Question for Holdem poker players

[SpurinDallas]

There's a reason you're a waitress.

I waited tables for 9 months 4 years ago. off.

[Jimcs50]

Yeah, I thought about it afterwards whether I should have folded. The only hand I really had him on was maybe 9-J. The guy got lucky to hit his flop, I just ended up paying him off.

I think Manny was saying that the bad part of your play was not 3 betting him preflop. If you make it $85-$95 to go, he probably goes away, unless you both have over a grand in front of you, because he was not getting the correct implied odds to call if you have KK or AA.

[Jimcs50]

I waited tables for 9 months 4 years ago. off.

Hey, I put myself through school working in restaurants for 10 years, nothing wrong with that.

[SpurinDallas]

I think Manny was saying that the bad part of your play was not 3 betting him preflop. If you make it $85-$95 to go, he probably goes away, unless you both have over a grand in front of you, because he was not getting the correct implied odds to call if you have KK or AA.

Yeah, after that on the way home, I knew should have gone over the top, and risk winning a little rather than lose it all. Lesson learned.

[SpurinDallas]

Hey, I put myself through school working in restaurants for 10 years, nothing wrong with that.

I know, I had to do it while I was out of work for a while. OJ is just an asshole

[Jimcs50]

Speaking of cracking aces, Let me tell you about a hand I played earlier in that same session.


New guy comes in buys in for $400, he sits and does not play a hand for 10 mins, there is a straddle, I have Jd 9h, I call the straddle, this new guy raises to $55, there are two callers, so I call, because I am putting this guy on a monster and I'm getting over 3-1 to call right now.

Flop:

7d 8d 10d



Unless someone flopped a flush, I have the nuts and a draw to uber nuts.

First player bets $65, I raise to $225, the guy who was preflop raiser goes all in for $345, the first guy who led out folds, I snap call.

The guy shows Ah Ad, turn is a blank, river is 9d

The guy whoops, and I say, sorry, I have the straight flush.



They guy stares at the board and gets up and leaves.

[SpurinDallas]

Speaking of cracking aces, Let me tell you about a hand I played earlier in that same session.


New guy comes in buys in for $400, he sits and does not play a hand for 10 mins, there is a straddle, I have Jd 9h, I call the straddle, this new guy raises to $55, there are two callers, so I call, because I am putting this guy on a monster and I'm getting over 3-1 to call right now.

Flop:

7d 8d 10d



Unless someone flopped a flush, I have the nuts and a draw to uber nuts.

First player bets $65, I raise to $225, the guy who was preflop raiser goes all in for $345, the first guy who led out folds, I snap call.

The guy shows Ah Ad, turn is a blank, river is 9d

The guy whoops, and I say, sorry, I have the straight flush.



They guy stares at the board and gets up and leaves.

Sick

It happens to everyone from time to time.

[Jimcs50]

Sick

It happens to everyone from time to time.

Yeah, that hand played itself, He is not folding with his hand, he could not just call my raise on flop, he had to shove all in and look at two cards, he probably had idea he was beat, but he had draw to what he thought was nuts, and there was a ton of money in pot to scoop, if he won the pot.

I just wish he had a grand in front of him.

[JamStone]

The amount you have in the pot is irrelevant. The size of the pot compared to your next bet is what matters. If everyone had called around the table you would still only have 45 dollars invested but you'd be staring at a much better situation.

They might have advised a fold based on the way he was playing (the information given on the other player really thin) but to say based on what you had in the pot is bad. If he had been raising the kind of hands that put 47 in his range then making a fold is a better option but if his range was actually closer to what I listed above then you don't need to fold.

If you really want to learn something, learn not to base your play off results. You think you should have folded in that situation and maybe you should have. However, you should not have folded based on the outcome of this hand, you should have folded only if the range of hands your opponent could have on that push is a range you do not beat ~60% of the time. If you win about that percentage of the time then you'll still make money on the hand. But you will still LOSE ~40% of the time. Making proper decisions in poker has nothing to do with winning or lose on one particular hand but rather how you do in the long run.

PS I overbet the out of pots live. The people at the live games here play terribly and call a lot. If I have the nuts on the flop, I try to get as much money in on the flop as possible (I'm not pushing like your villan but I am not betting 50% of the pot either. I'm over betting that pot).

