Dilemma at the River

Well, so much for my plan to evoke historical memories of Las Vegas every week here leading up to my trip back to the desert in early June. Today instead I have a hand post that I wrote most of last week after playing in a home game I have frequented several times before downtown in Manhattan midway through last week. For a change we opted to play straight 1-2 no-limit cash, and there were maybe 7 or 8 of us around the table for most of the night. These were mostly people I have played with before, although in some cases it has been a good long while for some of the individuals. Others I have a very strong read on and have played with enough, and enough recently, that I felt like I would know where I was at with them from the way they played their hands.

Around 90 minutes or so into our game, I was down to about three-quarters of my starting stack of 100 chips, having raised preflop a couple of times but then laid down to preflop reraises or to a raise on the flop. I looked down to find AQs in early position and put in my standard low-limit live poker raise of 4x the big blind to $8. Everyone folded except for the tight player across the table from me on the button, who called my raise. Although I am generally a tight player and had not shown a single poor hand down through this entire session, I know that to this crowd I am known as a hyper aggressive player, so I can't necessarily ever put anybody really on a monster when they call a preflop raise from me, especially in position, but at the same time as I mentioned this guy has been a tight player who likes to hold on to his money in the couple of times I have played with him in the past.

The flop came down AA9 with two hearts, and I figure I have got to be hopelessly ahead here. I figure if I bet this flop and confirm my preflop raise with an Ace, tighty across the way will just fold, so I check. I had not been c-betting hardly at all (hard to c-bet when you see very few flops and don't hit any of them), and the one time I had in the entire session I had folded to a raise, so I figured not c-betting here would not be giving away too much about the nature of my hand at all. My opponent checked behind, and we saw a turn of an offsuit 8. On this street, I figured I had begun the story of me not having an Ace in my hand with my failure to c-bet the flop, so I had already determined that I would check again on the turn, despite the drawish board, to try to stimulate some action from my opponent that I could either just call and risk a scary river, or that I could raise and take down the pot right then and there. Even as the dealer burned and turned the 8 on the turn, I was already loudly announcing my check, deliberately checking basically in the dark as I tried to send the message loud and clear that I was not holding an Ace and did not want to put any more money into this pot. This time my opponent seemed to get the message a little bit, as he bet out $12 into the $19 pot. I considered my options, decided that this guy has played fairly tight, and maybe he has a hand like a medium pocket pair that he assumes his ahead given the two Aces on the flop and my unwillingness to bet on either street so far since the community cards hit the board. I liked the thought of that, and I know I can fold when I think I am beat, so I decided to again tempt fate by just calling. I made sure to delay a bit, such that I am sure basically no one around the table believed I actually held an Ace in my hand.

There was $43 in the pot as the dealer burned and turned the river card, peeling over a black 5, making the final board AA985 with no flush possibility. As I looked up to get a read on my opponent, he was looking at the board and sneering -- literally, sneering, so hard core in fact, that it felt painfully obvious that the guy wanted to be seen doing it. He was acting like he hated that river card more than anything he'd ever seen in his life. Which made me, of course, think he somehow liked it. Still, though, with the way I played my flopped trips this hand so slow heading into this street on the river, I figured the odds were very good that my trips-and-second-kicker was ahead, and that my opponent would call a reasonable bet from me with a worse hand since I had tried so hard to act like I was not holding an Ace. Even though I wanted some value here, I hated the face he had made at the river card -- it was just too, too glaring and overt as I mentioned -- so I literally said out loud to the table as I motioned for some chips, "Well, despite the face you just made at that river, I will lead out for $20." I didn't like the face, but when you play your hand slow you need to "own" that decision for the rest of the hand, and in this case I felt like if I checked and my opponent just checked behind, then I was really not getting value out of the hand the way I had played it. So I led out for $20, right around half the pot.

My opponent took his time, and I became increasingly sure I was ahead since he obviously had to take his time deciding whether or not to call my roughly half-pot bet. After maybe a full minute, replete with more agonized-looking face-twisting, I was shocked to see the guy slide the rest of his chips into the middle and announce he was all in.

