Learning to think or not thinking at all?

[skelm]

First of all I apologise for the wall of text but this came directly from a blog entry and I don't see an easy way to summarise it. I apreciate anybody who takes the time to read this and comment.

Tonight I came across a situation that very deeply reminded me that not only should every hand played contain a good lot of thought but also that sometimes the option that ultimately looks like the best one is most certainly not the case (even in places where it appears that you will improve on future streets).

I do apologize for those involved and will be most likely read this if I got some of the suits wrong as the discussion that came after this hand made me think more in terms of the situation then the suit - thus it may not be entirely accurate but the processes are definitely represented as much as they can be in text.

For the record I think I played this hand incorrectly but obviously that isn't what matters here - what is more to the point is the processes involved in coming the the conclusions that I did - If the situation is varied slightly to negate some outs then the thought processes are solid ones to employ.

Most of the action in this hand took place on the flop - so I'm not going to really post the pre-flop action. The game is quite aggressive and the villain had been mixing his betting patterns / game up really well - so that's not something I chose to reflect on in this hand (I highly suspected amounts were being varied to either make me see a pattern that wasn't there and force a mistake or to develop a false pattern that I would fall prey to at some point in the game).

I was dealt :Kd:9d - not a brilliant hand for my position but a hand that was free to the flop as well as being relatively cheap for the Villain (Villain is in the SB and I'm in the BB).

The flop read :Td:Qd:4h and the Villain bets out $1200.00 into a pot that presently only stands at $250.00 and there are 5 runners. The over-bet doesn't mean much to me - as I said previously this player is not one you should read through betting patterns at all.

I knew that the villain liked his hand: Instantly communicative, dismissive of the actual cards being played around him and wanting to not appear to be a threat to bring more runners in - Once he thought he had me coming along for the ride he almost seemed uncomfortable about a second runner moving into the pot.

So what does this mean to me here? Obviously he liked his hand to some degree but he did not like the prospect of going up against multiple runners. This either suggests a flush or three a kind, perhaps two pair to me. This would indicate that his hand plays very well against one player but not against four (unless of course he is sitting on three of a kind and three or more of these runners are on the flush draw - thus removing a lot of outs for each of them and making the villain's hand a solid one indeed. Obviously something the villain couldn't possibly know and something which doesn't come into play in the reading process). I also read one of the other players in this pot for a possible flush draw (quite possible given his apparently deliberations and willingness to continue).

In this spot my mind naturally lead me to consider the possibility that I actually had 12 outs against a set: The nine remaining diamonds for a flush and after this the three remaining jacks for a straight (the :Jd can't be included twice here). When going over this a lot further I realized a fundamental flaw in my thought processes I'd never quite had before: I considered what he had now but didn't consider what he would have should one of these outs appear - this is suicide and I never used to do this but after my absence from poker it appears I have to work on this again.

If we take this into consideration then we have to remove the :4d and consider that he himself has six outs for a full house against my straight or flush should I make it on the next card off the pack whist I only have 11. Granted, 11 outs is plentiful but is it really so plentiful when facing a $1200.00 bet into a $250.00 pot with 6 outs against you even if you make your hand? Another consideration here is that if one of the other runners in this pot did have a flush draw then another two outs are removed - make it my 9 outs against a possible 6 outs once I hit my hand. Before I most certainly would have said yes but tonight I folded. Personally I'm still deliberating the hand in my head a lot and my opinions of it are certainly going to change a lot over time - but for now I consider the act of folding a mistake (so already I've changed my opinion).

[KurtSF]

If the question is "was folding a mistake?", then the answer depends entirely on stack sizes.

You're behind in the hand (you beat nothing right now) and will lose money on the call. The question is if you can make it upon later streets if you hit your hand. This is your "implied odds". How much money is left in you effective stacks, and how much of it is villain likely to put into the pot after you hit?

[kayaker]

In addition to stack sizes, as Kurt mentioned, you should also review your "out" counts.

If we are to assume Villain has a set:
A) You are correct in that you have 11 outs (the eight remaining diamonds minus the 4 and the 3 non-diamond Jacks). If one of the other players has diamonds, you have, at best, 9 outs. However, if the other players are staying in the hand, consider the possibility that they would only stay in with the nut flush draw. As this is more likely than staying in with 3d2d, you have to weight the odds in favor of your flush draw being dead.
In addition, what are the odds the other draws have AK and are looking for a J for Broadway. This kills your straight draw as well.
Any of these situations dramatically reduces your odds and should be considered.

B) You count Villain as having 6 outs for a redraw. This is incorrect. If Villain has a set on the flop, he has six outs to a Full House and another to Quads, giving him 7 total outs. If you make your hand on the turn without giving him a FH, he would then have 3 additional outs to pair the board. This is a total of 10 outs for a redraw.

With people left behind to act, you have exactly one out to the guaranteed nuts, the Jd. I think I would commonly be considered a bit of a nit, but I fold almost every time here. I don't like the odds (1.2:1 with unknown chance to increase via implied odds) to draw to a hand that might already be all but dead.

[Small Fry]

I'm assuming runners are players and there's 5 of you in this pot? So you're all in for $50 for a total pot of $250. And now you want to call a $1200 bet with 3 players still to act behind you with just King high. Fine...you have a draw... I'll give you two pure outs; A and J of diamonds. The rest do not give you the nuts and he could also have redraws. I'd discount your outs to about 7.

I'd want at least 6:1 odds and your getting about 1.2:1. You need to make up about 4.8 in implied odds, or about $5,760. So he needs at least this much behind. Then, assuming you hit on the turn can you now get this out of him.

Next problem is what are you going to do if a blank comes on the turn? Or if the turn is the 4d? In either scenario, if he bets again are you going to call again?

Lastly, the overbet is just absurd and if this is the way he plays then he will go broke or at least take a severe hit very soon. All you need is a good hand to set him up with. Wait for the absurd over bet and then push.

I fold this all day long. There are tons of better spots to get your money in.

[skelm]

Thanks for reading the giant wall of text guys, and the feedback I've got has been extremely thought provoking - I now agree that folding was the better option.

We've already identified that a key area for me to work on is odds counting - is there anything else in my thought process or analysis that I should look at working on?