I look at gambling a few different ways, and my uncle (who was a drunk and a pretty good gambler) told me that different people gamble different ways:

1. Some people play their opponent/s
2. Other people play the cards and the odds
3. And other people play based on their stack

Now you have a combination of those as well. When you're a professional gambler, you mostly play your opponents by reading them while using odds as a loose baseline for decisions. Amateur gamblers with big pockets will often and can play the cards and the odds because they can afford losing those all-in type hands. Now for a lot of us who are just recreational gamblers who play for fun, I think it's wise to at least heavily consider playing your stack or your money and making that a factor in your decisions. Even if Jim had a 50/50 chance of winning the hand or better, you're talking about losing $45 versus the possibility of losing $1130 and even if he had a 75% of winning, all of us who have gambled before know that there's still the chance that the 25% can still win and god knows how often that happens to bite you in the butt anyway.

You can read your opponent all you want to and you can calculate the odds to the thousandth percentile, gambling is still gambling and you can still lose. There are times, especially for amateur, recreational gamblers, where it's imperative to play your stack versus your opponent or the cards. People who consistently play the odds have a better chance of winning big but also have a pretty good chance of losing big.

The guy being drunk meant little to me because I know some good drunk gamblers. Maybe they're louder, more obnoxious, and maybe they're even riskier than usual. But it generally doesn't mean they just forgot how to play. I would have never pegged him to have preflop raised on crap and then catch the straight on the flop. But Jim still had several outs that could have knocked him out. And let's be real, even though two pair is nice on just the flop, it's not like he flopped a flush or a full house where your hand can justify confidence on an all-in call. This is the type of situation where you have to look at your stack imo. Didn't the risks of losing $1130 versus $45 have to play a role in the decision? I believe it should have. Maybe it's just me.

I don't begrudge or disparage you if you gamble differently, but I do think there are certainly other approaches in how you play that situation that make complete sense.

[Fabbs]

I look at gambling a few different ways, and my uncle (who was a drunk and a pretty good gambler) told me that different people gamble different ways:

1. Some people play their opponent/s
2. Other people play the cards and the odds
3. And other people play based on their stack

Now you have a combination of those as well. When you're a professional gambler, you mostly play your opponents by reading them while using odds as a loose baseline for decisions. Amateur gamblers with big pockets will often and can play the cards and the odds because they can afford losing those all-in type hands. Now for a lot of us who are just recreational gamblers who play for fun, I think it's wise to at least heavily consider playing your stack or your money and making that a factor in your decisions. Even if Jim had a 50/50 chance of winning the hand or better, you're talking about losing $45 versus the possibility of losing $1130 and even if he had a 75% of winning, all of us who have gambled before know that there's still the chance that the 25% can still win and god knows how often that happens to bite you in the butt anyway.

You can read your opponent all you want to and you can calculate the odds to the thousandth percentile, gambling is still gambling and you can still lose. There are times, especially for amateur, recreational gamblers, where it's imperative to play your stack versus your opponent or the cards. People who consistently play the odds have a better chance of winning big but also have a pretty good chance of losing big.

The guy being drunk meant little to me because I know some good drunk gamblers. Maybe they're louder, more obnoxious, and maybe they're even riskier than usual. But it generally doesn't mean they just forgot how to play. I would have never pegged him to have preflop raised on crap and then catch the straight on the flop. But Jim still had several outs that could have knocked him out. And let's be real, even though two pair is nice on just the flop, it's not like he flopped a flush or a full house where your hand can justify confidence on an all-in call. This is the type of situation where you have to look at your stack imo. Didn't the risks of losing $1130 versus $45 have to play a role in the decision? I believe it should have. Maybe it's just me.

I don't begrudge or disparage you if you gamble differently, but I do think there are certainly other approaches in how you play that situation that make complete sense.

Amen.
On the hand discussed i agree with yourself Heath and Jim himself now acknowledges in retro.
Better to have saved the All In or Major In call for another hand.

On a related subject, cheating. I believe it happens. A lot.
Lets have that on another thread.

