Pretty sure this is an angle... We need people who can't count outs at the tables. Please don't be shortsighted.

Yea I guess it's an angle only if you don't turn your hand over and ask the guy to chop saying you specifically have 17 outs therefore making you the favorite to win. However I don't see the problem of showing the guy your hand and then saying "I have 17 outs" (again after showing the guy your hand, it's up to him to confirm what your saying). Even if the guy correctly identifies that you don't have as many outs as you first said, is replying "yeah but its still basically a coinflip" an angle?

Without delving into a complex discussion about what exactly is and is not an angle, it boils down to this: if you are a professional poker player (someone who attempts to derive any or all of his income from poker) you need players at the table whom you have an edge over. Who else do you think pays for your living expenses, vacations, extravagant purchases, etc? Treat them as you would the owners of a company you really like working at...

Sorry for the derail OP, games are just getting so bad/nitty/unstable. The economy has all but created a domino effect in the casinos where everyone is just looking to "get theirs" at any cost/with no regard for the future.

/

1. check/call if he is a payoff wizard, tryto turn a gutter/pair etc

2. um what @ folding. anything except folding really

3. instafold

and lol @ people not stacking off w/ overpairs in 2010+

Fold hand 2 because pot was 50 and now it's 250 to go. One of the passives apparently liked his hand enough to bet pot and another passive apparently liked his hand enough to 5x raise. The raiser either has a better flush draw than you, or more likely he has top 2+ and he's flipping at the very least. Either way, your fold equity against him is miniscule. And don't forget about the original bettor, he could have anything up to and including the nuts. Worst case scenario (and not an impossible one) one guy has a set or a straight and the other guy has a hand like A8hh.

Pretty hand, bad spot...

And regarding players not stacking off 150 bbs with an overpair in live 5-10 anymore, like anything in poker, that's not an absolute. I guess I should have said that people are doing this WAY LESS than they were 3 years ago when games were awesome.

Thanks all. This thread has turned out well for me (and i hope you as well). Although no one has "the answer" thats cool and makes me feel a little better. All of these decisions were very close for me and judging by the wide array of responses they were close for you all as well. For a long time hands like these were just an insta jam for me, It was a huge leak and a leak I see young players making constantly. That said, I dont want to mellow out too much

think what u want, but i play a ton of hands along this vein, and by my donking the flop i bet half pot instead of your having to call a potted flop. If he raises i will decide then, but calling or folding is what happens most of the time. My range is wide, yet appears to be TP to villain,. If villain only calls, he will not win this pot. I will know his range and he will fold by the river like 90% the time.

Checking and hoping to check and make a flush isnt worth ****, since if villain is checking he wont have anything anyway.

Where do you play DG? Jesus, i havent seen anyone laydown an overpair in 2010. And i play 6 days a week.

I dunno man this is getting dangerously close to "betting for information". Remember also that these are multi way pots. If they were HU w/ a predictable opponent I might like it a bit more. So your throwing out a blocker on a drawy board multi way, seems sorta transparent. But then again, checking isnt ideal either.

+1. If people started laying down overpairs at commerce I'd have to get a real job.

sorry, but u have it backwards, but ive already gone back and forth more hthan i should have.

??? too much back and forth??? Isnt that what a poker discussion forum is about? You're the only person advocating the weak lead line so id guess you'd have to defend it.

You say that when your weak lead is called your opponent cant win the pot, wouldnt this be the same if your opponent checked through and much cheaper?

I cant see a single thing you accomplish with a weak lead that isnt also accomplished with a check AND with the exact hand discussed the weak lead would cost you the amount of that lead as you would have been popped and then had to fold rather than check/fold (of course you could also suicide shove into QQ+ at the commerce).

So I while i may not have everything right I respectfully disagree that I have anything backwards.

Once a weak lead is flatted, the size of the pot is that much bigger and the turn and river bets are going to be proportionally bigger as well, putting the caller in a more uncomfortable spot. The weak leader can bomb/bomb since he knows the caller's hand can't be that great. Forgive me tho if this is gibberish -- just woke up.

Makes sense, but is it the best play? I would assume that you, like I, are one of the more aggressive players in your game. Because of this players will let me value own myself as often as they will fold to that 3rd barrel.

Also how great is the villains hand if he checks through or makes a gutless stab at the pot? You can make this play free.

I mean, the play being advocated is a sort of death pact to fire off 150 bb's no matter what w/ absolutely no reason to beleive your opponent is weak enough to fold.

LA, if the villain is totally fit fold, will never cbet air like he should 100% on this flop, then yea, just play it like ABC against a 5 year old. But i give villains in a 5/10 game at least credit to cbet this board most of the time.
So you check and villain cbets half pot. Now what? Your range now looks EXACTLY like what it is to the villain. Not a good plan to me.

You check and villain cbets pot, haha, now u gotta fold. No good either.
You check and call pot. haha, now villain knows 100% you have a FD and even an idiot will fold a big hand if flush comes.

