I played this terribly

Hectorjelly

Here is a hand in which I made the classic mistake of deciding early on what cards my opponent had, and not considering any other alternatives.

I got dragged down to the merrion to play the 100in last night, I was doing fine and had increased my chips from 4000 to about 6000 before this hand came up. I had just moved tables and didnt have much of a read on the villain. Anyway, I limp with KQs in LP after one or two other limpers, small blind completes and the big blind checks. The flop comes up K72 all hearts. Checked to me & I bet the pot. The villain thinks for a while and calls. A 4s came up and he checked to me. I bet the pot again, and he looked real uncomfortable. Looked at the board for ages, looked at me etc etc. If he had the flush here he was putting on a master performance. Finally he counts his chips out and calls.
He has about 2k left, and I have 3k.

So here I have narrowed him down to:
A king with a crap kicker, (worse than mine anyway)
A flush (very unlikely, I would expect a lot more confidence and possibly a raise)
The naked ace of hearts, (I would think this is unlikely unless he is a terrible player, he didnt look terrible)

The last cards was another rag, and he checked again. Here I decided that he had a K, and that he had called me up to this point assuming that I was on the flush draw, or just bluffing. I also thought that an all in here would look like a failed bluff and he would have to call with the K. I move all in, and again he takes an eternity to call. Finally he calls and turns over 27 for a flopped two pair.

For some reason I never even considered two pair or trips.

CoD

funny thing is if anyone hadda raised the preflop even a little, the bb wudda folded straight away, lol

Aces Suited

Given that he was allowed get to the flop, I think he played two weak pairs quite well. You were blinded by a big pair with a good kicker, a common enough mistake. Don't beat yourself up about it. :cool:

Corben Dallas

Would have said weak 2 pair, or the Aces with a low kicker. Hard luck, If the game was NL then u could have pushed him off possibly, then again he might have chased u with 2 pair.

Thats another thing in Casinos, fair enuff all players should get adequate time to think over their call, weigh up the options etc. but some players take the michael, heard stories in the fitz of players taking 4-5mins b4 making a decesion.

Surely the Dealer should (after a suitable amount of time -maybe 2 mins) tell the player make yur decision etc. If not then players who regularly do this are using this as a strategy, ie wait that long and see if u give away any tells etc, which is not very sporting.

Wonder if anyone else have ideas on 'time out play'?

DapperGent

Was The Villain either small blind or big blind? If so I think you probably should have considered him being all over that flop when he calls your first bet.

If he had limped in with 72 I don't think you should reproach yourself too much. That's just terrible play on his part. Though of course in that scenario you could reasonably be putting him on a flopped set - most likely of twos with his hesitancy being put down to the flush on the flop.

It's a tough situtation, but for myself I wouldn't have being putting that many chips behind top pair queen kicker with that board. Well at least I think I would have attempted to check it down after he called your pot bet on the flop. You would have then been in a position to judge whether calling his bets was a winner or not.

Though of course there was always the possibility of him moving all in if you checked on the turn which would really have put it up to you. To my mind a check on the turn is the right move here. If he bets very heavily into you after calling a pot bet on the flop you would suspect you were behind, even if you couldn't quite see how.

Given what he was holding I think there's a good chance he would have checked it down to the river, meaning you would lose but not too much. He's desperately hoping you don't have a flush and doesn't want to lose his shirt on the hand but at the same time he's in a strong position with regard to a opponent who doesn't hold hearts so is likely to call bets but not make them.

As I said it's a tough situation, but tourneys are all about not putting chips at risk unnecessarily. I think the all in on the river is the only properly poor move, the only hand that will call is one that has you beat. He might be afraid you've slow played the flush but in calling your bets already he's already shown that he doesn't believe you have it. Having said all that you'd probably (probably) have pushed me off the pot with your pot bet on the turn. But that's just cos I'm all weak and passive.

Hear that everyone? Dapper is weak/passive! Bet into him when he checks!

DeVore

Corben Dallas wrote:

Thats another thing in Casinos, fair enuff all players should get adequate time to think over their call, weigh up the options etc. but some players take the michael, heard stories in the fitz of players taking 4-5mins b4 making a decesion.

Surely the Dealer should (after a suitable amount of time -maybe 2 mins) tell the player make yur decision etc. If not then players who regularly do this are using this as a strategy, ie wait that long and see if u give away any tells etc, which is not very sporting.

Wonder if anyone else have ideas on 'time out play'?

I take quite a while sometimes to consider the possibilities (or look like I am doing odds etc if I have a monster). I probably take the longest and I've never taken even close to 4-5 minutes. Some people in the Fitz think its feckin' speed poker we're playing and if you take longer then 10 seconds either call clock or start moaning.

F*ck them.

