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.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

200NL hand analysis needed

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 200NL hand analysis needed

    I'm now trying the 200NL since my bankroll permits me to do so. Someone ask what was my reasoning to his huge bet on the river, so here was my hole thought process as I played it. Not much info on the player, seen him a few times at the table and thought he was an aggressive player. Pre flop he makes a 2.5x re-raise, which to me is a normal re-raise Post flop he just calls, normally if you have a hand, you want value, so he would of raised. At this point, I put him on Ax, basically a missed flop and my initial plan is that I'm going to showdown with top pair On the turn, I decided to bet 1/3 and get him to raise He does, now I put him on possible flush, so I didn't want to inflate the pot so I just called On the river, both possible flushes are not in play anymore and no A's showed up, so in my mind I got the best hand unless he's got a set or AA. I decided to show him that I was weak and that he should be the first to talk. When he made a 65% pot bet. I looked at my stack, if I call I'm down to $150, so I'll be down $50, sure I could fold, but it wasn't my plan from the beginning, or I could go all in and lose my initial $200, so I opted to call. Hope this makes sense Were my thoughts ok? Did I play it right? Did I get maximum value?

  • #2
    Ever onwards and upwards Sandtrap! Your thought processes look fine to me - but trying to think from the opponents POV - with cards up - I cannot fathom what they are trying to represent, knowing they hold nothing that precludes your actual (good but not stellar) or possibly better holdings. Other than AA which you would 4-bet pre - but they would bet the flop surely??? But as this is exactly 100x my comfort level the thinking will be very different - I look forward to the analysis of this one. I think it will be hard for anyone to show how the opp could be representing anything better than what you hold. Good luck with your continued success. umbup: Ed from Edinburgh - EdinFreeMan
    Last edited by EdinFreeMan; Fri May 17, 2013, 11:19 PM.
    4 Time Bracelet Winner


    Comment


    • #3
      Actually that makes sense when he just flats i guess but when he raises the turn a set of 6s looks likely im not sure on that one myself i think if he raised the flop then you would have to fold but after what you just said that makes sense to me as for did you make max value are you serious lol the next time you come across him id expect him to only bet at you like that with a real hand next time.

      I like this mind game you like playing where you get people to lead your TPTK.
      Last edited by mike2198; Fri May 17, 2013, 11:33 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Way, way outside my comfort zone although I played 600nl and 1000nl a long time ago and lost a lot of money too LOL

        IF you had shoved could this guy actually call the river?

        I have no idea...

        Cheers,

        TC

        Comment


        • #5
          Whilst we wait for the experts - keep going over this - wondering all sorts of stuff -

          can I query this Sand

          "On the turn, I decided to bet 1/3 and get him to raise
          He does, now I put him on possible flush, so I didn't want to inflate the pot so I just called"

          there are now two flush draws spades/clubs

          I can't see then calling flop/raising turn with two spades especially AQs - so are we thinking club draw - maybe AcQc (from Sands viewpoint) I could see a reraise pre with AQclubs but not sure about a flop call with just the Kc - with 2 spades I can't see them not betting the flop then betting the turn.

          And if we now put them on a flush draw as a possible - don't we want to get in ahead here, or are we saying that is one possibility and we want to see if it comes, and the other possibilities are maybe AA/KK however unlikely and pot control for all the stuff that is currently ahead/possibly outdrawing.

          Fascinating - I can't think this out even over a few minutes/(hours?) - note to self - stick to 2NL...


          Ed
          4 Time Bracelet Winner


          Comment


          • #6
            I think sandtrap put him on the flush draw and thought that the villain might get all in if he kept raising so i think he wanted to keep the pot small and see the river to maksure it never came out, his read was obviously good but i guess there was still doubt in his head if he was gonna win this hand because if he was 100% sure he had the draw he would of just shipped the river.

            Comment


            • #7
              This looks like a very weirdly played hand to me But then again this is 200nl; I can't say much.
              just my 2cents on this.

              First, I think when someone raises an UTG open his value range is going to be very tight and his bluffs less frequent.
              Playing AKo OOP is also something I'm not happy about.
              Given that, I think we can choose to fold - as nitty as that may sound OR choose to 4bet depending on opponent stats. But you don't provide any.

              OTF, I don't understand what you achieve with the donk bet. It looks like you're playing your hand backwards which seems to be very tricky. Worked nicely this time, but might get ourselves into more trouble in general.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm not going to write a complete analysis, partly because you're playing stakes much higher than I am ever likely to, but I will say your play and thought process are almost exactly the opposite to how I understand the situation.

