Live strategic discussion : Post your point!

[BlackLava]

Hi,

I've added card smilies so worth testing it
Here is a "classic" hand we can face on free chips tables, I think it's interesting because it is describing the common average level of play at the tables.
(It's a fake example but I bet that's matching a reality)

We are on a NL 100 play money holdem table with 8 players seated at the table... Everyone is having about the same stack which is a deep one around 30.000 chips (300 big blinds is very deep).
We will name "Hero" the player we will follow here and "villains" the others.

Hero is seated only since 10 hands and the table is loose but not totally bingo oriented, he has played only 3 hands so far and folded after flop, there was a crazy 72 all-in preflop and 3 familly pots plus some "outside odds" flush draws flat call but nothing more so far.
Hero stack is 28.000
To simplify here : all other players got between 25.000 and 35.000

Hero is CO (cut off=just on the right of button) and is dealt
UTG (under the gun=just on the left of big blind) player limps
3 players fold (wow)
Hero call the BB for 100
Button limps
SB fold (and type in the chat box "I hate that site")
BB check
(the player who've gone all in with 72 has folded, you have no special reading on others here)

Pot is 450 so far... Here comes the flop :

UTG villain check
Hero bets 400 thinking he needs to test his kicker and push out flush draws
Button fold
BB fold
UTG villain call

Pot is 1250 now

Turn card :

Villain check
Hero thinks villain is most likely drawing flush and then bets half pot which is 600
Villain call

Pot is now 2450 (26.900 remaining for hero and about the same for villain)

River :

Villain bets 8000
Hero calls thinking that bet sounds like a bluff from a player chasing flush.

Villain shows


Hero type : "you have no right to call me on flop and turn with that!"
Villain : "you have paid me! I've called because I knew you would pay!"
...And we have another war on chat

What is your point about that hand and which advize would you give to Hero and Villain here?

[Uyto]

I think vilain play very well this hand, Or just very bad and have lot of luck.

Before the flop he paid the Blind this is not really good with the worst hand on poker.

But on the flop the seven is here. Hero bet, with a AS low kicker, vilain call, on this moment Hero must know vilain have something. But he bet again on turn, and vilain call again. No Raise before the flop vilain must have A7 or 7T at this moment.

River 2
this card is nothing because hero must think his AS is not strong at this moment, if we look better.

Vilain call on flop call on turn
Hero have just a AS low kicker

pot is 2400, and the bet is a huge over bet 8 000
the call is insane...because vilain play good his hand, never raise generally a player who do that show a great hand on the showdown.

But vilain may be play this hand bad and just lucky...but I think the big mistake have done by Hero especially on river.

[OP66fozzy]

Villain is an idiot for playing 72 in the first place.

Hero is almost as big an idiot for playing an Ace with such a bad kicker.

Anything that happens after that, they deserve for playing such bad hands in the first place.

[CaptainSandy]

Poor play from both players.
If villain was BB then fair play but he wasn't; once he hit 7 then he's gonna call especially as his initial bet was with 7,2.
Hero should only be playing A3 suited to hit a flush so to call a huge final bet was madness.

[BlackLava]

Thanks for your points, I think too there are errors from both Villain and Hero there, other point of vue are welcome
Uyto thinks Villain could be a smart player aiming for implied odds, I think the NL 100 free chips tables aren't including a lot of those but perhaps it could be possible anyway don't know as it's a fake hand all vision of the game is possible

[sa11y69]

Originally Posted by fozzy

Villain is an idiot for playing 72 in the first place.

Hero is almost as big an idiot for playing an Ace with such a bad kicker.

Anything that happens after that, they deserve for playing such bad hands in the first place.

i agree with fozzy (for once ) but would have to pity the hero as his hand was at least suited...i hate the villain already as he won with 72 off...anytime i've had 72 on a big blind and won with it i've always been embarrassed when it comes to showing my winning hand...i would never play this hand unless it was on a blind..(probably why i lose so much) a good poker player knows that patience is a big part of the game...its becoming rare now to get a decent game with decent players where you know they wouldnt play with such rubbish

[SternSwiss]

I am reading this quickly, but it seems that pot preflop amounts to 450

With 3 limpers and a SB paid, the SB could call to see a cheap flop (pay 50 for an anticipated 450)

Hero playing his suited rag ace is debatable but since he holds a late position and no one raised, it is not necesary totally idiotic.

