Playing at Harrah's Philadelphia. I have played the game before but I am far from an expert. Chatty, friendly table. Villain sat down for the heck of it after playing Hold Em for a while but he knew how to play probably better than me, or at least was likely more experienced. I was playing a touch higher than I would prefer ($5/10 or $6/12 would have been ideal for what I like to put on the table).
In small blind there are a handful of limpers. I look down at AAxx. No suits, no low. Raise that will chase nobody seems spewy. So I complete and the big blind checks.
Flop TTQ. Checks around.
Turn an Ace. Well, that was nice!
I bet. Big Blind raises. Folds around back to me and I three-bet. Big Blind then four-bets me. Hm. I call.
River doesn't matter (it wasn't an Ace or Ten). I check-call.
I will break protocol here by revealing the results because I think everyone here knows that I ran into quad tens. I certainly had that idea which is why I played it the way I did. One other person at the table called it before villain turned up his cards. I was proud that I lost the minimum but also wondered if I lost value here.
My thought process was that he would have bet the flop with a ten, even QT. Even if he did check the flop with QT, I don't see him four-betting when the Ace hits on the turn. I don't see him raising at all if he had Broadway. The only hand I felt I might have been beating the way he played it was QQ but I still think he bets the flop enough hoping a ten comes along that I can sacrifice value against QQ for when I run into a monster/cooler.
But I am not an expert and I was playing a wee bit higher than I might have liked which may have influenced my read.
Line seems normal. It's not a spot you can justify folding vs most opponents.
I didn't consider folding ever, but I wondered if I should have put more bets in or if the line villain took was strong enough to make me slowing down a smart move. I guess you don't feel that was the case?
I didn't consider folding ever, but I wondered if I should have put more bets in or if the line villain took was strong enough to make me slowing down a smart move. I guess you don't feel that was the case?
It totally depends on the villain. All but super tight players could still raise at, qt and qq so putting in another bet is never really wrong from a combination standpoint. For maximizing total bets going in we are going to play very mixed strategies on the turn, and often delay on showing more strength til the river. I probably check the turn to start.
seems fine. should be more worried about how youre playing marginal spots and not coolers. worry about if you could have squeezed/saved an extra bet eith 2nd low and top 2 or a set.
I didn't check the turn because it already checked around once and my hand was under-repped to say the least. Under-repped and practically drawing dead!
I didn't check the turn because it already checked around once and my hand was under-repped to say the least. Under-repped and practically drawing dead!
One of the reasons I lean check is that hero should have less nutted hands in range than everyone else, even when villains limp, once you bet your range gets much much narrower, and villains are less likely to bluff or go for thin value
Your play seems fine. This seems like more of an excuse to post a bad beat story than a real strategy question. In a limit game where you are just talking about a difference of one bet, extreme cooler situations are so uncommon that I wouldn't worry too much about how you play them.
It kind of seems like a big mistake for the BB to raise the turn, given the number of field players, the lack of strength shown by anyone on previous street, and the degree to which he has the deck crippled. What could anyone have that they would call two bets colds with? And there's no reason for him to think you have anywhere near as strong as hand as you do (in fact, he should significantly discount AA since you didn't raise preflop).