[Jimcs50]

I look at gambling a few different ways, and my uncle (who was a drunk and a pretty good gambler) told me that different people gamble different ways:

1. Some people play their opponent/s
2. Other people play the cards and the odds
3. And other people play based on their stack

Now you have a combination of those as well. When you're a professional gambler, you mostly play your opponents by reading them while using odds as a loose baseline for decisions. Amateur gamblers with big pockets will often and can play the cards and the odds because they can afford losing those all-in type hands. Now for a lot of us who are just recreational gamblers who play for fun, I think it's wise to at least heavily consider playing your stack or your money and making that a factor in your decisions. Even if Jim had a 50/50 chance of winning the hand or better, you're talking about losing $45 versus the possibility of losing $1130 and even if he had a 75% of winning, all of us who have gambled before know that there's still the chance that the 25% can still win and god knows how often that happens to bite you in the butt anyway.

You can read your opponent all you want to and you can calculate the odds to the thousandth percentile, gambling is still gambling and you can still lose. There are times, especially for amateur, recreational gamblers, where it's imperative to play your stack versus your opponent or the cards. People who consistently play the odds have a better chance of winning big but also have a pretty good chance of losing big.

The guy being drunk meant little to me because I know some good drunk gamblers. Maybe they're louder, more obnoxious, and maybe they're even riskier than usual. But it generally doesn't mean they just forgot how to play. I would have never pegged him to have preflop raised on crap and then catch the straight on the flop. But Jim still had several outs that could have knocked him out. And let's be real, even though two pair is nice on just the flop, it's not like he flopped a flush or a full house where your hand can justify confidence on an all-in call. This is the type of situation where you have to look at your stack imo. Didn't the risks of losing $1130 versus $45 have to play a role in the decision? I believe it should have. Maybe it's just me.

I don't begrudge or disparage you if you gamble differently, but I do think there are certainly other approaches in how you play that situation that make complete sense.

That is why the two pros who play every day fold that hand. Yes, you can win a nice pot, but if you call and are wrong or if the guy does have over pair and he hits his 5 outter on turn or 8 outter on river, you still lose the hand.

It takes a lot of good play to make up for that $1100 loss, and no time at all to make up that $45 that I put in that pot preflop.

I guess, being a thought of as a pussy was factored in after I showed my hand( I showed it during my thought process to try to get a read off the guy)

I did not want players to know that I could be pushed around. But after I asked the two pros, I guess they would have actually given me more respect if I had folded.

[Fabbs]

Originally Posted by Jimcs50

.....was saying that the bad part of your play was not 3 betting him preflop. If you make it $85-$95 to go, he probably goes away, unless you both have over a grand in front of you, because he was not getting the correct implied odds to call if you have KK or AA.

Yeah, after that on the way home, I knew should have gone over the top, and risk winning a little rather than lose it all. Lesson learned.

Lots of different ways to play AA but I'm down with Doyle on his stance. AA is usually good for one of two outcomes. Winning a smaller pot or losing a big one.

I've been doing a lot of slow playing AA and KK and I've gotten some acious payoffs. Arrived at 2/5 table with 400 and 1st hand under the gun. Slow played KK. About 7 callers and then big blind very aggressive player bumps to 45. I merely call, knowing the rest of the table would most likely fold around. They did, heads up. Flop was Kd 9h 2c rainbow. He jacks it to 150. I figure he hit his King and so i call. Turn was whatever, he goes 75 i go all in he calls. Boom my stack is 800+.

Not 20 minutes later I'm in middle position with AA. I slow play again pre flop. Dealer button raises to 45. Early position guy reraises to 100. I know the dealer button guy chases flushes and straights so i do not want a three way pot. I 3 raise to 300. Dealer button hymns and haws with Q7 suited (i kid you not, i said he is aggressive) and folds. Early postion guy goes all in for 900 more (has me covered) with his 10/10. I do the "duh" call. He does not suck out however Q7 flush chaser would have. Anywho badabing badaboom i double up again to 1700.

Not saying it's gonna happen that often but for me the payoffs from slowing AA and KK have outdone the losses. Provided of course you can lay it down when the flop misses you and hits them. Hard to lay off AA KK after the flop but one has to learn how to do it fo sure.

[SpurinDallas]

Originally Posted by Jimcs50



Lots of different ways to play AA but I'm down with Doyle on his stance. AA is usually good for one of two outcomes. Winning a smaller pot or losing a big one.

