Hand from Borgata WPT

[ski]

I bet out 1300. The BB throws in a 5k chip and a 1k chip. After 3 seconds, he says, "Call!". This seems important, why would he wait 3 sec to say call when that is pretty obvious what he is doing (if he put in 1.5K).

My guess is he put it in realized "oh [censored], I just put in 6K" and then said call. If it was planned I doubt the 3 sec delay would be there and this seems like an awfully elaborate angleshoot for a low stakes player with limited experience.

To me the reads you have on the Armanian guy are more or less unimportant to the actual hand.

The other angle I'd take on it is that the white dude is actually an excellent player and made you think he is a noob. I'd be pretty surprised if a person with a low bankroll got hugely lucky, won a satalite tourney, and now (in his mind) has the chance to be set for life and famous like Greg Raymer and then was drinking beer and talking about football.

either way I'd shove because I have a set and its live.

[aaaaaaaa]

u said he seems like nice guy nice guys dont angle shoot

[fringsrache]

i really appreciate that u want use to think deeper about a certain poker problem. Its great when good players take the time to do something like this thread.

But i seriously feel like ur wasted my time here. this is a poker forum and not a privat detective/quiz forum.

sorry.

[THEOSU]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm, after reading the whole thread i'm not so sure i like the original post now. Seeing as 'the key' basically came down to figuring out his hand range and what he does with the hands in that range, which is, ya know, that thing we do all the time and should hardly be called a key to the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still think the correct line of logic is a bit counter intuitive.

Obviously a lot of people are unhappy with this thread.

But looking at the long list of great posters that said call, I still think there is a lot more depth to the hand than most people are giving it credit for.

[/ QUOTE ]


Justin:


I, and few others including Daut, said call, but don't put any more money in the pot, because we don't think Villain is betting the river with a hand we can beat. I think AKss is squarely in his range here. The typical live AC tourney player (and being from NJ I've played a lot of tourneys here) loves to slow play. They will slow play top pair, top 2, sets, overpairs, anything. If you ever play a big hand fast, people get this puzzled look on their faces like, "What an idiot, I can't believe he didn't put on an act and slow play that hand." You are ruling out AK because you think Villain would have bet the flop, I think it is unlikely that a villain fitting this profile would, and certainly not impossible or highly unlikely that he would not.

Edit: I completely agree with your preflop and flop lines, which means you may want to rethink them. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


[/ QUOTE ]


i was wondering if anybody else would think this.

we've all said AK is in his range. AK is a trappable hand form a player who isn't that great on this flop. there's no draws, so we'll check to trap. additionally, there's an aggressive player who seems likely to bet, so he can check, aggro player can bet, you might call and then he's gotten two bets that way when he raises! ship!

the turn is a bad one for his hand, so he may actually have intended to call. perhaps he put in the 6k chips, waited 3 seconds because he realized 3 seconds later that holy cow, that's a 5k chip and not a 500 chip, and said call! he still has AK though, so a raise isn't all that awful, i mean, top two is the nizzuts, but really, he just wanted to call.

this is i think why a number of players are saying the turn is a call, but the river is a check/fold. his range is aa, kk and ak, with a very small amount of tt mixed in. his range isn't anything else.

the trouble with the key is that it is entirely plausible that a comparatively poor player would check ak on the flop and actually intend to call on the turn.

[cts]

flop plan is pretty miserable ; cr a set to find out where you're at? lol

with your reads i'd c/c of course

[iwantbooze]

Only just started reading this, please tell me the answer is that it was bears.

[microbet]

Ok, it's over, but I think if he had anything less than a set he would have said as little as possible during the ruling.

He didn't give a long explanation, but still Adanthar pwned this in the first response.

[fartman77]

[pete fabrizio]

I can't believe I wasted my time reading this thread. No one is ever angle-shooting, ever, except occasionally on accident when the opportunity is shoved down their throats -- and that's not what this situation feels like. You should just push the turn because he'll think you're trying to push him off his inadvertent raise and will look you up with AK-AT.

[Python49]

I don't know how I ended up reading this thread... linked from some other thread but since I feel like I just wasted my time i'm going to ninja bump this to b*tch about it.

The KEY to this whole thread was that no hands make sense that he calls with? LOL. If you put someone on a range of hands and that range of hands is assumed to be raising the turn almost always, then that already implies by itself that an action of "calling" doesn't make sense for that range. It's like if you say a persons range on the river is the nuts or air and they "accidentally" raise and try to claim they called... well if their range says that raising makes sense cuz it's the nuts or nothing then that also implies that calling DOESN'T make sense in and of itself.

On a side note, I could see an inexperienced live player taking this line of raise pf, check flop, call turn with AQ/AJ/QQ and it makes sense. With AQ/AJ its for pot control, and with QQ I can see a bad live player being scared of flop so they check, and then on turn thinking you may be bluffing since they showed flop weakness and they are just calling one bet to see if you fire river.