                Like geo, I don't want to call pre-flop and play out of position without the betting lead. I'd either 4-bet or fold.
                If I did decide to call, I wouldn't be donking out, I'd be check-calling. Since you did donk out, villain can kind of play perfectly. If he puts you on a king and he can't beat that, he can fold, so you get no value. If he has AK/KK/AA (all likely hands given the pre-flop action), he can control the size of the pot in position, building it when he has KK+ and letting you valueown yourself.
                If he has nothing, then his plan is to float, with the aim of to taking the pot away on the turn. When you bet small on the turn, your hand looks like JJ/TT that wants to get to showdown cheaply with a couple of blocking bets. If it was your intention to induce a bluff, that's fine, but I'd just bet for value if I think I'm ahead. Especially if I think villain has a flush draw, then I want to make a BIG bet to get maximum value from it.
                The small turn bet makes this a perfect opportunity for villain to seize on your weakness and rep his monster. If I was in your shoes, I'm folding here, because villain's action says "I have top set or AA". I'm not sure how you can put him on a bluff here. Every action he took is consistent with the virtual nuts. He's obviously barreling the river as the fourth part of the story.
                His "story" makes perfect sense to me. It's just his actual hand that doesn't.

                If this villain is a winning reg at 200NL, I should think he was scratching his head after this hand. Given the line you took, AK would be the last thing he'd expect you to show up with, I would think. :/
                Last edited by ArtySmokesPS; Sat May 18, 2013, 02:18 AM.
                Bracelet Winner

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by geoVARTA View Post
                  This looks like a very weirdly played hand to me But then again this is 200nl; I can't say much.
                  just my 2cents on this.

                  First, I think when someone raises an UTG open his value range is going to be very tight and his bluffs less frequent.
                  Playing AKo OOP is also something I'm not happy about.
                  Given that, I think we can choose to fold - as nitty as that may sound OR choose to 4bet depending on opponent stats. But you don't provide any.

                  OTF, I don't understand what you achieve with the donk bet. It looks like you're playing your hand backwards which seems to be very tricky. Worked nicely this time, but might get ourselves into more trouble in general.
                  LOL...OK
                  Maybe you should read more of my posts to understand how I play and it's been working now for over 18 months. I now have played 3 sessions at 200NL and they all have been very positive.
                  Just my 2 cents

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Arty, I understand your point and view

                    But like I've said before and often, It seems that every card played and in the matter it's played we must play a certain way. That's were I disagree.

                    Why wouldn't you fool a player by playing the opposite way?
                    I'm UTG, but if I decide to pass the UTG to the other player by checking, now I get control. What's wrong with that?

                    I'm not saying to always do that, but if you mix it up a bit

                    PS. If this was a donk bet, that means I'm a donk, well then, I'm winning donk...thanks

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by ArtySmokesPS View Post
                      I'm not going to write a complete analysis, partly because you're playing stakes much higher than I am ever likely to, but I will say your play and thought process are almost exactly the opposite to how I understand the situation.

                      Like geo, I don't want to call pre-flop and play out of position without the betting lead. I'd either 4-bet or fold.
                      If I did decide to call, I wouldn't be donking out, I'd be check-calling. Since you did donk out, villain can kind of play perfectly. If he puts you on a king and he can't beat that, he can fold, so you get no value. If he has AK/KK/AA (all likely hands given the pre-flop action), he can control the size of the pot in position, building it when he has KK+ and letting you valueown yourself.
                      If he has nothing, then his plan is to float, with the aim of to taking the pot away on the turn. When you bet small on the turn, your hand looks like JJ/TT that wants to get to showdown cheaply with a couple of blocking bets. If it was your intention to induce a bluff, that's fine, but I'd just bet for value if I think I'm ahead. Especially if I think villain has a flush draw, then I want to make a BIG bet to get maximum value from it.
                      The small turn bet makes this a perfect opportunity for villain to seize on your weakness and rep his monster. If I was in your shoes, I'm folding here, because villain's action says "I have top set or AA". I'm not sure how you can put him on a bluff here. Every action he took is consistent with the virtual nuts. He's obviously barreling the river as the fourth part of the story.
                      His "story" makes perfect sense to me. It's just his actual hand that doesn't.

                      If this villain is a winning reg at 200NL, I should think he was scratching his head after this hand. Given the line you took, AK would be the last thing he'd expect you to show up with, I would think. :/

                      I'm confusiboozled - ???

                      Ed
                      4 Time Bracelet Winner


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Hey Sandtrap!

                        For me, calling the 3-bet preflop oop would be extremely read dependant. I run a HUD, so I could easily check their 3-bet% and get an idea of their range.