I've been doing a lot of slow playing AA and KK and I've gotten some acious payoffs. Arrived at 2/5 table with 400 and 1st hand under the gun. Slow played KK. About 7 callers and then big blind very aggressive player bumps to 45. I merely call, knowing the rest of the table would most likely fold around. They did, heads up. Flop was Kd 9h 2c rainbow. He jacks it to 150. I figure he hit his King and so i call. Turn was whatever, he goes 75 i go all in he calls. Boom my stack is 800+.

Not 20 minutes later I'm in middle position with AA. I slow play again pre flop. Dealer button raises to 45. Early position guy reraises to 100. I know the dealer button guy chases flushes and straights so i do not want a three way pot. I 3 raise to 300. Dealer button hymns and haws with Q7 suited (i kid you not, i said he is aggressive) and folds. Early postion guy goes all in for 900 more (has me covered) with his 10/10. I do the "duh" call. He does not suck out however Q7 flush chaser would have. Anywho badabing badaboom i double up again to 1700.

Not saying it's gonna happen that often but for me the payoffs from slowing AA and KK have outdone the losses. Provided of course you can lay it down when the flop misses you and hits them. Hard to lay off AA KK after the flop but one has to learn how to do it fo sure.

I agree 100%. I often slow play those premium hands similar to how you described and more often than not, I get paid off, big time. This one time, it bit me in the ass. In the grand scheme of things, I'm still ahead when playing these hands.

I just hate losing to a frat boy who admitted he stayed in that hand because he says he always plays 69.

[JamStone]

One other thing I should have emphasized more was Jim's hand. He had two pair. Now getting two pair on a flop is nothing to scoff at. But when an opponent calls all-in that requires you to risk a big part of your stack, you still have to consider that two pair is still the third worst hand in poker. It only beats high card and one pair. That's why I also mentioned that it might be different if Jim had flopped a flush or a boat. That would instill quite a bit more confidence in calling the all-in than just two pair. Even though you could eliminate flush hands, there were still several hands out there (at least as possibilities with two more card draws) stronger than two pair.

[Fabbs]

In the grand scheme of things, I'm still ahead when playing these hands.

I just hate losing to a frat boy who admitted he stayed in that hand because he says he always plays 69.

"Reward a Re " style like 69boi played happens far too often and yes it slays me too when the table praises someone for the very low percentage call that ends up sucking.

Some think it's proper to compliment the suck outs or be a zombie if you're the losing hand. Frankly i have no problem getting reasonably angry when someone pulls that kind of crap and hope i never turn zombified or kiss up to such players. Yeah yeah i know Caro says to compliment them as you will make it back from them in the long run. News flash Caro, chances are better you won't even be in the same hand with same person ever again. I watched Caro try his complimentary schtikk at the WSOP and it came across as soo phony.

[SpurinDallas]

"Reward a Re " style like 69boi played happens far too often and yes it slays me too when the table praises someone for the very low percentage call that ends up sucking.

Some think it's proper to compliment the suck outs or be a zombie if you're the losing hand. Frankly i have no problem getting reasonably angry when someone pulls that kind of crap and hope i never turn zombified or kiss up to such players. Yeah yeah i know Caro says to compliment them as you will make it back from them in the long run. News flash Caro, chances are better you won't even be in the same hand with same person ever again. I watched Caro try his complimentary schtikk at the WSOP and it came across as soo phony.

Only thing that made me feel better was I got to watch the rest of the Spurs game at the poker house when they were putting on OKC in OKC amongst a bunch of Mavs "fans".

Then when I got up during a commercial break to check on that table I got busted out on, 69 boy was in the process of losing every single chip he had won, before walking out empty handed. Justice.

[O.J. Simpson]

I know, I had to do it while I was out of work for a while. OJ is just an asshole

[Jimcs50]

Originally Posted by Jimcs50



About 7 callers and then big blind very aggressive player bumps to 45. I merely call, knowing the rest of the table would most likely fold around. They did, heads up.

.

This table and a lot of tables I play would have probably had 3 or 4 more calls of that $45, then you are going up against 4-5 players with KK. Your odds of winning are probably about 35%. If you isolate that guy, then your odds increase dramatically.

What do you do if you had 3 or 4 other callers and if the flop is 6 7 J, and one of players who limp called check raises you? Does he have AJ? JJ? 67? 89? 66? 77? You have no idea.

