How Should I Have Played This Poker Hand?

[Azazello1313]

oh and how did the Ks come on the river if you already had it in your hand?

 

maybe that last king was clubs or diamonds.

[i_am_the_swammi]

how could he have hit a flush?

 

 

I assume its a typo...Kc came on the river? Ks-2s were in his hand.

[The Holy Roller]

I usually fold K2. Nuthin' but trouble. Ace rags is just as bad.

[Thews40]

You did nothing wrong... poker aint free. I lost a hand a few weeks ago (at least it was a limit game) with a boat aces over threes to a straight flush ... it happens.

[Big Country]

BTW, a nit is the same thing as a rock. Its not a maniac...

 

 

Swammi -

 

How does seeing that spain's definition of a nit equalling a rock change your opinion. I have a feeling that you, as well as me, though that by nit spain meant donkey or fish, not rock.

 

I also think you are looking at the entire spectrum of hands when saying it is unlikely an opponent holds a K as oppossed to the likely spectrum of hands that would be involved, which increases the probability that another K is in play.

 

I also think a factor in determining my play is the position of the nit/rock (thogh, moe that I think of it, his position is less important than his being in the hand). His presence in the hand would make me want to check this hand even more. If another playe leads out and our nit/rock calls or folds, I let my hand go. Another player may lead with anything, but he is only calling with a hand that beats us. If he is the first to lead out (and especially if he receives any callers before us), I lay down as he likely only leads out with a hand that beats us, and, assuming (and admittedly a hugh assumption) that other people at the table are paying some attention, a caller of his bet would have to have a hand that beats us as well.

 

Aggressive table or not, selective aggression is the key, not reckless aggression. IMO, given the situation and nature of the flop, this is a case of reckless aggression trapping spain into an unwinnable position because the board happened to fall perfectly to trap him.

[i_am_the_swammi]

Swammi -

 

How does seeing that spain's definition of a nit equalling a rock change your opinion. I have a feeling that you, as well as me, though that by nit spain meant donkey or fish, not rock. It didn't change my opinion of his hand at all...sorry if it gave you that impression. I've said all along I don't think his flop bet was a big mistake. I think I alluded to the fact that since the bet was called, he needed to be careful of K-better kicker (and now knowing his opponent is a "rock", he assuredly must have felt he was behind. But once the deuce came on the river, the odds of him being behind were very long.

 

I also think you are looking at the entire spectrum of hands when saying it is unlikely an opponent holds a K as oppossed to the likely spectrum of hands that would be involved, which increases the probability that another K is in play. I see your point, that if someone is in the hand, their cards must be semi-good. But many people (like myself) will limp with middle suited connectors...someone (or two) were probably on the A....KJ, QJ, any two suited cards.....the simple odds that 3 of the first 15-17 cards dealt (6-7 players x two cards each) + 3 flopped) were Ks are fairly long, and certainly in Spain's favor. Remember, this was a $300 max game, with the blinds at $1/$2....I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there were many agressive players limping with marginal cards, willing to make a run at a hand.

 

I also think a factor in determining my play is the position of the nit/rock (thogh, moe that I think of it, his position is less important than his being in the hand). His presence in the hand would make me want to check this hand even more. If another playe leads out and our nit/rock calls or folds, I let my hand go. Another player may lead with anything, but he is only calling with a hand that beats us. I agree 100%. But I would not necessarily put him on K-10. In fact, if he was the "rock" Spain said he was, he too shouldn't have limped with a so-so hand like K-10. If he was in fact a "rock", I'd have put him on KQ, maybe KJ. I'm not sure K-10 offsuit is that much better than Spain's Ks-2s (maybe 65-35 pre-flop?). But since he was a "rock", once Spain's flop bet was called, he surely knew he was behind...the chance this player was chasing a flush/straight was essentailly nil.

 

Aggressive table or not, selective aggression is the key, not reckless aggression. IMO, given the situation and nature of the flop, this is a case of reckless aggression trapping spain into an unwinnable position because the board happened to fall perfectly to trap him. Inevitably, thats what did happen. But again, I don't think a $15 lead-out bet is "reckless" agression. He stated he wanted to see where he was...perhaps a $5 bet at that point rather than a $15 bet (small potatoes at this point) would have done the trick, but I think he wanted to see right where he was, and based on the odds I mentioned earlier, was in good shape to do so. In fact, his strong wager might have even pushed out a better hand (K8, K7, K6, so on). I would also wager that if the deuce hadn't fallen on the turn, Spain would have been signifcantly more conservative, knowing he was behind.

 

I think we both agree that once the turn and river hit, he was going to be felted no matter how the betting went. I just don't think his $15 flop bet was a mistake. In more cases than not, that same $15 bet takes that $10 pot down. I'd have no problem playing the same cards in the same position the same way.

 

But I do agree that in hindsight, based on the bad luck of the cards falling the way they did, you can point to that $15 bet as the reason the hand went the way it did, and ultimately cost Spain considerably more ching.

 

Edited May 18, 2007 by i_am_the_swammi

[TimC]

You did nothing wrong... poker aint free. I lost a hand a few weeks ago (at least it was a limit game) with a boat aces over threes to a straight flush ... it happens.

 

 

Buddy I went with to Vegas was playing 2/5 at the Venetian and had pocket aces. Flop comes A-7-7. Money gets all in and the guy flips over pocket 7's. I thought you only saw those kind of hands online.

 

He lost about $800 on that one. The guy said he wishes he had $10k in front of him.

 

He was on tilt for 2 days afterwards. That'll mess with your head if you let it.

[darin3]

I would have re-raised all-in.