OESD played fast

[dcb777]

SA125 , I usually lead the flop. If you are running good which i hope you are your play is great as it turned out. When you are running bad you may wish you had lead the flop. What is your plan if you miss or pair on the river (This is the important question in the hand) It all seems easy when you hit

[GuyOnTilt]

This is a really bad hand.

[ QUOTE ]
Bn is predictable/transparent and I put him on a T, which he had.

[/ QUOTE ]
Stop putting people on specific hands after such little action. He limped after 2 limpers otb then raised a QTx flop. Putting him squarely on a T is retarded.

[ QUOTE ]
I 3 bet to get the BB and CO out if they had a weak Q...

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2.6 or so (Spanish keyboards don´t have tildes wtf) outs you gain when both the BB and/or CO have a weak Q AND they decide to fold it (extremely unlikely given your discriptions) AND the Button has exactly a T doesn´t nearly make up for extra SB + loss of implied odds because of your raise + loss of implied odds because of how drastically you cut the field. And even if your ill-conceived plan works and the two "dumb" players fold top pair on the flop here and you get it HU vs the Button´s 2nd pair, it´s very likely you´ll get called down a lot when you don´t improve and induce a fold when you do, as he´s very likely to fold if a K or J come.

[ QUOTE ]
...the same hand...

[/ QUOTE ]
Nobody´s folding an open-ender here.

[ QUOTE ]
...or a better J.

[/ QUOTE ]
There are only 2. Wrt KJ, see above. Wrt AJ, it´s extremely unlikely anybody holds that hand given the action and ridic unlikely that if they do they´ll fold it given your descriptions.

[ QUOTE ]

Having the T come off on the turn makes my hand easier to play with the lead. It's bet/call the turn and fold river UI.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, it´s not. It´s try to limit the number of bets you put in on this street since you have virtually no chance of taking it down and don´t have proper equity. Your strict read on the Button holding a T makes betting even more horrible, though it would´ve been bad on a turn blank anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
If I ch turn as he said I should've, and it goes bet/raise, now I'm looking at 2 cold again.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, that is a true statement. But it doesn´t address the real issues on the turn here, which is putting in the least amount of bets possible and, to a lesser extent, decreasing the probability of your opponents folding hands you don´t want them to. Check-call.

[ QUOTE ]
Calling station mode is something I'm looking to avoid.

[/ QUOTE ]
There was a time this thought existed in my head too. Now all I care about is making the best plays.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
After the button raise, I'd have checked/called the turn and led the river once my hand hit.

[/ QUOTE ]

That includes 2 cold I guess?

[SA125]

What's good about the forum is you'll get respones that range from "Standard/I play it the same,NH" to "Far too cute/This is really bad". When there's no consensus, there's room for discussion.

GOT, good to see you posting again. The depth of your analysis is welcome. In this case, I disagree with some of what you say, especially this [ QUOTE ]
"Stop putting people on specific hands after such little action. He limped after 2 limpers otb then raised a QTx flop. Putting him squarely on a T is retarded.".............."Your strict read on the Button holding a T makes betting even more horrible, though it would´ve been bad on a turn blank anyway."

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case, I didn't take the standard, cookie cutter line that others have said makes my hand obvious but is still the best play. Sometimes I do. The line I took here was based on my feel for it and trying to win the hand with other than a str if my action could create the opportunity to do so. You won't know unless you try it. It also does what you always want - make it harder for others to know where you're coming from.

I appreciate the feedback, both for and against. Tx for the responses.

[Howard Beale]

[ QUOTE ]
It also does what you always want - make it harder for others to know where you're coming from.

I appreciate the feedback, both for and against. Tx for the responses.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd have played this particular hand slower than you did but I agree with this part completely and it's something I'm always trying to accomplish. And I found the discussion interesting as well.

[GuyOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
The line I took here was based on my feel for it and trying to win the hand with other than a str if my action could create the opportunity to do so.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand that. I´m contending that your "feel" for what was the best line was wrong. I´d do a calc if I felt it was close, but I don´t think it would end up being close at all.

[ QUOTE ]
You won't know unless you try it.

[/ QUOTE ]
This line of reasoning could be applied to all sorts of bad plays, but it doesn´t change the fact that they are still bad plays.

[ QUOTE ]
It also does what you always want - make it harder for others to know where you're coming from.


[/ QUOTE ]
I come from the belief that the goal isn´t to confuse your opponents, but to make the most EV. If it´s particularly close, making it harder for your opponents to play against you in the future might be a deciding factor, but here it isn´t.

The most blatant mistake you made in this hand, imo, was betting the turn, which you quoted as something you "especially" disagree with. I´d like to hear you explain why betting the turn has a higher EV than checking.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It also does what you always want - make it harder for others to know where you're coming from.


[/ QUOTE ]
I come from the belief that the goal isn´t to confuse your opponents, but to make the most EV. If it´s particularly close, making it harder for your opponents to play against you in the future might be a deciding factor, but here it isn´t.

[/ QUOTE ]

GoT is right, as usual.

it's a 15/30 game. even if there's one or two people at the table who are paying attention to how you play, it's unlikely that they have any clue how to adjust properly. you really shouldn't be worrying about how your opponents are going to play in the future until you're playing much higher - like 10 times higher. and even then its a pretty small consideration.

just remember what your opponents know about you, and apply that knowledge when the time comes. don't give up obvious present EV for a table image that might have a very small effect on how your opponents will play in the future - particularly in a low stakes live ring game.

[jskills]

The only problem with the flop check/3-bet (aside from the awkward spot you end up in OOP on the turn, but that can't be helped) is that you risk losing the BB and CO when you face them with 2 bets.

I like calling the flop raise much more here. The flop is rainbow, so you're not concerned about the flush, so there is no reason the play this hand fast.

Unless of course you believe it would be good to lose the BB and CO and take the hand away from the button on the turn somehow?

Anyhow - betting into a paired board and multiple opponents on the turn really seems sketchy. Just call the flop and call the turn ...

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
The flop is rainbow, so you're not concerned about the flush, so there is no reason the play this hand fast.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you're fastplaying flops with an OESD because you're concerned about a flush draw, you suck at poker.

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
The most blatant mistake you made in this hand, imo, was betting the turn, which you quoted as something you "especially" disagree with. I´d like to hear you explain why betting the turn has a higher EV than checking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cliff notes -

I'm not saying the hand should be played that way everytime. Disagreeing with the line is fine. But saying it should never be played that way and will always be -EV is ridiculous.

The turn was very likely to get bet and probably raised. Considering I'm not folding, saying you're sure ch'ing is definitely more +EV than betting is equally ridiculous. You're taking a gray area like this and absolutely quantifying it. Come on.

Long version -

You said before that it's retarded to put an opponent on a specific hand, like I did with him on a T here. Then you say it's wrong to bet the turn if I in fact put him on one. It's contradictory and doesn't take into account adjusting in the hand.

I was pretty sure of my read of the Bn with a T. But when the T came off on the turn, I thought maybe as you said I was wrong.

I had represented a big hand on the flop. I figure I probably need my str now to win and should have some outs for it. It's still a 4 way pot on the turn. I'm calling a bet and a raise so I bet.

You say ch'ing is written in stone always right? Come on.