PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

HeHe :)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HeHe :)

    And heres me thinking i was being clever lol.

  • #2
    You got coolered.


    • #3
      Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
      You got coolered.
      think thats a cooler had qq a few hands before flop comes qk2 me and op get all our chips in he turns over kk and then hits quads to rub it in lol, i better stay off poker 2day lol, i have to laugh.


      • #4
        Not sure what you want analyzed here pest.

        The flat for the set mine here is OK I guess. Could make a case for an aggressive bet pre as well since you're going to be OOP after the flop and most times at least 1 over is going to flop,many time 2.

        Post-flop I would have led out here with 3 under cards on the board,even with 2 of them being paired. In this hand it may have saved you money in the long run if the quads plays back at you. In most hands it will be a good play as to try and price out the broadway hands that are probably up against you here. Look at it this way...short of flopping a 9 this is about as good a flop as you can hope for. Why would you check your option at that point,especially with a hand that is vulnerable to draws with this many players in the hand? ANY over card on the turn is going to be a scare card.

        After the turn you're pretty much always getting stacked here,nothing you can do.


        • #5
          So i should of raised pref being as oop and raised on the flop TY
          Last edited by PokerPest72; Mon Dec 12, 2011, 12:33 PM. Reason: typo


          • #6
            Meh,just saying raising pre IS an option,trying to take it down there or at least thin the field a little.

            Really I think the pre-flop flat by you is probably the better play and the one I would have most likely taken myself. Pretty much because it simples things up so much post-flop. If I hit my set then it's value betting time. If I miss and there are overs on the board it's check-fold time. if I miss and there are all unders on the board then again I'm betting a little more than a standard value bet because I would really want to try and take it down there so as not to give the turn a chance to peel an over.

            Really think you played the hand decently enough here except for the check on the flop. Don't care for that myself as a rule,though in this hand it wouldn't have saved you IF the villain is disciplined enough to just flat your raise. At 2NL that's not going to be the case too often,which again may have saved you some chips.


            • #7
              Originally posted by PokerPest72 View Post
              So i should of raised pref being as oop and raised on the flop TY
              Raising preflop is silly. It would trim off the bottom your opponents' ranges. People don't like calling 3bets preflop with weaker than 99. You also keep in lots of people for maximum setmining potential when you call instead of raising preflop.

              By checking on the flop, you control the pot so that if somebody does have a 2, they will have a harder time getting three streets of value out of you. Betting makes sure that people with hands like KJ don't see a free turn, but it also turns your hand face-up as a middling pair that needs protecting. I like checking the flop.


              • #8
                Love the check on the flop...

                99 is a minor over pair on a paired board, and that is not a good spot to be launching bets. You can call some bets but making them leaves you far too bluff-able, so good job.

                I love your lead out on the spike of top boat. Hands that got "cute" by slow playing the 2 are behind you now, and set up to pay you off well, so why not let them, right? Plus, there is really no sense in slow playing because after the flop check through, opp's either have a hand they will call a bet on NOW, or they do not have one they would call on at all.

                You have every reason to get 'em all in on your hand, as you are on the 2nd nuts. It is just a major cooler that the villain willing to get 'em in had the nuts. It happens...

                Well played.

                Hope it helps.

                Double Bracelet Winner


                • #9
                  the op with the quad 2,s had a massive vpip aswell i was praying he caught a piece of something lol, so it really made me laugh when he showed the nuts

                  Thanks all.


                  • #10

                    Since I've been told that my suggestion that a pre-flop raise here is a POSSIBLE play is "silly",I'm not going to pull my punches in my response.

                    First I said that it's a possible play to give consideration,but that I would also lean towards the standard set mining play here and just calling pre-flop myself. And in a multi-way pot with 99 that's essentially what you ARE doing,playing for a set mine only. The reality is that at least one over is going to flop most of the time and in a 4 way pot at least one player is likely to hit any overs that flop.

                    And this reality leads me to where I said that raising is a POSSIBLE line to take pre-flop. Because the simple truth of the matter is this...

                    This is a 2NL table. Given the types of hands most players will play here the 99 is very likely the BEST hand pre-flop. Just calling means that you are now hunkering down to play a hand that is likely to be BEHIND post-flop,with the extra added "bonus" of playing out of position. So why not instead at least give a thought to raising at the one point where your hand is most likely to be the best hand? The thinking I see displayed here seems to give in to the idea of the hand going to showdown being the only possible outcome. An aggressive re-raise pre-flop COULD take the hand down right there. In this case it very likely would have gotten the 22 hand to fold.

                    And yes,I completely understand that we DON'T want 22 hands to be folding to our 99 hands in most cases,nor A2 hands either for that matter. But what we CAN accomplish by betting out pre-flop is to maybe get some of the Broadway-x hands to fold. Having only one such hand stay around for the flop greatly increases our chances in this hand if we can achieve that with a pre-flop bet.

