Poker did I play this hand good or bad?
I had jj utg in 10c20c cash game. I min raised (following chris ferguasons rules of thumb in raise sizes because of position) I got called by one player and a player who I previously noted as a player who COULD be familiar with the squeeze play on the button, re raised pot. I felt I could just as easily be ahead here just as much as I could be crushed so decided to call and re analyse on the flop. Other guy folded. Flop 2510 I check he bet 3/4 pot. Now I want to know where I'm at here. I don't want to call and risk here sucks out if he is bluffing, and plus I feel I could easily have the best hand so want to know right now. I doubled his raised add bait and he tank called which confused the **** out of me. Turn I binges luckily so shoved 3/4 the pot and he tank folded. I think he might of had 99 but on the turn at the time I felt he might have qq possibly aa kk and put me on a set (I doubt that now). Now again looking back at the hand I prob should of checked the turn but he may of had a flush with like aq ak so didn't want to give him a free card. What do you think of my play? (I was abit tilted in this hand because of my downswing so yet again I'm Going to take s break from the game for abit)
Flop had 2 spades and I meant binged not binges lol and I meant flush draw not flush
- Divide By ZeroLv 79 years agoFavorite Answer
I think your utg minraise was a bad idea. It attracts too many players to see the flop, gives you no info on what they have, and induces light 3-bets which you won't have much info on either (they could easily be weak since you only minraised, or they could have a legit hand because any legit hand must 3bet). So the minraise means you'll be out of position against lots of opponents, without info.
But I'd like to read what Ferguson said, because maybe there's something I'm overlooking. Ferguson is a mathy player. What was the book/article in which he discussed that play? Was it relating to cash games or tourneys?
Anyway, you somehow only got 1 caller, then the button 3bet. This is a tough spot you put yourself in. If he's a good player, his range is wide here so a 4bet is a good idea. Flat-calling might have advantages too (depending on who the raiser is) if you're somehow pretty sure the 3rd guy will fold and it will be heads-up to the flop. If you're unsure of that, I think you should definitely 4-bet so it doesn't end up 3-handed with you first to act.
So I did some reading on the topic of preflop raise-sizing. Turns out it's a reoccurring debate on 2+2, one that isn't exactly settled.
In Chapter 21 of "The Mathematics of Poker", the authors argue that Jesus' strategy is game-theory-optimal (GTO). I like the reasons they give and I'm temporarily convinced, but I'll have to learn more about GTO before deciding whether anything is missing from their argument. They seem to be implying that when playing GTO, post-flop position isn't important. I don't know if that's true (it wouldn't surprise me), nor do I even know if they're really implying that.
Regardless, I think the Jesus strategy is only good against GTO opponents, not for exploiting, and this appears to be the consensus on 2+2. Since you're always gonna be exploiting, especially at low-stakes where GTO is useless, it's better to do the opposite of Jesus: raise more in early position and less in late position.
Now for the postflop analysis.
I think betting/checking this flop depends on the opponent, but I guess the default is to check since he's the preflop raiser and he has position. If he missed the flop, checking might induce a c-bet, whereas betting would most likely make him fold (he's aware that you called a 3bet preflop).
He bets 3/4 pot.
I agree with raising. I don't think calling would conceal much. You raised UTG preflop, then called a 3bet, so following that up with a check-call isn't gonna make him put you on an OOP float with air. He'll have to think you're staying in with something. So if you call, he'd know you're strong (only thing he'd be wondering is how strong) while you wouldn't know how strong he is. That would be a disadvantage.
If he has air and you call, he's probably giving up anyway for the reasons mentioned. If you check again on the Turn he'll probably check behind. So by raising the flop you're not missing out on more bets. You're protecting your hand.
He calls. Now the Turn is an interesting spot. But before I try to analyze it, you need to say what the card was. I don't know what you mean by, "I binged". Haven't heard that term before in poker.
Also, what are the stack sizes? I notice you say you *shoved* 3/4 pot on the Turn. 3/4 pot was an all-in? (I should have asked before analyzing the flop action, but too late.)
- 5 years ago
You are eighty% to win after the flop... so that you obtained fortunate to your 30 hand simulation, you will have to most effective win 24 occasions, now not 26. But matters occur. Was it a nasty play? You did not supply us sufficient expertise. You limped, then wager 1200. Well how a lot did you've gotten left? What have been the blinds? Was 1200 a small wager, significant wager? Cash recreation? Late in a match? We don't have any notion. You limp with 10's then what? You fold while any prime card hits the board. I'd say it was once a nasty play, you then obtained unfortunate, however with out extra data, I are not able to say.
- pdqLv 79 years ago
You are a brilliant analyst and poker player. It's clear that you think of every angle, so you must be making TONS of money playing poker.
Nobody could have possibly played this hand more expertly than you.