CJ Asks..
CJ Asked: Kind of scary.. Calling 5$ Pre-Flop with 24 s00ted and raising $52 on a draw, I suppose that is one way of playing it...
Luckbox scared.. hmm.. That is a little scary to me.. ANYWAY.. Ya, I was a little nervous. But big Pocket pairs only have one way to win..
I am not at all concerned about calling $5 pre-flop with 24h. It is an easy enough hand to get away from and if it hits, like a 24 flop, then you can bust someone who overplays AA/99, etc.. Huge implied odds there. I do not think you ALWAYS play this but changing it up once in a while can make interesting hands.
As far as the OESD on the flop. We were not very far behind (basically a coinflip at 43%). The idea behind this hand (I think) was to assume Mr. 99 was smart enough to fold when we made a large raise. He had a lot of ways of being beat on that flop. So we have some amount of positive expected value in the fact that people will fold that hand (x) amount of the time to us. We only have to rely on our backup 43% a certain portion of the time.
Here was the conversation I had with Flux during the hand (paraphrased).
Sir: 24h
Sir: He raised 5$
Flux: Fuck him he is a fag
Sir: ok.
Sir: He bet 8$
Flux: Raise him 28$
Sir: he went all in
Flux: Fuck! How many outs do we have!
Sir: I think we have to call now
Actually I think the guy with the 9's played this TOTALLY wrong.. I will not entirely defend our play except we had outs and we were freerolling with earlier winnings.. Again, the concept behind the hand was the guy was smart enough to fold a marginal hand. He was not. So we had to rely on our backup outs. We would have been more than happy to only take 13$ from him. Although a clue to him not being smart enough would be the $40 buyin he made. Something to note in the future.
How can the guy with pocket 9's not even consider AA-TT, A made straight, draws which he had none of, and a small set. Especially something like JJ I would push hard there..
I think you need a better hand than 99 to call off a 28$ raise.. Once he called bullshit on our semi-bluff raise we were committed to the hand.
I am starting to think that big pots and big backup draws are what this game is about, I need to digest this a little more since I never play this way, but it is interesting..
This hand might make you think that all we were trying to accomplish was pushing alot of money in with a decent draw. That is not the point at all. Also, as Fluxer mentioned, we only posted the interesting suckout hand which made us $70 or so, not the other two tables where we made over $180 playing our made hands exactly the same way. What can I say I am a Shock Jock!
One more thing: Using my normal tight-aggressive style I might win $50 a night playing NL or lose a buyin, being more aggressive with made hands and draws, and making pots big when I want them to be, makes the whole dynamic change.. I end up making $100-$300 a night, and lose a buyin at about the same frequency as my tighter play.
Anyway.. I think this hand on the surface might have looked "fishy", I think delving deeper into the thinking behind the hand helps to show why it can be +EV. Fluxer may have some more to add too. If he ever wants to do a guest post he is totally welcome to. This is my analysis of the thinking behind this one hand.
posted by SirFWALGMan at
10:49 AM
19 Comments:
I think it's a brilliant play Waffles especially how you laid your thought process out.
First of all you are up $180 which allows you to take more chances especially if you've been playing tight-aggressive. You are investing a small portion of your winnings to take down a monster, excellent risk reward factor.
Second, you get your money in against someone who thinks he's a much better player than he really is. You called a $6 raise preflop and you re-raised from $8 to $28 after the flop. Hello Mr 9-9, with that flop I'm thinking a set, TT or JJ and at worst an OESD. Muck the 9s and pick a better spot.
Third people who buy-in with a short stack are asking for trouble. They try to hit and run, bluff and bully to build their stack instead of relying on skills. Playing live cash games her in Vegas we devour short stacks by always putting them to the test and pushing them to their stack limit.
Hitting hands like those is where the big money is. Getting up early and taking some chances is IMO the model to play NL cash games.
Are you getting hooked on the cash games yet?
11:58 AM
If Fluxer guides me through the "Real" learning process then I may just start playing cash games.. heh. I like his style of play and thinking.. although to be honest my blog does not give the whole picture and does not give him enough credit..
1:27 PM
It really is funny that this guy couldn't lay down the 99. Part of my reasoning of pushing with these types of drawing hands is that you have so many outs.
Normally you can get guys to fold a few extra hands and increase your ptbb / 100 by quite a bit.
I would add that you have to play a set the same way so you don't become transparent.
2:48 PM
I was just thinking.. if a good player like CJ is afraid of me, I must be doing something right, lol..
Ohhhhh for me.. ah, I get it..
4:11 PM
Certainly not afraid of you, my suckout powers double vs. the Waffle. I'm frightened you risk $50 on an OESD in that spot.
Why would 9's give away his hand? You called $1 preflop and just called his raise to $5. You certainly didn't represent that big of a hand preflop. And then post flop he made a reasonable feeler bet, then you overbet the pot. Certainly doesn't scream monster... doesn't scream set or straight. It's very reasonable to assume he's ahead of your little pair or you might just be on overcards.
Then he pushes for everything you have left. My question then is, what did you put him on?
If he's holding a set of 5's, you're just 23% from there. If he's holding A2, you're just 2.5% from there. If he's holding A2c, you're just 2%.
As it was, you risked your stack on 43%. Not quite a coin flip... that's 3-to-2.
I understand taking cash game risks, I'm just not sure I CALL an all-in with it. I can understand pushing all in... then you win two ways, he folds or you catch your outs.
4:35 PM
Raising 28$ was akin to pushing all in, he had to have known I was not going to fold when he re-raised me.
I put him on what he represented. Two big cards. Pair of jacks maybe.. 9's was a little weaker than I though.