                    And yes I understand fully that we may be better served exercising pot control until we have a "made" hand here as another way to go. As I said it's the line I would most likely take myself. But to say that a pre-flop raise is just "silly",I just completely disagree with. I'm simply saying that taking an aggressive line pre-flop when in a 2NL setting we very likely have the best hand at that point (let's be frank---most 2NL players are making a BIG raise,even a ship,here if they have 1010 or better in the hands that acted before us...) IS something to consider. Being best at showdown is NOT the only way to win in this game I've been told.

                    As to loving the check post flop....Meh.

                    Yeah on the one hand you're "protecting" yourself against the possibility of there being an A2,88,other random hand that has a 2,22 itself or even an overpair that was slowplayed pre-flop but is that really the "best" line? In this hand it was obviously,but this is a case of hindsight being 20/20 I think. Isn't the probability of there being some mix of any BroadwayX hands and underpairs that missed much higher than the chances of there being a hand with a 2 in it,or someone hitting a set with their 88? I would think it is.

                    We have 99 here and 3 unders (one paired) have hit the board. Short of our hitting a set on the flop this is going to be, in many more cases than not, the best we can hope for. And we PASS on playing when we,again,very likely have the best of it,to let yet another street peel off unchallenged? Sorry,this leads me to wonder why the Hell we're even playing the 9's to begin with,unless of course we're saying that 99 has NO value except as a set mining hand.

                    Lastly I have to say this because it's something that's been growing on my mind of late...

                    ...I see a pattern of many (most?) responses to queries in Hands Analysis and other areas of the Forum as being made in the vacuum of what their equity calculators and/or HUDs are telling them to make. That's NOT taking into account the reality that poker isn't a "one size fits all" proposition in many cases. Yes the over-arching concepts of equity and odds are the baseline for a solid game,but as Barry G said "sometimes math is stupid".

                    What I mean by that is this...

                    To think that what may be a correct play at one level is necessarily the correct play when weighed against the objective realities of the typical skill set of players in another level is a very dangerous fallacy IMO. And that isn't even getting into the inherent differences of why a certain play in a ring game may be correct,but would be a bad play in a MTT or SNG setting. And 2NL is not 5NL,is not 10NL and so on. This needs to be accounted for more I think. To ignore the realities of the player tendencies and how they change from one level to the next is a blindspot in our analysis if we persist in it.

                    This is something I think we need to get more input from the players when they submit their queries and need to consider ourselves when making our responses,so as to better serve them with our responses.

                    You may now flail away.
                    Last edited by Moxie Pip; Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:22 AM.


                    • #11
                      No flail. I have a hot chocolate right now so I'm feeling cozy. I think I salted it too much though.

                      Calling with 99 is just what I think is the best play, which is why I stated it as strongly as I did. I'm not as set on checking the flop for sure, but it would be my preference. Many approaches definitely have merit, and I'm not trying to stomp anyone's feelings when I post. I'm just being straight with my opinions, though I'm aware I sometimes come across as a bit of a dufflebag.

                      As to the lack of advice on how to perform more player-centered hand analysis rather than card-centred hand analysis, I think the main reason we focus on the math is because the math is easy to assess. Players aren't, because every player does it differently, and people rarely provide enough info in their OP's to get a real line on specific villain behaviour. And while there isn't necessarily a universally correct play for any given poker situation, I think some situations get pretty close to having one play that is superior to the others, because if poker were 100% situation-based, it would be almost impossible to analyse in a forum.


                      • #12
                        LOL,it's all good PP. Not worried about my feelings,trust me the political forum I engage in on a daily basis would laugh their azzes off at what can get you a reprimand on here.

                        My point is just that rejecting the POSSIBILITY of raising pre out of hand is being...let's say a little positive in one's thinking. And again,for the record, I DO think that checking pre is probably the best line as well. As to checking or raising on the flop I do lean towards the raise myself (which in this particular hand MAY have saved me chips since if the villain plays back at me in that spot it's the one point in the hand where I can most easily see myself being behind) but do think checking is viable as well. Just the raise is my preference.

                        And yeah,what you responded with here is my point exactly and I hope the peeps that see it take it to heart whence framing their queries here. Giving the analyzers as much complete info (game structure,point within that structure if an MTT/SNG setting,any SOLID reads---not VPIP's when you've seen 20 hands,that's meaningless really) all of this can help the analyzers give a much more complete answer.

                        That being said without that info then of course the math is all we have and therefore the quality of the answers are going to be naturally hamstrung a little as a result.

                        I still think this section is a great idea and a great learning aid,but if the players would be more diligent and specific in their submissions it could be even that much better.



                        X Cookies Information

                        We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.