[Clipper]

Savior17, I think the prudent play (unless playing a maniac) would be to fold the AK to the SB's reraise. You would lose a small pot, no harm done. Even if he has a pair you are behind in the hand. Say he has QQ, if you hit the flop you are not going to get any more out of him. You should have decided to push or fold to his reraise, depending on stack sizes of course. Once you get around 1/3 of your stack committed before the flop you should push to gain fold equity (convince him to fold to your re-reraise - a very strong move by the way) and to ensure you see all 5 cards. I would have folded though. If you are better than your opponents you would rather play hands where you have a significant advantage, rather than just taking a coin flip (although in a tourney a coinflip may be desirable at times).

[Clipper]

Congrats on your success Savior17. If you did it, it ain't bragging. I am not one of those insecure types who can't stand to hear people tell you of their success. I can give you some advice though, you will make waves on this site by bragging (better off telling the bad beat story . . . lol).

[Savior17]

Originally Posted by Clipper

Savior17, I think the prudent play (unless playing a maniac) would be to fold the AK to the SB's reraise. You would lose a small pot, no harm done. Even if he has a pair you are behind in the hand. Say he has QQ, if you hit the flop you are not going to get any more out of him. You should have decided to push or fold to his reraise, depending on stack sizes of course. Once you get around 1/3 of your stack committed before the flop you should push to gain fold equity (convince him to fold to your re-reraise - a very strong move by the way) and to ensure you see all 5 cards. I would have folded though. If you are better than your opponents you would rather play hands where you have a significant advantage, rather than just taking a coin flip (although in a tourney a coinflip may be desirable at times).

Thanks. I agree. I was partially on card-dead tilt. Everytime I had a decent pocket pair, the flop came AKT or AQx and there was a bet and a raise before me prompting me to shake my head in disgust.....all night. Lesson learned.

[Savior17]

Originally Posted by Clipper

Congrats on your success Savior17. If you did it, it ain't bragging. I am not one of those insecure types who can't stand to hear people tell you of their success. I can give you some advice though, you will make waves on this site by bragging (better off telling the bad beat story . . . lol).

Thanks.
Nah. The people here are much nicer than those of some other websites that do nothing but flame.

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by Clipper

I checked the turn to see if the board paired (even though I knew I had the best hand on the turn). I knew he had an A (or potentially 66, A5, or A6) and simply was not folding even if I pushed.

You knew you had the best hand, and knew he wouldn't fold... how does that lead to a check?

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by yeltzen

Well, I'm done with the book, but I mostly just skimmed the last 20 or so pages. I will be interested in seeing what the consensus on the book is a few months from now. I feel No Limit Hold'em Theory and Practice is by far the stronger book. The major thing I took from Professional No Limit Hold'em is that you should have already decided you're committed before you actually commit. That has helped me a lot, because my tendency is to play it street-by-street, and I usually go for the most passive option. By committing before the money goes in, I can't out-think myself any more. I like it.

Overall, though, too much time is spent on SPR, which really is not that useful of a concept, in my opinion (as I'm sure you've gathered), and not enough time is spent on REM and general hand reading. That's the stuff that makes you a great no limit player. Knowing when and how to commit is great, and it will make you a consistent winner, but being able to put people on hands and take advantage of playing tendencies is what will make you a big consistent winner. Also, SPR straddles the fence of going against the big pot-big hand, small pot-small hand mentality. Unless you're a short stack, getting your target SPR will require building a pretty big pot preflop with hands like AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, QQ, etc. Those are decent hands, but hardly big hands. I don't really know how I feel about trying to get an SPR of 4-7 preflop with these hands. If you miss, can you really c-bet? You're going to be putting a huge amount of your stack in the pot at this point on a bluff. I much prefer keeping the pot relatively small with AQ and then c-betting a smallish amount if I miss. I like picking up these little pots. I don't want to have to risk half my stack on a c-bet.