Whaaaaa? That face he'd made really did mean strength, didn't it?

My opponent had me covered, so the bet was basically another $40 to me to win $83.

Are you sure enough to call here?

Cash Game Question -- Conclusion and Analysis

Wow! What a set of responses to my actual real life poker question yesterday. Guess maybe I should post a little more about poker, huh? I will see what I can do about that. I am definitely still very interested in the game, and I'm still reading and thinking and playing quite a bit, although the new job combined with the slowing economy definitely has me playing a bit less than I once was. Hopefully both of those factors will start evening out over time, but who knows. In the meantime, I do not think it's a bad thing for me to be writing about topics other than poker, as I do have a lot to say on many other topics, and my readership has surprised me by growing significantly over the past two months since the fall of Lehman Brothers and the historic global stock market crash. And most of all, I find that I have really enjoyed writing about these non-poker topics, which is the best part of all since, as I like to remind everyone from time to time, this is my blog after all. So you can expect more of both in the coming days and weeks as the beat rolls on here at hammerplayer.

OK so back to the hand analysis question I posed yesterday. Now let me begin my saying that like a good little lawyer I chose my words in yesterday's post very deliberately, in that the hand I described did not actually happen to me. But it is a real situation that I read about, and was somewhat shocked at the result. I know last week I had written about the frustrations I was having reading Dan Harrington's Cash Games books, and specifically that I was starting Volume II despite being disappointed in Volume I. Well, the hand from yesterday comes directly out of Harringon Cash Games, Volume II, pages 84-87. I basically reproduced everything more or less directly as described in the book, and posed the question to you all as to how you would handle rivering a set in that hand with a ton of preflop action.

To review, here is a recap of the hand I asked about in yesterday's post:

You're playing in a $5-$10 no-limit holdem ring cash game, with all the stacks fairly large. The game can be classified as a fairly tough game with mostly good players, mostly fairly tight and aggressive types generally typical of a 5-10 game in my experience. UTG+1 limps for $10. UTG+2 also limps for $10. You are UTG+3 with 88, and you opt to raise 5x to $50. The button reraises to $150. The small blind calls the $150 cold. The first two limpers fold to the $150 double-raise. There is $380 in the pot and it is $100 to you to call with your pocket 8s. As the other two players both have larger stacks than yours (all more than 100 big blinds), you opt to call the reraise and do a little set mining.

The flop comes AQ5 rainbow. The big blind checks, you check given the Ace on board, and the button checks as well.

The turn is an offsuit King. Again the big blind checks. You check as well, knowing you must be behind with all that action before the flop. The button checks as well.

On the river falls an 8, giving you the rivered set. Now the big blind bets out for $200 into the $480 pot.

What do you do here?

So that's the question. The many comments to yesterday's post basically went right on along with my own thoughts on the hand. I figured the rivered 8s was probably ahead, but not definitely since the possibility of a set of Queens, Kings or Aces had to be out there given all the action before the flop in this hand. One thing I thought was that there was a significant possibility that one of these players was sitting on AK, and given all the checking-around on both the flop and the turn in this hand, the raggy 8 on the river would have to make that guy with AK believe he was in the lead. Thus, as I read this hand in Harrington's book, I was torn between flat calling the bet, or possibly putting in a small raise which was designed to elicit a call from the likely player with AK. As I mentioned, this is exactly the range of responses I received to yesterday's post. Almost everyone said to call or perhaps minraise, and I think both of those answers have merit. A number of the commenters hit on the fact that the set of 8s could surely be behind a higher set here, since with all that action preflop anyone holding AA, KK or QQ has you beat, so a raise, or at least a significant raise, is not really in order in a cash game context here, in particular with all players involved holding more than 100 big blinds.

You will notice not a single player suggested that the set of 8s fold his hand at the river. A number of people thought the situation does not bode well for the 8s, but the bottom line is that, with both the flop and the turn checking around, you are a donk if you fold your set of 8s in this spot. To say that such a move is exploitable, weak poker is understating things. Again, I'm not saying that you're definitely ahead with the pocket 8s and you should clearly jam here, but for $200 into the $680 pot at this point, it is very difficult to imagine folding given the absolute dearth of action on both the flop and the turn heading into this river bet. If just the flop had been checked but then the turn was bet and called, that changes things significantly as a big flopped set might quite often bet the hand in just this way. But there is a good reason that not a single commenter, nor myself, thinks that folding the hand to this one nearly half-pot river bet is the right move here.