Anyone who is new or wants to take time should, its your perogative and you shouldnt play into the hands of the "time bullies". If someone calls clock on you to bully, take your minute entirely, regardless of when you come to your decision. Its worked wonderfully for me!


As for the hand in question, I would probably have stopped pushing and tried to either check it down or outright bluff knowing my top pair wasnt good enough. I think you have to presume he was either drawing to the flush (in which case you arent getting any more chips from him) or has tripped up or two pair. I dont think you played it that badly as you could easily have lost him with the bets on flop and turn. The all in might have been a bit risky though... God knows I've played far worse then that though!

DeV.
DeV.

Hectorjelly

DapperGent wrote:

Was The Villain either small blind or big blind? If so I think you probably should have considered him being all over that flop when he calls your first bet.

If he had limped in with 72 I don't think you should reproach yourself too much. That's just terrible play on his part. Though of course in that scenario you could reasonably be putting him on a flopped set - most likely of twos with his hesitancy being put down to the flush on the flop.

It's a tough situtation, but for myself I wouldn't have being putting that many chips behind top pair queen kicker with that board. Well at least I think I would have attempted to check it down after he called your pot bet on the flop. You would have then been in a position to judge whether calling his bets was a winner or not.

Though of course there was always the possibility of him moving all in if you checked on the turn which would really have put it up to you. To my mind a check on the turn is the right move here. If he bets very heavily into you after calling a pot bet on the flop you would suspect you were behind, even if you couldn't quite see how.

Given what he was holding I think there's a good chance he would have checked it down to the river, meaning you would lose but not too much. He's desperately hoping you don't have a flush and doesn't want to lose his shirt on the hand but at the same time he's in a strong position with regard to a opponent who doesn't hold hearts so is likely to call bets but not make them.

As I said it's a tough situation, but tourneys are all about not putting chips at risk unnecessarily. I think the all in on the river is the only properly poor move, the only hand that will call is one that has you beat. He might be afraid you've slow played the flush but in calling your bets already he's already shown that he doesn't believe you have it. Having said all that you'd probably (probably) have pushed me off the pot with your pot bet on the turn. But that's just cos I'm all weak and passive.

Hear that everyone? Dapper is weak/passive! Bet into him when he checks!

Good analysis, I dont know if anybody would call the bet on the river with just a K. He was on the big blind so I cant blame his preflop play!

Hectorjelly

Aces Suited wrote:

Given that he was allowed get to the flop, I think he played two weak pairs quite well. You were blinded by a big pair with a good kicker, a common enough mistake. Don't beat yourself up about it. :cool:

I think he played it pretty badly, bottom two pair on a suited flop is not a hand to slow play.

DeVore

I'd agree. I think he played bottom two pair badly as well. He should either fold or end the hand asap. Certainly he shouldnt give you the odds to draw a heart (he doesnt know you arent flushing, and you might be by accident anyway!).

DeV.

bohsman

DeV on a wednesday and sunday night we effectively are playing speed poker, with blinds doubling every ten minutes I have no problem calling the clock on you its not to bully its just the damn blinds

DapperGent

bohsman wrote:

DeV on a wednesday and sunday night we effectively are playing speed poker, with blinds doubling every ten minutes

True dat. Excessive tank time with the crazy 20 game blind structure is hella annoying. Especially when it's Dev.

DeVore

Rules are rules. You play speed poker if you like but by the rules I'm allowed time to think. The truth is I dont take that much time usually. Also there are a few ignorant cnuts in there that feel they can bully new people into making mistakes and that really bugs me so I get them to target me and frankly I could care less what they say then.

DeV.

DapperGent

In the twenty game if anyone gets annoyed at someone going into the tank I don't think the tanker is doing anything wrong, any irritation is simply a refelection on the silly blind structure rather than the tankee.

DeVore

Yeah but there is one older taller bloke in there I've seen blow a gasket about someone taking no more then 45 seconds and he started barking at him. What was worse was he wasnt playing in the hand, he wasnt even playing AT ALL! He was dealing for the table! I nearly went accross the table at him and we havent spoken since. It just gets my goat. The blinds structure is poor. We all know that. I've complained on these very boards about it. It shouldnt be used as an excuse to bully people though. Argue for the rules to be changed ... either less time to think or more time to play but saying that I have to play by some imaginary "new" set of "agreed" rules is like saying that aces will never get cracked because they just *shouldnt*.

DeV.

DapperGent

There are some total cúnts that play in the fitz alright, but at any given table they're usually vastly outnumbered by sound people. Thinking back I've seen some bad behaviour but I've never seen it not shouted down by others at the table, either by other people at the start or sometimes lately by one or other of the "boards crew". Which is all to the good.

Funniest bit at table so far has to be one of the older ladies going through Faux-Senile for being a prick.