is my statement factual?

[tjd2001]

Very interested in everyone’s take on not just the hand, but of my statement at the end:

Background: 1/2 NL at Trop in AC. Everyone involved in the hand is well stacked (having >$300 max buy-in). I have about $400; Villain has about $600 and, by my estimation, a very good player. We both have been at the table for about two hours.

By way of further background, my table image (to my chagrin, but by my own doing) was firmly established the rotation prior to the hand in question. I hadn’t played a hand in three rotations and I am dealt AKo in early position. UTG raises to $25 (slightly more than the $15 pre-flop raise that was standard for the session). I call. MP Calls. LP Raises to $60. UTG folds. I call. Player to my left goes all in (~$250). Re-raiser goes all in (~$350). I fold. Opponents show KK vs. QQ. The very next hand, nearly the same thing happens. UTG I am dealt AKo I raise to $20. One player in mid position calls. A player in late position raises to $50. I call. MP goes all in. Reraiser goes all-in. I fold again. And AGAIN I expose my cards out of anger. Opponents show KK vs QQ again.

Now comes the hand in question: I have As 3s UTG. 8 total limpers. Board comes 3h 3d 5s. Checks all around. Turn comes 8s. Both blinds Check. I Check. Player to my left bets $7. 5 callers back to me. I re-raise $25. Original better calls, as do 2 players in mid-postion and both the blinds. 6 players to the river and one of my few scare cards hits, the 5d. Small blind checks. Big blind bets $140. I fold. Folds all around. Villain exposes 8/9.

I would appreciate comments on my play (weak fold? Was my betting too passive, i.e. should I have done a better job at cutting down the field)

Also, my friend took exception to my following statement (I will follow later with my rational): “It was much easier for villain to make that bet (even with nothing), then for me to call his bet (with a full house).” Agree?

[AbreuTime]

[ QUOTE ]
“It was much easier for villain to make that bet (even with nothing), then for me to call his bet (with a full house).” Agree?

[/ QUOTE ]
Agree.

I would lead flop. Get more money in pot earlier (for example, your reraise on turn was too small).

[TheKitbag]

i lead flop or turn and reraise more on the turn. It depends on my read of the players whether i fold ... is anyone hanging around there with just A5, i know i wouldn't with that kinda action on the turn in a multiway pot. would the villain?

[chiTown22]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
“It was much easier for villain to make that bet (even with nothing), then for me to call his bet (with a full house).” Agree?

[/ QUOTE ]
For sure, don't really understand the argument. A betting range is always larger than a calling range.

[tjd2001]

I don’t think it really mattered if Villain was likely to be playing A/5 or any 5; What is important is the distinct possibility that any of the four other players in the hand could have held a 5. For the villain, playing out of the big blind, any 5 is entirely possible and it would seem that any 5 would also be priced in to that turn call as well. Similarly, A5; x5s, 58, are all hands possible for the MP players and the SB that see a un-raised flop and call the turn bet.

[tjd2001]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
“It was much easier for villain to make that bet (even with nothing), then for me to call his bet (with a full house).” Agree?

[/ QUOTE ]
For sure, don't really understand the argument. A betting range is always larger than a calling range.

[/ QUOTE ]


While this is usually the case, I don’t want to use such a blanket/generic explanation to cover my statement; plus I think the situation is a little more complex. It is way too obvious too say that there are more hands he can rationally make that bet with than hands that I can call with (after all, all hands fit into the betting category from rags to the nuts). What’s relevant is how ‘easy’ / ‘smart’ it is for him to make that move.

Here is my argument (which, in honesty, is even simpler prole logic):

Villain knows that I am not holding the 5 (unless, I have the extremely unlikely 5/3). In fact, it should be abundantly obvious to any good player than I am holding at least two spades and, most likely, a 3. Villain also knows that I will run away from pots (especially since I ‘don’t have much invested in this pot). I think its very simply, Villain knows of two people who aren’t holding a 5: leaving just three players to fold to his aggressive bet. I only know of one player who isn’t holding a 5 (myself). Throw in the added obvious logic of you statement (we all know that bluffers can’t call), my decision is much more ‘difficult’ than his.

[ManChild]

not betting this flop or turn is a gigantic leak

but your statement makes sense

[shpanko]

But flop, bet turn, fold river I guess, but it should never get to this point with this small a pot. On the turn you only raised to $25, wtf man? You have a monster put some [censored] money in the pot.