You want to know why I dislike Harrington's books? Remember I was saying last week how annoying it is that he uses examples where he clearly knows the outcome and uses that knowledge in designing the advice he gives on the hands, thereby making his entire array of advice basically useless and worthless for someone trying to pick his brain about cash games? Well, here's Harrington's response on the hand, directly from page 86:

"On the river, you hit your set and the big blind bets. You're getting 3.4-to-1, but it's actually a very tough call. (Give yourself many demerits if you actually thought about raising.) The big blind probably has a set of kings, and there's a decent chance the button has a set of queens. Your set of eights, in this situation is just a hand with some value. The 3.4-to-1 odds look good, but you can't be sure that another raise isn't coming from behind you. At a loose table I would most likely call here, but at this tight, tough table I'd regrettably let this go.

You fold. The button calls. The big blind shows a set of kings and the button mucks his hand."

What a fucking genius!! How oh how did Harrington know that the button had that set of kings? Is he the best hand reader of all time? Oh no, wait. He knew the answer before he wrote his analysis of this hand! This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about with why Harrington's cash books suck so horribly. In a situation where the call -- albeit a crying call -- is more or less mandatory in reality, in a book that is supposed to be helping the readers with their cash play, Harrington uses his foreknowledge of the other players' holdings to make himself look like a fucking genius and therefore give out the clearly wrong advice under the guise of advocating good, tight play. What an ass.

Do not buy Dan Harrington's cash game books!

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful comments though, that was really fun. I will get some more hands up here shortly for people to chip in with their thoughts.

Cash Game Question

And out of nowhere we're back to a poker question about a cash game hand I recently ran into. I am interested in any of your thoughts on this because there was some disagreement around the table as to the right play to make in this hand. And I will not disclose for now which if any of the players involved was me, because the answer should not be in any way dependent on my level of involvement in the hand but rather purely the poker elements of the situation. I am hopeful that some of our cash game friends can weigh in with what they would do in this spot as I think it an interesting situation that we all have found ourselves in from time to time in some form or another.

OK so you're playing in a $5-$10 no-limit holdem ring cash game, with all the stacks fairly large. The game can be classified as a fairly tough game with mostly good players, mostly fairly tight and aggressive types generally typical of a 5-10 game in my experience. UTG+1 limps for $10. UTG+2 also limps for $10. You are UTG+3 with 88, and you opt to raise 5x to $50. The button reraises to $150. The small blind calls the $150 cold. The first two limpers fold to the $150 double-raise. There is $380 in the pot and it is $100 to you to call with your pocket 8s. As the other two players both have larger stacks than yours (all more than 100 big blinds), you opt to call the reraise and do a little set mining.

The flop comes AQ5 rainbow. The big blind checks, you check given the Ace on board, and the button checks as well.

The turn is an offsuit King. Again the big blind checks. You check as well, knowing you must be behind with all that action before the flop. The button checks as well.

On the river falls an 8, giving you the rivered set. Now the big blind bets out for $200 into the $480 pot.

What do you do here? Personally I believe decent arguments can be made for all kinds of different moves here, but I am interested in what move you support, and at least as importantly, why, and if you think a raise is in order, how much do you think is the right amount to raise, and again why.

Tomorrow I will be back with some analysis and what actually happened in this spot.

MATH Pimp, FTOPS Returns and Cash Game Profits

Don't you forget:



Mondays at the Hoy is back tonight at 10pm ET on full tilt! $26 buyin, password as always is a very a propos "hammer". The crowds have been bigger than usual lately for our weekly Monday night get-together, so see you there tonight as the race for the top of the 2007 MATH moneyboard heats up heading into our last 10 or 11 tournaments of the year!