Villain, well limping UTG with 72 is an odd move. 72 is played sometimes by some of the best players in the world. But an UTG limp is a tad random coz you just bet on hitting flop/later, not on putting pressure on the table by raising from early position (which is an aggressive move that is risky and where one needs to know how to fold later)

Flop betting (pot = 850):

400 is a reasonable bet for hero. A bit high if only contested by one opponent but since table is loose and people might chase a flush draw with wrong percentage it would make the message clearer ("I hit" you are going to have to pay a wrong amount if you are chasing).

But note that since 2+1 people more have to speak after him, if one calls, say with a pair of 10 or another ace, then the odds start to look good for callling a flush draw (400 for 1250) with 2 cards to come (say villain, who checked on the flop).

Calling from Villain sort of makes sense. Hero's could have been be a probe bet. Problem in calling and not raising is that Villain gets no extra information on Hero's hand. Calling 400 to get 850 with bottom pair is a choice to be made, but I find it weak for the lack of extra information reason (and the quite risky factor of facing an ace or a 10)


Turn bet (pot = 1250):

Now Hero bets 600. He is thus offering 600/1850 pot odds which is 32% in case someone is chasing flush. Weaker bet than flop one if he is concerned chasing flush draw hands (but still not offering the odds), same logics applies.

Villain could know he is beaten so far, but can't be sure. His low pair could also hold if hero just made a probe bet and sticks to his strategy. Odds are much more interesting here than after flop, so a call is less odd of a move. But still no information on hero's hand (since preflop was limping there is not much info around)

River bet (pot 2450)

Villain's bet is huge. Now the main reason I see for doing that (on a losse table) is to make the opponent believe you want to chase him away with nothing while being convinced the double pair will hold. But it is a bit pushed.

We had no information on players read of each other. But that could make sense.

Calling 8000? In itself I find the move stupid. It is only based on observations and tells that you might decide to take a chance against a raw bluff, but there are so many possible reasonable holdings with which UTG opening could have been made that will take you down (K 10, JQ, A7, 77, 22, etc) + the few random ones (eh... 7 2), that the move is highly unadvisable in my book.



So a rahter odd hand.... like we see quite a few over here.

I read and posted quickly, btw. Hope it makes some sense and is not toally idiotic.

[BlackLava]

Right Stern, it's 450 oops, fixing it, thanks

[roo27]

with him only limping till he hit 2 pair i think Villain played his bad cards the best he could and hero should never of called the fianl bet with only ace rag but this seems to be a comen hand on the low tables apart form there was no 7 way all in lol

[BlackLava]

Thanks SternSwiss for taking time to dissecate the hand, it's the way to go to understand clearly what happened for sure
Anyway I agree with others too : 72 UTG isn't playable at all on such table... Could be possible to call at a very high poker level when you perfectly knows your opponents but even there it's a raise which is needed and not a limp most of the time.
You could limp like that if you are facing a full table of totally newbie players when you know you will steal a lot from hitting 2 pairs and got some kind of odds from the very deep stacks implicated... But otherwise I see that as a crazy limp too (and the chance of hitting 2 pairs is too low to talk directly about preflop odds even with 10 newbies calling you, you can only aim for implied odds... There is a difference between your odd of winning and your odd of hitting "something playable" after flop!)

My point is we are having 2 different kind of misplay here : One about calling fishy all the way (classic) and one about reading a book and trying to apply that at the wrong table and without experience
What's sure is SternSwiss book was better than hero's one

Originally Posted by roo27

this seems to be a comen hand on the low tables apart form there was no 7 way all in lol

yes I've tried to recreate the feeling at the average play money tables
It's good to focus on what is really happenning on tables!

