Semi Interesting 2/5 hand from Rio 9K pot

[LA_Price]

Game is playing fast and loose with multiple players on tilt. The table appears as such

Seat 1 unknown-(500)
Seat 2 - Loose Passive Irish Guy- 8000- won most of this money calling down seat 3 on a kT22x board with AAxx
Seat 3- Tilting LAG chubby Verision of Dr. Evil-(8000)-
he's LAG before the flop and someont passive after. There was a hand we played a few days before where I opened from mp with an AAxx hand and he reraised on the button. We were really deep, heads up, and I didn't know how he played at the time so I just called. Board cam AT2 7 2 or something and it went went check check on all streets, so he reraises more than and doesn't bet after the flop unless he hits
seat 4- semi loose predictable player- 1300
Seat 5- unknown -500
Seat 6- Tilting older Irish guy- (1000)
Seat 7 -Tilting American guy -(2000)
Seat 8- Me(2500)

Probably one of the better games I've ever sat in
Blinds are 2/5 and its straddled to 10 by seat 3 on the button

Pre-flop
Seat 4 calls the 10. Seat 5 folds. Tilting older Irish calls as does the tilting american.

I look down to see a [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]a [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

I make it 60 to go(i've been raising a fair amount with a lot of different hands)

seat 1 folds. Loose passive Irish guy in seat 2 calls the 60 and LAG tilting Dr. Evil makes it 200 on the button. Seat 4 calls the 200 and it's folded back to me.

I reraise to 890, which puts about 33% of my stack in. Loose passive Irish Guy Calls as well as the button and the sb also calls. 4 to the flop with about 3600 in the middle.

Flop comes J [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Seat 4 checks. I push for about 1600. Loose passive Irish Guy calls and button thinks and goes all in.

Short stacked sb calls for 300

passed back to the Irish guy who thinks for 5 minutes or so and passes.

There was a pretty big commotion around the table during all of this and it took awhile to finish the hand.

I don't know what the loose passive irish guy had nor do I know what the sb had.

Button had 6 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 6 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

Just wanted to share the biggest pot I'd been in for awhile.

We dealt it once and the turn was the 6 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

River was(in white)....... <font color="white"> 7h giving button the straight flush </font>

My thoughts on everyones play.

Sb- Awful on every street. and I don't even know what he had
Me- Well on every street
Passive Irish guy- awful on every street
Button- Pre-flop re-raise was bad, especially given the hand from the previous day where I learned he reraises more than aces and plays passively post flop unless he hits, but post flop played well. Albeit he mainly benefited from the passive Irish guy and sb's bad play.

I didn't tilt after, played a few more interesting hands and won a couple hundred and left when I got tired. One of those night where there's a huge disconnect betweeen your decisions and results.

[Silent A]

[ QUOTE ]
Just wanted to share the biggest pot I'd been in for awhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right before this I was thinking, "Why TF is this guy posting this hand in this forum?"

( <font color="white">nh, b turn, b river - thought you pulled it out for a sec </font> )

[LA_Price]

Yeah it's a pretty low content hand. I'll post more a few more interesting ones in a couple of days.

Acutally now that I think about it the sb played well post flop too.

Probably would have been a more interesting hand if button had not reraised before flop. That deep and given the previous hand I probably would have had some tough decisions.

[BluffTHIS!]

LA,

Three questions:

1) Do you really believe you were right to reraise pre getting only 33% of your stack in, when even against slightly lagish tilting players they will mostly just smoothcall with the resulting multiway flop that actually happened, instead of allowing you to get allin pre?

2) As played pre, if your best play on the flop was to open push, why was it? As opposed to checking and always calling.

3) Again as played pre, if the board had instead come J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], what would you have done and why?

[LA_Price]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Do you really believe you were right to reraise pre getting only 33% of your stack in, when even against slightly lagish tilting players they will mostly just smoothcall with the resulting multiway flop that actually happened, instead of allowing you to get allin pre?

[/ QUOTE ]

When the sb calls yes I do think i'm correct as his stack size will take away alot of the buttons pure bluffs. Also this player was very LAG preflop and tilting, so he doesn't even necessarily have 4 coordinated cards and my Aces are very premium. Also as I mentioned his play is not as loose aggressive after the flop so I can't guarantee getting in a good c/r on some hands I might want to. Plus i'm out of position after the flop so raising takes away alot of his positional advantage, while to some extent I get the advantage of the initiative. If any of these factors were different I would probably play them differently, as I have done on occasion.

[ QUOTE ]
2) As played pre, if your best play on the flop was to open push, why was it? As opposed to checking and always calling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pushing is better because hands will call me that shouldn't, but might think they should. I'm thinking very weak one pair plus some other random cards here. Also players are not loose aggressive after the flop so I can't really guarantee they would bet any pure bluffs because of the small blinds stack size.


[ QUOTE ]
3) Again as played pre, if the board had instead come J 5 4, what would you have done and why?

