Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions / Old Hand Analysis Section /

Lucky to lose and still double-up!

 
Old
Default
Lucky to lose and still double-up! - Wed Oct 19, 2011, 08:34 AM
(#1)
royalraise85's Avatar
Since: Jul 2011
Posts: 26,020
(Community Coordinator)
Plenty of limpers here so I decide to limp along in position. I was extremely lucky here that it was the BB that was short stacked and the Small Blind that had the large stack. If it was the other way around I'd have been crushed.......

This is one of the rare hands where I lose and still manage to nearly double-up.

I jammed post flop be cause the pot was one third of my stack and I knew I was going to be pot committed. I did not for one second think that I would be beaten by a higher straight which is one of the leaks in my game that I need to work on.

All thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Sorry, this hand was deleted by its owner

Last edited by TOO2COO; Wed Oct 19, 2011 at 04:06 PM.. Reason: Removed Twitter Addy
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 09:00 AM
(#2)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,802
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
KJ is definitely in a limper's range and due to that, do not like the shove on the flop. The flop bet was only about 1/10th your stack and I'd have called and re-evaluated on the turn.
A 1/10th stack bet does NOT commit you to the pot. It's a BET of 1/3rd your stack that could commit you, not the pot size.
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 11:30 AM
(#3)
JARGON1977's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 66
JWK ,

I thought , relating to commitment decision , that a call of 10% on the flop is effectively a large enough call that we must decide then if we are prepared to commit our hand to the felt (play for stacks) or decide to only peel card (to improve our hand , as you said re-evaluate) .

In this case the 'Hero's' straight was already made , would we only be calling the bet to enable us to fold to aggression from 'iceman' if a King turned up .

I wonder , are we not justified in trying to get heads up (by shoving over 'icemans' check) with our straight at a cost of only 130 chips to the higher straight (by Gubler), or are we most concerned that 'icemans' min raise form the SB is holding KJ ?

JARGON1977

Last edited by JARGON1977; Wed Oct 19, 2011 at 11:39 AM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 12:12 PM
(#4)
ohjeohje's Avatar
Since: Oct 2011
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by JARGON1977 View Post
JWK ,

I thought , relating to commitment decision , that a call of 10% on the flop is effectively a large enough call that we must decide then if we are prepared to commit our hand to the felt (play for stacks) or decide to only peel card (to improve our hand , as you said re-evaluate) .

In this case the 'Hero's' straight was already made , would we only be calling the bet to enable us to fold to aggression from 'iceman' if a King turned up .

I wonder , are we not justified in trying to get heads up (by shoving over 'icemans' check) with our straight at a cost of only 130 chips to the higher straight (by Gubler), or are we most concerned that 'icemans' min raise form the SB is holding KJ ?

JARGON1977
We are already committed with our hand. We must think how we get all chips from SB. Hero should not be concerned about BB holding. Could have just about anything.

Yes hero made straight and he raises all in. What are we getting call from? another straight? Two pair? Overpair? Hero got lucky as SB had AA and wanted to gamble. By calling we want to SB to pay our bets with pair etc.

BTW if turn is K its not bad card, J is bad card for HERO.

Are we just happy BB small pot? I want more and luring SB to pot is what we want. By raising all in we might lose SB.

Last edited by ohjeohje; Wed Oct 19, 2011 at 12:14 PM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 03:04 PM
(#5)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
You start with a 40+BB stack here, so calling a limp from position with suited J8 is largely a style choice.

If you feel your opponents are weak post flop, coming along with hands like that will lose you some small pots, while possibly setting you up to win some big pots.
I would say the more you feel you have a post flop skill advantage on opponents, the more you'd want to be playing hands like this in spots like this; the LESS confident you are about your relative skill, or the less clear how your opponents are "making mistakes" it is, the less prone to playing these sorts of hands you should be.

When the flop comes and you hit "gin" (the Q high straight), at that point you are NOT thinking about folding at all. Those are the sorts of hands you are PRAYING for when you enter a pot with something like J8s, and ANY contemplation of a fold when you get it defeats the purpose of coming along in the first place.

Just for clarification...we are NOT "committed" to the pot based on the amount we have invested! We are committed here because the flop has hit us so HARD we are certainly not folding BEFORE we pass a committment threshold for our stack. As it stands, when the action comes back to us, we could elect to CALL the 130 jam, and that would only have us about 15% invested. Normally that is an amount we cold FOLD if we felt a severe threat (even though we wouldn't like it). But the fact we elected to enter on a speculative hand, then hit it BIG means we are all but certain to be willing to put in at least double our current investment, or else why play J8s at all, right? So yeah, we are definately committed by the flop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JARGON1977 View Post
JWK ,

I thought , relating to commitment decision , that a call of 10% on the flop is effectively a large enough call that we must decide then if we are prepared to commit our hand to the felt (play for stacks) or decide to only peel card (to improve our hand , as you said re-evaluate) .

In this case the 'Hero's' straight was already made , would we only be calling the bet to enable us to fold to aggression from 'iceman' if a King turned up .

I wonder , are we not justified in trying to get heads up (by shoving over 'icemans' check) with our straight at a cost of only 130 chips to the higher straight (by Gubler), or are we most concerned that 'icemans' min raise form the SB is holding KJ ?

JARGON1977
Fact is Jargon, if your hand were more vulnerable to suck outs and you felt you currently had the best hand, this line of thinking is not bad. But in the case here, how vulnerable are you to suck outs?

- If the board pairs, a set or 2 pair might have boated.
- If a J comes, you may lose out to a better straight.
- If a K comes, you have a lesser chance of losing to a better straight.

That's about it...

Based on that, you really want to configure the bet size decision on the flop (whether to call or raise) in such a way to get the most value form the SB. Without info on the SB, it is really hard to say what the best choice would be, but the immediate all in is not really going to work all that well in most spots here.
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 04:12 PM
(#6)
oriholic's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 751
BronzeStar
This is actually precisely why J8 is one of the biggest "trouble hands". Because on QT9 you WILL get stacked by KJ, and there's nothing you can do about it. Same deal with Q9 on KJT (lose to AQ). This doesn't mean don't play them, but that's an important risk to consider.

No way can you ever fold obv.

Also , Iceman's telegraph preflop, and mazuroff's limp/fold to a minraise multi-way are both terrible.

Your play seems fine, though, maybe just call/make a smaller raise like you're trying to iso but don't want to commit. Again, you can never fold, even though KJ is totally possible. You even have a backdoor flush draw which is nice.

Also Iceman has AA or KK here almost always, so it's slightly less likely that the short stack has KJ. He can jam his less-than-half-pot bet in with a whole lot less. Like, any pair or draw...
 
Old
Default
Wed Oct 19, 2011, 04:54 PM
(#7)
JARGON1977's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 66
Ok ,ty .

I think I may have misunderstood one of the posts , but I get the gist of the hand now .

Thankyou .
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com