WSOPC, 1k event hand - Page 2

RichC. · #11 05-24-2007, 08:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
can't we know more than 1 of the 4 board cards? and who are we playing against?

i agree the turn is usually a check, but it should get bet some % of the time depending on how you've previously played some hands (i.e. if you've recently double/triple barreled)

[/ QUOTE ]

The other board cards are somewhat unimportant, and, i dont really remember them and hate to just make up a bunch of cards. I think there was a 9 on the flop, maybe a J on the turn, but again, I am not 100% sure on those.

As to the villain, it was UCLA.

hamnegger · #12 05-24-2007, 08:54 PM

i am the rare guy who likes a bet here. the pot has grown fairly large and you only have 1 pair (i think its best most times )i really dont mind losing him here

nath · #13 05-24-2007, 10:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i am the rare guy who likes a bet here. the pot has grown fairly large and you only have 1 pair (i think its best most times )i really dont mind losing him here

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not about "losing him", it's about maximizing the chance you have the best hand when the money gets in. This is simple WA/WB, and if we check the turn and he checks the river, we both a)have more information to conclude we probably have the best hand and b)increase the chance he calls our river bet with a worse hand. One of us is drawing slim; let's find out who before we put money in.

Rich,

This hand is a good example of why including all the details is important. A QJ96 board is VERY different than a Q842 board. And knowing the villain is UCLA and not just "A 2+2er" definitely affects how this hand plays.

FWIW, vs. Paul I would definitely check the turn and if he shoved the river I would have to consider folding. I probably don't, but I at least think about it.

RichC. · #14 05-24-2007, 10:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Rich,

This hand is a good example of why including all the details is important. A QJ96 board is VERY different than a Q842 board. And knowing the villain is UCLA and not just "A 2+2er" definitely affects how this hand plays.

FWIW, vs. Paul I would definitely check the turn and if he shoved the river I would have to consider folding. I probably don't, but I at least think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I wish I could really remember all the details of the hand since its been a since mid-Feb when we played this tourney. I know the was a possible draw on the turn, but I really dont remember the card, J, 9 or T is best I can do here as I know there was one of these on the turn. I should have posted this a while back but kept putting it off.

nath · #15 05-25-2007, 11:31 AM

Oh yeah, for some reason I thought villain was a limp/caller and not cold calling directly behind you. This obviously changes how you should play the hand, but my other points are still relevant as general ideas.

I think it's more likely you're good now. I'd check/call the turn and bet the river if the turn checks through.

RichC. · #16 05-25-2007, 02:06 PM

Well, FWIW, I ended up betting the turn, about 2/3rds again and Paul tanked for a long time before pushing for about 400 more. Trivial call and MHIG as the river bricks. Talking to Paul later that night, he thought I had JJ and that AQ was a slight possibility. He had KQ.

This hand has bothered me for the longest time though, even though I won the hand, I felt like I played about as bad as I could and still got it all in ahead. When Paul pushed, I thought I was beat for sure but cant fold for 400 more. I ended up busting near the bubble when QQ<AK AIPF.

timex · #17 05-25-2007, 02:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Well, FWIW, I ended up betting the turn, about 2/3rds again and Paul tanked for a long time before pushing for about 400 more. Trivial call and MHIG as the river bricks. Talking to Paul later that night, he thought I had JJ and that AQ was a slight possibility. He had KQ.

This hand has bothered me for the longest time though, even though I won the hand, I felt like I played about as bad as I could and still got it all in ahead. When Paul pushed, I thought I was beat for sure but cant fold for 400 more. I ended up busting near the bubble when QQ<AK AIPF.

[/ QUOTE ]

This beat was actually VERY thinly veiled, nh

tubasteve · #18 05-25-2007, 02:25 PM

I was gonna say I thought he had something more like a QJs. You sort of gave away that he didn't flop a set by saying the board was Qxx. I think responses would be a lot different if the board was like Q24 vs Q78 since ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

Since you didn't specify, I just naturally assumed he had one pair of Qs, but its still possible that he would flat call with a set if the board was really dry.

As to the actual play of the hand, I like a turn check, planning to CRAI on the turn or open shove the river.

nath · #19 05-25-2007, 09:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he's raising either range behind someone who has made it 5.5x behind two limpers.

RichC. · #20 05-25-2007, 10:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ucla is more likely to raise 77-88 PF than 22 or 44.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think he's raising either range behind someone who has made it 5.5x behind two limpers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with Nath here. Also, his call PF caught me off guard too. Maybe if Paul checks this thread he can add more to it.