My last 75-150 stud game

[CarlosChadha]

[ QUOTE ]

Given the way you played this hand, I don't recommend you play the $75-150 stud game again. It was played atrociously from the start...
CJ

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think that the OP played every street quite well. I agree with you that the antics (dramatic pauses and checking dark) were poor decisions, but the play itself was good. CJ, what streets do you think were played poorly and why?

Carlos

PS. Although checking in the dark is a poor tactical decision, I wouldn't exactly call it amaturish. I have seen a majority of players (pros and amaturs alike) make this play at 75/150, 150/300 and 400/800.

[CarlosChadha]

[ QUOTE ]

and yes, he's probably right saying you should raise on 5th because you'll get a flush to slow down quite a bit when your door card pairs and you show aggression. to him, it looked like you hadnt filled yet and were patiently letting him bet into you without much thought about the hand, hoping to fill up. if you raise on 5th, most of the time he's not going to donk you on 6th, and youll get a free river card.. if he blind bets on the river you can raise if you fill and fold if you dont.. saving 1 bet. staring at the guys flush does nothing but show him that you are weak, and hes going to come at you all day long.


[/ QUOTE ]

I am in total agreement with the lat sentance of the above quote, the staring does make one look weak. The rest of your advise in your post (concerning the swings of the game) are also pretty good.

The advice about check raising 5th (or betting out, it is not clear which you are advocating) is almost certainly just spewing money. The man with the flush might very well 3 bet the check raise (or raise the bet), especially since the case jack is dead and since the OP didn't come out raising on 3rd. All this will do is result in the OP charging himself extra bets. It also might force the guy with trip 8s out of the pot, which he doesn't want because that guy is just padding his drawing odds. Lastly, the OP cannot reasonably expect to get a free card on 6th since he is out of position.

Carlos

[sleepyjoeyt]

I was almost pausing sarcastically. I really wanted to make sure that the gentleman in the 2 seat saw that the 8 seat had 3 hearts on board and me announcing the 8 seat's hand would have been improper. Having the 2 seat wonder why I was staring at the 8 seat's hand (and maybe noticing the flush on his own) might prevent him from ramming/jamming now that he is behind to both hands.

I really don't think this is even that interesting a hand - probably just proves the point that I should stick to the 20/40 level - if I don't want all this action than I probably shouldn't be in this game.

Thanks to all for comments.

[CJC]

Hello Carlos,

3rd street, given his position was a raise or fold.. I don't even think it's close.. given the limits he was playing..

While caution is often the proper play with a couple of overcards behind you... this is just to big of a game to justify limping with that holding. I MUCH rather prefer folding to limping in this instance... smaller games I am perfectly ok with a limp..

Let's take a look at this hand as an example. Let's assume hero did raise on 3rd.. he very well might have picked up the pot on 3rd.. and very very likely would have picked up the pot on 4th.. Even if reraised.. you can play heads up and reexamine your holding based on opponent/cards at that time.

Instead, hero lost a bunch of money...

4th.. obviously played well...

5th.. given the heat the other opponent took on 4th.. I probably check -call.. although betting out can't be that much of a mistake.. but again player dependant. I am ok with his play there..

6th.. ok with.

River... although I hate paying off people.. this is a huge pot.. many..many people would try a blufff.. or bet a smaller set... so I would pay off.. but in saying this.. I wasn't there... hero had a good correct read.. and if my read was as good if I were there then I probably fold too.. but I am going to be damned sure of it..

So in conclusion... my problem ( and a large one at that ), is with 3rd street.. as it makes the play of the later streets so much easier too..

As far as the checking dark.... seriously.... terrible idea in this spot.. assume he filled, and opponent didn't bet as many wouldn't.. hero cost himself money... If he looks at his cards.. fills, then checks.. he probably gets a check-raise in.. again costs himself money.. Checking in the dark just shows weakness, and I don't like to show any weakness when playing poker.. ( except in the $1-3 and $1-5 games [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] )

What do people think about hero LEADING OUT ON THE RIVER? Interesting.. If he (was) planning on calling a river bet, might be better to lead out.. never know, might just get opponent(s) to lay down a better hand..

Regards,

CJ

[MRBAA]

I'm kinda with you on the raise or fold thing but both Carlos and Jeffage who play this high (in AC) describe the games as pretty passive. If that's the case, it might not be awful to limp/fold if raised by an over (I do this against a few players in the 2-4 game online).

As for checking dark, it's ridiculous. I can't see any good reason for doing this here. The only time I do it is in the train game, when I have a really weak holding that I wouldn't bet no matter what -- like say a pair of eights with 3 others still in, and I'm first or second to act I'll sometimes say "check while I see if I filled my trips" or some such nonsense just to see if I can influence a free showdown.

[Bill King]

i think the 3-bet is possible.. but i think you see it less likely in the scenario. look at hero's line to villain. he limped in with two guys behind him with two overs to his door card. the only time he showed aggression in the hand was when he paired his door card, clearly representing trips. i think it puts the villain with a flush in a very tough spot, in that yes he may 3-bet with the flush and it may be good now, but if the hero comes over the top and 4-bets (which i wouldnt mind doing here even if hes not filled up yet) you really put him to the test. some call that a spew, but i have seen laydowns not normally made to a 3-bet, for a 4th bet. i think if hero were to go with this line, he should bet dark because he KNOWS that villain has a flush and cant improve his hand to beat a full house. betting dark i think have ++EV, and a positive metagame expectation.

what do you think carlos? or a i a crazy spewer? haha :-)

[Jeffage]

Sounds like a money pressure issue - do not play 75 stud if losing 5-8k is going to bother you a lot, especially if the game is aggressive. People that play a little looser than you but don't have any money pressure at all have less of a disadvantage then you might think - they will (accidentally or not) make all sorts of thin bets that you will leave on the table and on close decisions you might let a card slide off cheap that can cost you a lot of money. Been there, done that - return to the battlefield when you're ready for it.

PS. As for the hand, I'd strongly consider folding on third with two live overs behind me - this is especially true if they're held by aggressive players. (I assume they're live -if either was dead, I'd come in for 75 probably).

Jeff

[AlanBostick]

You took a great hand to the river and lost. That happens. If you can't face that, you shouldn't be playing at that limit.

Neither should you be talking about the hand afterwards. Talk about the Yankees and the Red Sox. Talk about Israel and Hizbullah. Talk about the time you played with James Woods. Don't talk about how you and the other players played the last hand!

I've only spent one week at Foxwoods (first week of June), but if you can handle the swings, the 75-150 stud game is sweet.

[Bill King]

yes, that game is beautiful.