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent Question. I think i would need to turn on the little randomizer in my head and push some, check and call some, and check and fold some of the time. With all 4 of them calling always pushing would give them too high of implied odds. Always checking and calling would not force them into making very many bad decisions, as they were passive postflop. There would also be some flops where I would check and fold occasionally if they bet. I'm thinking if the flop was something like KKK, QQQ, JJJ. I'd check and call some and check and fold some. I'd be stuck on percentages because its a very extreme circumstance that I'm in maybe a couple of times a year.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) Do you really believe you were right to reraise pre getting only 33% of your stack in, when even against slightly lagish tilting players they will mostly just smoothcall with the resulting multiway flop that actually happened, instead of allowing you to get allin pre?

[/ QUOTE ]

When the sb calls yes I do think i'm correct as his stack size will take away alot of the buttons pure bluffs. Also this player was very LAG preflop and tilting, so he doesn't even necessarily have 4 coordinated cards and my Aces are very premium. Also as I mentioned his play is not as loose aggressive after the flop so I can't guarantee getting in a good c/r on some hands I might want to. Plus i'm out of position after the flop so raising takes away alot of his positional advantage, while to some extent I get the advantage of the initiative. If any of these factors were different I would probably play them differently, as I have done on occasion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Premium or not, the value of aces greatly decreases in multiway pots.



And 33% of your stack in preflop is an uncomfortable amount.

The real question is if you just call at $200 will your EV be just the same as the way you played it committing a lot more preflop.

Where are your opponents making their biggest errors?

[LA_Price]

Troll,

Firstly i would dispute the absolutist nature of your graph. Showing a graph like this neglects a huge aspect of poker, the decisions your oppoents make about the cards they are given. Your graph is simply about card distributions, and forgets the fact that people can make really bad decisions during the hand(like the passive irish guy who put in 1600 of dead money basically).

Remember also that when I made the second raise I didn't know there was going to be 3 other players. That was the absolute most there could be. There is some possibility I get this heads up or just the button and sb call. And even with your graph there's no scenario that makes my move worse than breakeven due to the simple card distributions. I would argue that my opponents would do even worse overall than the randomly dealt out card distributions.

Concluding I would say that the worst this move could be is better than breakeven, and it could be much better than your graph could ever describe because of the bad decisions players make.

[Ribbo]

The value of aces goes up in multiway pots relative to the size of the pot, and that's all that matters.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]
Troll,

Firstly i would dispute the absolutist nature of your graph. Showing a graph like this neglects a huge aspect of poker, the decisions your oppoents make about the cards they are given. Your graph is simply about card distributions, and forgets the fact that people can make really bad decisions during the hand(like the passive irish guy who put in 1700 of dead money basically).

Remember also that when I made the second raise I didn't know there was going to be 3 other players. That was the absolute most there could be. There is some possibility I get this heads up or just the button and sb call. And even with your graph there's no scenario that makes my move worse than breakeven due to the simple card distributions. I would argue that my opponents would do even worse overall than the randomly dealt out card distributions.

Concluding I would say that the worst this move could be is better than breakeven, and it could be much better than your graph could ever describe because of the bad decisions players make.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main question isn't whether or not your play was breakeven (I'm sure it was better), the question is comparing it to calling $200 (or maybe even raising to just $450 or $500). By getting so much in preflop, you are pretty much pricing yourself in (correctly) on the flop.

Yes people make bad decisions, but wouldn't you like them to do so with you risking less money? You counted the amount of money everyone had at the table. You know how to manipulate pot size and players. Can your opponents do this?

Minor points. The graph is versus hand distributions of random cards (which is what bad players will play), you can't possibly guess what bad players are playing there? Can you guess what even good players will play? So the most you can do preflop is play against distributions. All the graph demonstrates is you losing your edge as the number of people seeing the flop increases. One can also see the difference in the earn rate of Aces in games where an average of 4-5 people see the flop as opposed to 2-3.

[LA_Price]

I see no problem with pricing myself in when I'm out of position. It's basically taking a taking tactical maneuvers away from my opponents. I'm not afraid of swings either. I think I handle them better(not perfectly) than the majority of my opponents. I have to try and get it headsup, and even if I don't i'm still fine. Is there anything wrong with playing a hand in way that you can't really be outplayed?

[ QUOTE ]
One can also see the difference in the earn rate of Aces in games where an average of 4-5 people see the flop as opposed to 2-3.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would dispute this assumtion, based on your graph. Again this is an epistemological problem i have with your application of "knowledge". The variance may go up yes, but the earn rate may also go up. 3 people making a 100 dollar mistake is the same as one person making a 300 dollar mistake.

Firstly your graph implies that your opponents will play with perfect knowledge of my holding(What suits and other cards do i have?), while in reality they will not. You are right that I also do not no there, but I have already priced myself in, so really the decisions are theirs.

Seconly a hot and cold graph of hand distributions does not describe how the hands play, and the the betting situtions and decisions my opponents are facing. It gives some sort of idea of how a hand does on "average" when in fact many situations they will be confronted with are very specific and extreme, and I think bad players make bad calls and get outplayed. Again I'm not trying to trump my own play, rather their bad play. I'm also cautioning you in too much belief in graphs and your interpretation of them. There are many ways in which they lack the rigor in describing reality.