300 more after the raise, so he raised 3x BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is. Hero raised to 300 at 75/150. Pot is 600 going to the flop.

[Stumpy]

Yeah, sorry, you're right, but isn't this confusing?

6 folds, SB calls t75 <font color="#aaaaaa">(pot was t225)</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to t300</font>, SB calls t300 <font color="#aaaaaa">(pot was t450)</font>.

The wording of the first SB call and second SB call seem in conflict... The SB really called to T150 the first time (but had 75 in the pot already) then it gets raised to 300, and it says SB calls T300. But really, SB just called 150. It should either be SB calls 150, SB calls 300, or SB calls 75, SB calls 150. I would think the latter is proper.

Or am I a moron?