This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

[NL2-NL10] I hate my life (AA)

    • p0rkus
      Joined: 03.03.2009 Posts: 230
      Hand converted with online hand converter:

      Play hand

      $0.01/$0.02 No-Limit Hold'em (9 handed)

      Known players:
      MP2 (Hero):

      Preflop: Hero is MP2 with A, A.
      UTG1 folds, UTG2 calls $0.02, MP1 folds, Hero raises to $0.10, MP3 folds, CO calls $0.10, 4 folds, 3 folds, 2 folds, UTG2 folds.

      Flop: ($0.25) 3, 8, J (2 players)
      Hero bets $0.18, CO calls $0.18.

      Turn: ($0.61) 3 (2 players)
      Hero bets $0.40, CO calls $0.40.

      River: ($1.41) 3 (2 players)
      Hero checks, CO bets $3.80, Hero calls $1.69(All-In).

      Final Pot: $6.9.
      Results follow:

      CO shows a full-house, threes full of nines(9 9).
      Hero shows a full-house, threes full of aces(A A).

      Hero wins with a full-house, threes full of aces(A A).

      again im not sure if this was right, but something about the way he instantly called everything and then instantly shoved...ok intuition isn't probably the best thing to use in this situation. But doesn't this feel like he should have a set?
  • 6 replies
    • edi9999
      Joined: 03.11.2008 Posts: 1,387
      I don't think he has a set the most of the time.

      But i think that you should value bet him on the river cause you're hand is a monster hand, you should push all in on the river imo.
    • p0rkus
      Joined: 03.03.2009 Posts: 230
      it seems that if i simply bet river then im commited if he goes all-in, so going all-in makes sense. I guess i wanted to see what he would do, seems he thought i had overcards and went all-in, which i interpreted as a trap. Its probably hard because i never had anyone have a set against me so im not used to spotting it and seeing how people play them
    • MrMardyBum
      Joined: 14.03.2009 Posts: 2,235
      Bad attempt at a bluff at the wrong time by a unexperienced player (imo).

      I think you played the hand well except for you could of raised slightly more on the turn, and you should definitely of led out on the river as most players would be happy to check behind here if they are unsure of their hand.

      As for spotting sets, it's the hardest hand to spot and you shouldn't have the mentality that he may have a set. Most of the time when villain has a set and you have a decent hand you are losing a good chunk if not all of your chips at the table.

      This balances out when you hit your sets, you'll gain a lot more profit from your sets than you'll lose against them, and once you've had a few hundred sets yourself, you'll begin to spot the tell tale signs because you'll know how you played them in the past. Just keep playing and don't worry about them.
    • p0rkus
      Joined: 03.03.2009 Posts: 230
      thanks for the explanation
    • fryandspicy
      Joined: 27.05.2010 Posts: 440
      I think the check on the end is okay. Maybe a min bet would have been better.

      The reason the check is okay is that the only made hands that aren't betting on the end will probably fold to a normal sized bet. 8x and middle pocket pairs will often fold to three barrels here imo (that's what you'd do, right?), whereas Jx, overpairs and sets will raise here most of the time.

      The flush draw is folding to a bet but may be going for an audacious bluff if you check. Other hands like 8x and middle pocket pairs will also sometimes bluff on the end, whilst Jx, overpairs and sets will bet for value on the end alot of the time. So by checking, or betting really small, you'll induce bluffs or weak value bets (unfortunately also strong value bets, but they'd reraise a raise anyway) and probably get money in the middle more often than by betting here yourself.

      The min raise can induce bluffs from alot of players and may get a call out of 8x and weak pocket pairs which is why it might be better than a check. (it might slow down Jx, which is the downside)

      Hope that makes sense. Also, i hope it's right because i don't want to be leading you astray. There's some poker maxim about betting that's like 'only bet if worse hands will call or better hands will fold' that should be taken into account here i think.
    • MaestroOfZerg
      Joined: 17.11.2008 Posts: 5,510

      Check/jamming the river is fine if you believe you opponent will shove most boats himself, in which case you don't lose value against boats by not betting and you can bluff-catch against busted spade draws as well.

      Otherwise if you think your opponent might inexplicably check back a boat and/or is unlikely to bluff busted spades anyway, just jam the river. Nobody is folding a boat in that spot but you never know when bad players might end up checking behind for no reason.

      Hope it helps.