On an related note, it was a good, fun weekend of poker in the Hammer household, the most profitable weekend I've had in a long time at the virtual tables. I knew the weekend was going to be strong as soon as I actually won a hand during Monkey Hour in Friday night's donkament. It was just about the only hand I would win the entire night, but it was a quick double-up and I won't soon forget it. I think I had a primary draw and it filled on the turn or river or something. The whole table stared dumbfounded for a few minutes while play was stopped and the servers were checked for any evidence of tampering, but apparently it was for real. So I won one hand in the donkament and then flamed out early in the first "real" hour of play since I was a tiny stack (the result of winning just one hand in an hour of play) and had no cards to speak of. But that one hand I won during Monkey Hour on Friday got things started off to what I just knew was going to be a profitable poker weekend, and I was right.

At the cash tables, I won probably 4 buyins overall over the past few days, where I played really great in almost all facets of the game. Out of 24 sessions over the weekend, 16 were winning and only 8 were losing, and the average win was more than twice the size of the average loss. That right there tells you more or less what you need to know about my quality of play this weekend, but I think I've narrowed my recent success to three key areas at the cash tables:

1. Bet some draws and check some draws. I've noticed that at my worst, I am too aggressive with my drawing hands, which inevitably kills me at cash because those draws don't hit quite as often as you like. It's not usually something I'm directly perceiving at the time, but after the fact when I go through a bad spell in cash games I tend to decide that I've been simply too aggressive on the come, betting in some form almost every draw I pick up, and that strategy my friends does not normally translate into profitable play. At other times, often in reaction to overbetting my draws, I catch myself constantly being bet out of pots where I have draws because I am playing too timidly and failing to bet out on occasion to keep my opponents honest and to mess with my opponents' reads. In the end, either strategy ends up being too predictable and frankly too exploitable by most decent players, and that's why I mention the moderation I found in this area over the past weekend's play. I found success betting out with some of my draws on weaker boards, because those had the highest chance of creating folds by my opponents as well as potentially disguising the hand when it does fill. At the same time, on strong boards, in particular those with an Ace (when I did not have one and felt fairly sure that someone else did), I seemed to do better trying to get a free card or two when I was drawing. In all it seemed to be a good balance because I tended to lose the minimum with my missed draws and to get paid off nicely when I hit 'em, which actually happened a few times for a change.

2. I play extremely well out of position. Now this may seem like an odd thing to say to many of you, but as I've mentioned here previously, I just don't pay quite as much attention to in position / out of position as most other "good" players seem to. Maybe that's a fault in my game, I don't know, but as a rule I am not the least bit fazed by playing out of position, and this weekend my stats and screenshots show me winning a good number of hands from up front, mostly on the flop. The best way I like to do this is as simple as it is fun to do. I'm in the blinds and I call a mid-late position raise into a heads-up pot. Then, as long as an Ace doesn't come on the flop (or sometimes, even when an Ace does come, if I don't put my heads-up opponent on an Ace for whatever reason), I bet out, in the exact same amount as I would bet if I made a hand like top pair or two pairs or something. It's fun. I can tell the guy was expecting to c-bet me out of the pot, and then suddenly there I am leading out into his expected c-bet. Wow, I must have a strong hand to bet out into a likely bettor like that, right? Now of course you can't get too fancy with the OOP lead or you will get burned, but I find that if I keep my wits about me and stick with my reads (and base those reads on real information and not just blanket "intuition" or whatever), then OOP lead betting, in particular on the flop but sometimes on the turn after a flop check-around, can be a profitable tool. And a useful one in that it allows me to represent some hands from out of position when I don't have them, such that when I opt to just smooth call a preflop raise with pocket Kings or something, or when I flop a set, I tend to get paid quite well with those hands because by that point my opponents at the table are positive I can't be getting that many good hands in the blinds.

3. Run goot when I need to. As I mentioned above, I actually hit a few of my draws, and when I did, I made for the most part well-sized value bets on the river that were getting called almost without exception over a good 20+ sessions overall since I last posted. I was actually able to play a little bit as I flopped top pair or at least a pair on the board more than a few times, and throw in some nice primary draws as well to give me lots of opportunity to mix it up postflop where the decisions get real interesting. I made a few nice pulls on later streets and was able to get paid for the most part when I did.