                        If I did call I would have lead with a bet on the flop like you did, but I would have bet more 70% pot. Both to give him bad odds if he has spades and because people tend to call flop bets lighter than bets on later streets.

                        On the turn I would have barreled as you did, but again, larger because there are now two threatening flush draws. I wouldn't mind if I took down the pot now.

                        I love the river play! If he was chasing, he won't call a bet. But he might try to bluff you off the pot if he thinks you were chasing. I definately wouldn't raise him. I think you would just get value owned. All the bluffs would fold and only AA, KK or another AK are calling.

                        In other words, I would often take the same actions, but with diffent bet sizes.

                        Nice hand

                        Roland GTX

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I can understand both of your point of views but when sandtrap said he donked and villain only calls this is saying that the villains holdings is weak? why would he just flat if he had pocket kings here when i see some donk i expect it to be a decent hand on that flop but then the villain goes insane on the turn because sandtrap bet 3rd of the pot showing alot of weakness so he though il get him off his TPTK at best .

                          Imo the only hand i could put villain on is pocket 66s but i dunno if they 3bet that at those stakes, i dont know if his flat call on the flop is enough to go with that he doesnt have a made hand but i would expect a lag to just go insane on the flop with pocket KK why would a lag slow play a made hand on the flop he would start building right there?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            One of the things I love watching on PSO is Dave's analysis and leak busting and his thought process therein.

                            Sometimes I look at hands I have played and think how I have missed a lot of value especially in cash and others I have stuck to hands that i had no business being there with. I do not have a HUD or a tracker as playing as little as I do does not justify it but I will download and request hands from the site. Last Sunday I played just over 200 hands with a BB/100 win rate of 200BB (self calculated); I actually also lost a stack of 100BB and one of 250BB in this session. My best hands pre were AKo and the next best was a pair of sixes that just happened to hit a six on the flop.

                            I played tight as far as stats were concerned (I would estimate about 18/12) but the hands I actually played would not even fall in that range as I got so much crap. I just stole a lot, won a lot of small pots and fortuitously called large turn or river bets when I felt I was ahead: the best hand I had was a small flush which funnily enough lost me 250 BB.

                            I am not sure of the point I am making here but Sand has played for 18 months with what many would say is a tricky/nit style and yet it is a target to so many players on PSO to set, achieve and outstrip their goals and I for one can remember when his posts were just swept aside as a blog

                            So what I am saying is that conventional, straight forward play can be a winning strategy but equally a non conventional approach can achieve similar or even better results.

                            Long may it continue

                            Cheers,

                            TC

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
                              Arty, I understand your point and view
                              But like I've said before and often, It seems that every card played and in the matter it's played we must play a certain way. That's were I disagree.
                              I don't think you have to play a certain way. As I understand it, at higher stakes there is more room for creativity. Being unpredictable can work in your favour. You asked if your thoughts were OK and did you play it right. I'm just saying I'd play it differently, as your line is very different from the "standard" lines I try and stick to.

                              Originally posted by Sandtrap777 View Post
                              Why wouldn't you fool a player by playing the opposite way?
                              I'm UTG, but if I decide to pass the UTG to the other player by checking, now I get control. What's wrong with that?
                              There's nothing wrong with mixing it up, but I don't see how checking gives you any control whatsoever. It does the opposite. I really don't like giving control of the hand to another player, especially if he has position, because he can bet for value or as a bluff and I have no way of knowing which it is. What's "wrong" with checking is that you're giving the villain the keys to the bus. He can drive the action. If he doesn't want to play a big pot, he can check behind. How do you get value if you don't bet? Against aggro players, checking to induce a bluff is a great idea. It happens all the time at high stakes. (Watch 'HSP', and see Johnny Chan flat call with AA in a multiway pot, in order to induce a squeeze play, or see one of the guys check TPTK on the flop and turn on a wet board).
                              Personally, I much prefer to be the player driving the action. If I have the best hand, I want to bet it and get called by worse hands, including draws. The last thing I want to do is give free cards, especially if it's possible villain is on a draw. The biggest problem is I hate having to guess on the river. I want to narrow a villain's range, and I usually do that by betting. Turning yourself into a calling station is fine against blufftards, but I wouldn't want to make a habit of it against unknowns.

                              As TC says, your style has had great results, but it's clearly quite different to "standard" play, and goes against much of what the trainers are teaching. "Tricky" play would generally get newcomers to the game in all sorts of trouble, as seen in some of the other threads in this forum.
                              Bracelet Winner

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              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.