A2 and/or 55 usually do not raise 5 bucks pre-flop. Sorry.. I can not put him on those hands. If he has a monster like that then good for him, he did what he should have, I still have some outs.
I honestly did think he would have/should have folded there.. It is nice to know that *good* poker players think overbets are bluffing.
Since some of the idea is to bet hard with either good draws or strong made hands.
4:53 PM
I'm puzzled how the "overbet" doesn't scream set or straight?
I love overbetting sets against a high pocket pair or two pair and especially when leading into the pre-flop raiser before he can even make a continuation bet.
95% of players immediately push after the "overbet" because of pure ego and greed refusing to believe they are beat.
Why slow play when you can get the money all-in as a favorite before the river?
6:09 PM
"It really is funny that this guy couldn't lay down the 99."
I think everyone is forgetting the fact that this guy was ahead and made the correct play.
Nevertheless, It is nice to see Waffles getting away from "Playing insanely tight is the only way to win" mentality.
7:35 PM
The fact that it was the correct play doesn't mean that the thinking was there. Now if that player came on here and said why he knew he was ahead with 99 then I might give him credit for that. In this case I just think that it is the typical guy who can't fold an overpair. In cash games guys just limp call with QQ JJ 1010 all the time.. so the reraise did scream big hand to me.
Now if this was Full Tilt I would expect a few extra hands to attempt this sort of thing.
I would have liked to see a push as well but this is a big step instead of a big raise but this is a step in the right direction.
Also, while he played this different I bet his VPIP and PFR % didn't increase a whole bunch. Maybe he can provide those stats for us to see if the opponent thought you were donking it up with TPTK.
9:52 PM
VP$IP was a respectable 17.65%. 2.94% pre-flop raise percentage.
10:05 PM
I'm not saying that Waffles played the hand poorly, I'm just saying that the people that think this guy was an idiot for calling are neglecting the fact that he made the right play and he was ahead.
You want to assume that this guy was an idiot, when it's possible he just had a good read.
It's entirely possible that the guy figured if Waffles had a pair bigger than nines he would have raised pre-flop, and that if he had flopped a set he would have played it slower.
I know it's more fun to assume the guy was a moron, but it's completely possible that he made the right play.
7:49 AM
How is it a flawed thought process to state that the guy was ahead in the hand? I would love to have 100 hands in that guy's situation.
Justifying this play by saying anything other than "we got lucky" is just crazy. Yes, I do see the value of playing a poor hand from time to time and letting the table see you do so.
I also got a kick out of calling his winnings 'freerolling" money...
Oh, and before you give shit about me posting anon, my name is Greg, I don't have a 'blog', and that's less anonymous than 99% of you people.
10:00 AM
Thanks for identifying yourself Anon, thats cool.
Anyway.. Here is the point I think. Not that 24s vs 99 is an idiotic call for 99. The main point is 99 vs unknown hand for your entire stack with set/straight and high draw potential is not the place you want to get your money in. Sure if you know for sure I have 24h then you win 7% over time, no brainer.
The point is not that 24h is Gods best hand either. The point is that along with the semi-bluff to try and take down a small-medium pot we had backup outs that were pretty good, and we had already made some money for the night which just made this attempt at a steal a very good move.
10:15 AM
Duggle,
I would totally agree that the villian could have made a good read but I don't think so. You even mentioned that Waffles plays too tight...
Look at the stats and tell me you couldn't put him on a big hand... he must limp JJ often and he did call a $5 reraise. Rocks always kill you with sets and that is what his stats tell me.
Waffles take a buy in at one lower level and play a <25% vpip and a 13%+ PFR with a 2+ post flop aggression factor... you will enjoy yourself!
10:23 AM
Re: the idea that you were "freerolling" with your winnings. I like this idea. Some people might think that your winnings are real cash and that it isn't a freeroll at all, but cash that you are putting on the line. They are right. But they forget about one thing: the momentum of poker. When you win, it's easier to win more. When you are stuck it's easier to lose more. So that "freeroll" money allows Waffle to gamble more. This is pure Super/System, in a way. Brunson suggests that you pick up a bunch of small pots so you can make those calls from behind with draws later on with your "freeroll" money. That's why he claims that he seems to get "lucky" a lot. He is getting lucky, but he puts himself in that position by building his coffers enough to be able to take those chances.
10:50 AM
"basically a coinflip at 43%" Basically I want you to do this 100 times and tell me if you come out ahead. I don't think we can call 43% basically a coin flip, it is a lot closer to the 60/40 line then the 50/50 line.
11:03 AM
Just so we're clear here... the 99 didn't have to make the difficult call. He basically had to make a pot-sized call and had Waffles outstacked 2-to-1 so his entire stack was never at risk.
The only one who had to make the difficult call was Waffles and he HAD to know he was behind. That's a tough call to make when you're behind.
Mr. 99 put Sir Waffle all-in, not the other way around. I guess one of my big problems is that you are NOT the one who put the pressure on. He was clearly not scared of your bet and rightly put you on a hand weaker than his.
Here's my point on the "overbet"... if Sif Waffle had a monster, there's no way he makes a bet designed to win the pot right there. I've played with him enough to get that read, and perhaps Mr. 99 did as well.
If you want to risk your stack on middle pair and an OESD when you know you are a 3-2 dog, that's fine, but in the long run, I wouldn't support this play.
Sometimes you gotta play a feeling though, and sometimes those feelings pay off big.
1:28 PM
Mr 99 had never played me before (and probably never will again).. Waffles is tight, never overbets monsters. Waffles in cash game learning from Fluxer is looser and makes huge overbets anytime he can with or without the nuts.
3:04 PM
I see Waffles is learning the cash game.
But making -EV bets in the long run will hurt.
Playing a LAG isn't for everyone.
7:35 AM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home