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.

When you play correct but luck plays a part

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • When you play correct but luck plays a part

    Villain Reg Multi Tabler 22/15 Tagged ABC Toned down the way I play AK as been get owned lately so reverted to Fit or Fold depending on the player. A hand where you do everything right but get owned. Then the bugger RUNS !! I HATE PLAYERS THAT RUN Sometime ago I even emailed PokerStars on this subject. My point was in a Casino/Poker Room you can't table jump and rabbit hole. The software should make a player playing the same limit table the same amount and only after an hour start again with 80c This person was on loads of tables, maybe he or she was embarrassed after me putting in chat "VERY LUCKY" Sorry rant over

  • #2
    This is a pretty bad suckout, but I'm not really sure you "did everything right".
    Flatting pre is OK, as villain is repping a big hand when he makes it 5x in EP. The flop comes KQx and villain bets 2/3 pot. Why are you minraising? Raising the flop with TPTK is generally a mistake. It valuecuts/valueowns you. Villain can definitely have KQ, KK, QQ and AA here. You do not want to get shoved on and have to fold TPTK after bloating the pot. (Especially as villain might also have AK. Imagine folding when you're choppng!)
    If he's c-betting with a hand like JJ, then he's usually folding to a raise, so you don't get any value on future streets by raising here. If he has something more marginal, like a gutshot with AJ, then your minraise gives him decent odds to call.
    My play would be to just flat the flop. With villain's stack being short, he's stacking off on the turn anyway if he has any piece of the board. I guess an option is to just put him all in immediately, but there's still another player in the pot. If he has a set, you're losing your stack.

    Btw, this player migh be a "reg" in that he plays multiple tables, but his stats are far from ABC. He's a semi-LAG, and since he has 69c to start the hand, he's basically a bad short-stacker, as evidenced by his iso-raise with KT in EP. A TAG reg does not make that play.

    As for your rant, Pokerstars already has rules about "rat-holing" (you can't come back to the same table with less money than you took off it), but they are considering further expanding the idea so that players can't buy-in at tables of that limit with less than their "average stack" or something like that. I personally don't have a problem with someone taking their winnings off the table and buying in short on another. Most of the shorties are pretty bad players, anyway, but you can't force someone to play deep. Players can leave whenever they like. Removing table-hoppng completely would not be good for players trying to build a bankroll.
    Last edited by ArtySmokesPS; Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:21 PM.
    Bracelet Winner


    • #3
      I doubt they were embarrassed.

      I'm certainly never embarrassed when I suckout. I am just totting up my profit/loss.

      And I tend to close tables after a nice winning hand that puts me in profit, though I play Zoom so I dont really think it is the same as rat-holing because the player I have stacked or won a big one agains is unlikely to be one of the next set of people I get seated with.

      I can understand how it is annoying at regular tables, and like Arty says PS are looking into solutions for this and some other problems, so big changes may be on the way re: rat-holing and bum-hunting.

      As an aside, rat-holing, bum-hunting, sucking-out all seems slightly homo-erotic terms. I like that



      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.