That is why you should always re-raise with AA or KK, not only to get to heads up or also to get more information prefop. Had you made it $125 to go, you will get 66, 77, 67 to fold. Now JJ will still stack you, but it is much better odds of winning.

[Jimcs50]

One other thing I should have emphasized more was Jim's hand. He had two pair. Now getting two pair on a flop is nothing to scoff at. But when an opponent calls all-in that requires you to risk a big part of your stack, you still have to consider that two pair is still the third worst hand in poker. It only beats high card and one pair. That's why I also mentioned that it might be different if Jim had flopped a flush or a boat. That would instill quite a bit more confidence in calling the all-in than just two pair. Even though you could eliminate flush hands, there were still several hands out there (at least as possibilities with two more card draws) stronger than two pair.

What sucks in my hand is that the pro to my right said he had AQs, and he thought about re-raising preflop. I got pissed off at him in jest after he told me that because he would have saved me $1175 had he done so.

[Fabbs]

This table and a lot of tables I play would have probably had 3 or 4 more calls of that $45, then you are going up against 4-5 players with KK. Your odds of winning are probably about 35%. If you isolate that guy, then your odds increase dramatically.

Oh this table too. It was not a table of tightie whiteys or inexperienced players. As Aggressive Guy on the button was raising to 45 i went with the "observe body lang" tells on the rest of the table. Raiser did the Large Stack in Hand but only dropped 45 and took the rest in his hand back. I watched them as it appeared he was going to drop way more if not all the chips he held in his hand*. Got a vibe that none of them were going to go. That's why i simply did the call. I agree with you 100% that most of the time with that many players behind 3-4 are gonna call the 45 and now you're in a real pickle post flop.

What do you do if you had 3 or 4 other callers and if the flop is 6 7 J, and one of players who limp called check raises you? Does he have AJ? JJ? 67? 89? 66? 77? You have no idea.

Being way out of position (1st to act) I'd fold. I've lone ago gotten to the point of laying down KK or even AA post flop with 3 and certainly 4 handed pots. It's still tempting tho no matter how many hands you've played.

*btw this allowing of players to hold an infinite amount of chips in hand and then drop off a portion on the table and pull the rest back is total b.s. IMO. To me crossing the betting line should mean it's in, period.

[Jimcs50]

Oh this table too. It was not a table of tightie whiteys or inexperienced players. As Aggressive Guy on the button was raising to 45 i went with the "observe body lang" tells on the rest of the table. Raiser did the Large Stack in Hand but only dropped 45 and took the rest in his hand back. I watched them as it appeared he was going to drop way more if not all the chips he held in his hand*. Got a vibe that none of them were going to go. That's why i simply did the call. I agree with you 100% that most of the time with that many players behind 3-4 are gonna call the 45 and now you're in a real pickle post flop.


Being way out of position (1st to act) I'd fold. I've lone ago gotten to the point of laying down KK or even AA post flop with 3 and certainly 4 handed pots. It's still tempting tho no matter how many hands you've played.

*btw this allowing of players to hold an infinite amount of chips in hand and then drop off a portion on the table and pull the rest back is total b.s. IMO. To me crossing the betting line should mean it's in, period.

They have a betting line on the tables at Venetian, so if it goes past line and is left on table, it is in. However, the chips that are in his hand and he is just putting out stacks with the one hand, he is allowed to pull back leftover chips.

[DMC]

One thing I've learned is a lot of people who call themselves pros don't actually make a living playing the game.

[DMC]

Speaking of cracking aces, Let me tell you about a hand I played earlier in that same session.


New guy comes in buys in for $400, he sits and does not play a hand for 10 mins, there is a straddle, I have Jd 9h, I call the straddle, this new guy raises to $55, there are two callers, so I call, because I am putting this guy on a monster and I'm getting over 3-1 to call right now.

Flop:

7d 8d 10d



Unless someone flopped a flush, I have the nuts and a draw to uber nuts.

First player bets $65, I raise to $225, the guy who was preflop raiser goes all in for $345, the first guy who led out folds, I snap call.

The guy shows Ah Ad, turn is a blank, river is 9d

The guy whoops, and I say, sorry, I have the straight flush.



They guy stares at the board and gets up and leaves.

Online player no doubt.

[slick'81]

scared money dont make money

[Jimcs50]

scared money dont make money

True. I do not put in front of me what I can not afford to lose. That does not mean that I want to donk it off.