[MrRoyal]

I think both played badly. Hero played a very marginal hand at a loose table and ended up having to play a dodgy flop. Trying to push off draws seems a good idea but having been called why then put the other player on a flush draw on the turn? If we're assuming the other player is going to make a sensible call then we should put them on holding an A or T (or maybe a KQ, KJ or QJ in hearts). Having already tested the water on the flop and got called hero would be best to check the turn to avoid committing more chips to the pot. If there is then a big bet from villain on the river it becomes an easy fold for the loss of 500 chips rather than over 9000 lost by hero.

Villain, of course, got lucky. Implied odds aren't relevant either. They only came about because hero played badly an made a bad call. Villain will only hit this sort of hand playing 72 about 1 time in 20. To break even just for their blinds they would need implied odds of 20:1. If hero had played this hand better then villain would likely have made 700-1200 chips which is nowhere near the implied odds. If we add to that the chips they will also waste making bad calls on the flop and overbetting when they hit (if hero holds AK, AT, A7 or A2 then they likely call and villain loses another 8000 chips) then the implied odds needed become huge.

[Grovewilks]

i think most agree that to play 72 is poor but especially UTG as the potential of another raiser has got to worry you. I think i would only look at 72 if i was small blind and there had been a lot of folds or it was a bet for value as BB against a lowstacker.

The 8000 call with a pair of aces was again strange but it would depend on my knowledge of the bet maker - which in this case was minimal so i would have to have got off it

[jOYa]

I think that Vivian have 50$ on table and other poor guy
had 5$, and thats why Vivian play small pair like that,
just fishing.
If y play by the books all the time on cash tables not good,
guys will read you very fast, and play weak starting hands against you.

Btw, lava, 1 question for you:
Are the showing cards on cash tables donk or good move?

[BlackLava]

I'm not sure to understand the story about $50 and $5, my example was about play money tables

about showing cards on cash tables I would say it's a weapon only if you really need to change your image at the table, otherwise it's an error
What's your point?

thanks to Grovewilks and MrRoyal, good adds too hehe

[roo27]

id say you should only show your cards on a cash game to promote the opersit of your game stile eg if your a lose player only show when you have had the nuts and if your a very tight player only show on that very rair ocation when you were bluffing this will make you a lot harder to read

[jOYa]

Originally Posted by BlackLava

I'm not sure to understand the story about $50 and $5, my example was about play money tables

about showing cards on cash tables I would say it's a weapon only if you really need to change your image at the table, otherwise it's an error
What's your point?

thanks to Grovewilks and MrRoyal, good adds too hehe

Sorry, i just modify story closer to my world now,
cash tables for real money, because its much harder to play
there with real money then chips.

Thanks for advice about showing cards.

Think like y roo, m8.

[DeanReeves66]

Villain, well limping UTG with 72 is an odd move. 72 is played sometimes by some of the best players in the world. But an UTG limp is a tad random coz you just bet on hitting flop/later, not on putting pressure on the table by raising from early position (which is an aggressive move that is risky and where one needs to know how to fold later)

(quote)

I aggre Stern but sumtimes it can be a stong move when sum1 limps UTG, it sumtimes looks stong. the player thats UTG could be holding a monster and hoping for a raise so he can re raise. but in this case he hasnt he has 7 2 and no raises.. but if there was a raise and the villain re raises, im sure that he would make hero fold with A3 and win the hand

[SternSwiss]

Of course I agree, Dean it is definitely a possible move.

Though the risk (especially here) is having a family pots and lots of contestants which might hit on a lame flop, drwoning the powerhouse. And in lava's indication, he stated that hero had seen 3 family pots out of the 10 hands he observed, which is a rahter high percentage.

[SternSwiss]

Gohh, I like that we discuss a bit of strategy here.

LAva: you should propose more (I guess you are too busy and was just making a point relative to the "bingo" threads)

[DeanReeves66]

o yeah i missed that bit m8 lol i come across players like the villain all the time and they allways seem to get lucky like that. HATE the play with 7 2 HATE bingo players and HATE the river lol