The book is pretty cheap (like all 2+2 books), so I would recommend it to everyone, but I would advise taking the SPR section with a grain of salt. The examples they show are very, very contrived. They always work out perfectly so you can get the exact SPR you want, and the villain always wants to get all in against you. Please. The majority of the situations you'll run into are that the people in the hand have 100BB stacks, and you'll be unable to get a good SPR without playing like a dope. As long as you understand that SPR is just a general guideline for figuring out how the money is most likely to go in, the book will be helpful. If you start adjusting your preflop game based on it, I think you'll be in trouble.

I think SPR is better expressed as 'pots behind' (which is probably because I read as that before this book). If you think of your stack as the # of pots you have left, you can do the planning/commitment/etc. without having to figure out what ratio you 'want' in a hand. The important part is thinking of your stack in terms of the pot developing.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by Poboy

You knew you had the best hand, and knew he wouldn't fold... how does that lead to a check?

Basically I can see not wanting to get all the money in now with a strong (bottom set) but vulnerable hand but a check seems like leaving money on the table. Also, you state you have the best hand on the turn but then put him on a hand like 66,A5,A6 which contradicts your statement. I can't get to pokerstove to run the real numbers but what range do you put him on.

Lets assume a more reasonable hand like a strong A (AQ,AK,AJ). On the turn, you are an 84% favorite. Why would you check here? The only arguments I can see are you are dangerously close to being pot committed with a strong but vulnerable and don't want your whole stack committed. If you small bet, you figure he will put you all in (not necessarily bad) while a more reasonable pot sized bet basically commits you to the hand also. Given you left out stacks sizes and pot sizes, its hard tell but I can't see you committing a lot of money preflop with 55 and you only bet 1.5x the pot on the flop which unless you are short stacking or it was a large multiway, raised pot preflop, doesn't sound like a lot of money has been put in play. It sounds like you were playing with scared money and were just worried about variance. In that case, get it all in on the turn and offer to run it twice.

My question is what sort of advantage are you looking for to get your money in with?

[Clipper]

One last post to answer Poboy's question.

I checked the turn because if the board paired or another A hit, I was ph*cked. I would no longer have the best hand. When the A came on river, I knew I no longer had the best hand, and folded to a large bet, saving some cash. I had a higher EV by waiting until the river to get the chips in if board did not pair or another A hit. Not many players would understand this move because it is so counterintuitive. They think, clearly you should get your money in with the best hand. But if I did that and he drew out on me, I would have lost my stack. By taking a free card and peeking at the river card (he was planning a checkraise or a check call), I escaped with most of my stack. I would have still collected if a blank fell on river.

[hachkc]

Originally Posted by Clipper

One last post to answer Poboy's question.

I checked the turn because if the board paired or another A hit, I was ph*cked. I would no longer have the best hand. When the A came on river, I knew I no longer had the best hand, and folded to a large bet, saving some cash. I had a higher EV by waiting until the river to get the chips in if board did not pair or another A hit. Not many players would understand this move because it is so counterintuitive. They think, clearly you should get your money in with the best hand. But if I did that and he drew out on me, I would have lost my stack. By taking a free card and peeking at the river card (he was planning a checkraise or a check call), I escaped with most of my stack. I would have still collected if a blank fell on river.

I perfectly understand that move but I just don't agree with it. Outside of the case A or 1 of the 3 6s (4 outs), what card(s) would make you fold the river here? Please answer this. If you check the turn and he bets out (likely with AAAxx), how do you know whether he hit or not? If you bet the turn and he checks the river, you can now evaluate as to whether he missed or is looking to C/R. Obviously, he can still lead the betting on river and still put you to the test.

I guess it boils down to whether or not you think you can get all of his chips or a good chunk on river if his hand doesn't improve. This should be easier with more money in the pot.

[King of the Farm]

Originally Posted by Clipper

I have actually had it with this site. With just a few pr*cks.

Goodbye all.

Originally Posted by Clipper

One last post to answer Poboy's question.

I took more than a couple hours... oh well.

But "One last post"? C'mon now!