But of all the nice cards I hit over the weekend sessions, this one had to be the nicest. I allin reraised preflop on a short stack against a raise from a known active stealer, at a time when I was purely playing position and had a pretty dam funny hand for an allin reraise. Unfortunately I walked right in to my opponent's pocket Kings and he instacalled for all of my chips:



Oops! But then, Hammer Power!



Wooohoooo! And you just know this guy was bitching about that hand for the next several hours, and probably will still be for the next few weeks. Of course at that point I was up and actually felt pretty good that this guy would lay down to my reraise, since he had been caught himself raising and even reraising preflop based purely on his position and with absolute nothing hands. But it is nice to know that even when I get caught with my pants completely down around my ankles, I can still suck out once in a while to get it back. Once in a long, long, long while.

On the tournament front, I recorded a few small mtt cashes over the weekend to pad the online roll just a bit, plus I was surprised to notice the return of FTOPS VI already, scheduled for the second week and a half of November, which means not only another 11 days or whatever of large-guarantee tournaments, but at least as exciting for me is the whole slate of mtt satellites to those FTOPS events. Anyways, Friday night was the first night I saw FTOPS satellites on the mtt schedule, and I played in my favorite of all the mtt satellites, the $10 rebuy into FTOPS #1 on both Friday and Saturday night. On Friday I busted out against a guy who turned his lower pocket pair into quads against my higher pocket pair when allin preflop, so I had to get in there again on Saturday for the nightly run of this rebuy sat at I think 9:40pm ET, and whaddya know:



I also took second place after getting sucked out on twice when heads-up with a huge chip lead in a $69 buyin satellite to FTOPS #4, the $500 Shorthanded PLO tournament. This one takes place on a Saturday afternoon, so the odds of me actually being able to play in this event are fairly low, but I saw it there, I do have those $69 tokens just sitting in my account waiting to be used, and I do love me some PLO, so I figured why not. I did manage to blow a more than 3-to-1 chip lead in hu play, but like I said first a guy flopped a set of Queens allin preflop against my AAxx, and then a few hands later the river on a board of K2789 ended up making the ignorant straight for me with 56xx, but also made my opponent the miracle inside straight with his KQJx hand that crushered me once again. Frustrating, but 2nd place in that FTOPS satellite paid some decent cash so I'll book those profits and move on from there.

I plan to write some more about the upcoming FTOPS and the satellites I am looking at to play my way in, but let me just reiterate here that these low-buyin rebuy sats are without a doubt the easiest and most fun way to play in to the larger events. I only wish they had more of these $6, $8, $10 and even $14 rebuys for all the FTOPS events, because I would play every one of them every quarter the FTOPS comes around then. So far, this 9:40pm ET nightly rebuy satellite into FTOPS #1 will have roughly 30-40 players, and by the time all the rebuys and add-ons are done with, the top 4 finishers or so will be awarded FTOPS seats. So more than 10% or so of the field will eventually win their way into the FTOPS via each one of these satellites. And yet, my favorite part about them is that due to the 1000 starting chips, the 1500-chip addon at the end of the rebuy half-hour, and the low cost of the buyins, even busting on the last hand of the 30 minute rebuy period and then double-rebuying plus adding on leaves you right around the middle of the pack heading into the real tournament starting 33 minutes in. These relatively low buyin rebuy satellites are a great value, and in my experience it is reasonable to expect to be in decent shape following the rebuy and addon period with only a minimal investment of say 3 total buyins or so under normal circumstances if you play well.

As I said, I will be back later this week with some more discussion of the FTOPS and the way I like to play and prepare for this 4-times-annually high-guarantee series of poker tournaments featuring the best players and pros that full tilt has to offer. Until then, don't forget to play in tonight's Mondays at the Hoy at 10pm ET on full tilt, where I will look to avoid the donkeys and the recockusucks to make another run at cashing and stealing the 2007 MATH moneyboard lead away from current frontrunner and flop luckbox Bayne. Looking forward to seeing you then!