All this sound like a good plan to you? But if you donk half pot and call a small raise, then your range looks quite a bit larger. Jx FD whatever

Limping this hand creates all this trouble. If raised from behind, now we have to play a FD OOP which is not worth half of playing one from position. Especially if we dont have the lead.

By donking the FD, now FD hits turn, what will villain do with overpair plus flush card? I doubt he folds the turn ever. If you c/c and a flush hits, how will the turn play out?

If you run all these scenarios thru and see what happens, it should be fairly obvious how to try and salvage this hand once we play it preflop as we did.

ANL! Glad ur back (seriously, no joke). Personally I dont know any loose passive villains who fire c-bets into 3 players w/ air, ever.


I really dont know of any decent players who c-bet here "100% of the time". Why do you think this is a c-bet into a passive field "100% of the time"?

I mean if someone c-bets 100% than checking to them is by far the best play, no?

If , as you ask, he makes a gutless bet at the pot (half pot or whatever) im popping him.


Now i havent heard about this pre flop problem yet. You like raising an utg limper w/ KTs utg+1? You like a muck pre when you know you can get a multi way pot?
You dont think youre getting popped on the flop by overpair + flush? This is the exact hand passive players need to pop a weak lead. You've mentioned this raise might be small enough to call. isnt that as much wishful thinking as hoping his cbet w/ the same hand will be small?

Also I dont think you should c/c flop. If the face-up/passive villain does his job and bets pot he get a little round of applause and its time for the next hand. If he makes a gutless bet he gets popped, big. If he checks through, no problem, now I can make a play for it on the turn with my eyes open.

wow, your game dynamics are just different from mine. I see little raising / getting in with bare flush draws or say Qx flush draws on this board. Hell, i even see a lot of check backs with flush draws here.

I dont limp these hands ever unless i have passive passive players behind and i can get MW pots that i can control OOP. Otherwise yes i open raise and play in that manner. The term Multi-way by itself doesnt mean a lot since if aggro players behind, then having pot MW sucks.

If villain is super cbetty with air, im still not popping him with this FD. The extra raise has zero value when he has air, but is losing money when he is real. (IOW he has to give up on the river if he is not barrel type bettor)

If he raises my donk bet huge, then im fine folding since im up against a big hand or better draw (in my games).

And by the way, late morning games, people getting a little cally preflop, flop is like perfect dry type other than FD, i would think players would still cbet this flop even though 4 way total. Might be why he almost potted it. It should work quite often.
Kind of a shame to have limp called the KTss and then have to fold to his air cbet or pot isnt it? I will bet his pot cbet is more air here than value, but he his tight passive and it would cost us a crapload to find out.

Well ya the games are different. I dont know how much time you spend in L.A. but I've been at venetian about 10 times a year since it opened and the 5-10 games really arent comparable. The 10-20's and above are.

Even in Vegas you get nights where every pot is 4 or 5 handed because of a couple droolers. In these situation you need to be playing all kinds of speculative hands early and raising early coming in w/js9s/5s6s and its ilk isnt ideal as you are going to get yourself shut out of many profitable situations in my experience. KT is right on the cusp but a 4-5way raised pot w/ these type of hands is much better than a 0 way 3 bet pot, no?

Im not sure about this because a lot of the time he doesnt actually have air but just a weak hand hell fold and sometimes his air is better than your air. If a guy cbets 100% like you advocated your cr has far more than enough FE to be profitable.

LA, i dont know where ur going with all this. You stand firm with your thoughts on every aspect. So what have you gained here? How do you prefer to plan this hand from start to finish? I play the hands with a firm plan that serves me very well. So now i would like to here your plan if you would because it seems you love the way you actually played the hand.

For example. I really hate CR flops with the thought its +EV because of villains high cbet with air. There are so many other ways to play the hand which doesnt require having to get allin on the flop with basically a bare flush draw. The advantages of this play has a very sharp edge on the other side when really there is no real need for it.

But honestly, i want to here your plan.

I think youre being a little unfair. On hand 2 I didnt stand firm at all. I shipped that hand and in retrospect after reading a couple responses it was obviously the wrong play. With hand 1 nothing I've read has been too compelling.

My plan was as follows.

1. I am the best player at the table (not bragging this was a JUICY table)
2. Most of the opponents are bad and tired and are playing their hands face up
3. I want to see as many flops as possible with them, as cheap as possible
4. When in a hand I want them to act first as I feel making reads in these multiway pots w/ passive opponents is very easy.
5. I checked to watch my opponent "act" first as his action will not be a response to my individual action
6. I fully believed his action and played my hand as I would if his hand were face-up.

i think this is a set of notes that is far from usual. Thus, i wonder why the hand was posted, thats all. And without all these notes to go by, the replies should come back contrary to what u are looking for, no?

And i was speaking of hand 1 only.

Ya I knew the notes would influence the responses thats why I was vague. Ive played poker exclusively for a living for 13 years, nearly all limit poker (stud and holdem). I want to know how other people are thinking of "standard" situations in NL. The reason I press back, is because i just want to make sure the logic is sound based on the assumptions the other posters are making. It seemed to me, from the responses, that these situations were interesting enough to warrant a discussion.

fair enough