Thursday, March 29, 2007

The Mookie, Lost, and an Interesting Suckout Hand

To begin today, I want to offer big congratulations to Miami Don for crushing the Mookie last night. This was the first Mookie I've played in in a few weeks, and I played well, busting several players in the earlygoing as I got a few cards, hit a few flops, and bluffed the shit out of Schaubs on several occasions ;). I got lucky once on a 30-something percent shot when a too-large reraise from me actually gave me too-good-to-fold pot odds to get the rest of my chips in preflop with AQs against what I figured was Schaubs's lower pocket pair, but what actually turned out to be pocket Kings. The Ace on the flop helped keep me in the game and build me a nice stack early, saving me from what was truly an unusually poor sizing of my raises. It's nice when the cards aren't working against you all the time, like I usually feel like they are. Anyways I forgot what eventually got me knocked out of the Mookie, but like I've said before, if I can't remember it then that usually means it was nothing recockulous, most often something like I pushed to pair into pocket Aces, or 9s into Tens, something like that (Edit: Just read Mookie's live blog, turns out I pushed 4s into 8s preflop on a short stack, go me). That Mookie tournament is always a great time, I have got to say, although being on Lost day still makes it very hard for me to play in it. Last night I was only able because the Hammer Wife went to sleep really early after a long day with the Hammer Girls, so I just watched Lost on delay on the DVR while playing out my time in both the Mookie and the Dookie.

And speaking of the Dookie, you bloggers are seriously the worst razz players on the earth. Not to sound like slb or anything, but this is now two or three consecutive blogger razz tournaments where I have been eliminated because of a donkey who was so far off about his and my hands that the clown is even raising me on 5th and 6th street when I am significantly ahead and only one of a few possible cards for him combined with only one of a few possible cards on consecutive streets for me can give him the victory. I love when that happens. Almost as much as the donkponent seems to love when he hits his fucking 3-outer-combined-with-my-3-outer to knock me out. Unreal. Last night in the Dook I'm on an 7-low draw on 5th street and some guy with 89K showing on his board raises me on 5th (I love it). It's almost like he maybe thought we were playing stud high or something. Then on 6th I hit a brick and he picks up a 7, and he still bets enough to get me allin even though he's still behind. Again I'm wondering if the guy even knew what game we were playing. Naturally, the river pairs me up, and comes low for him so he ends up winning. I had to be a 70% or better favorite on 5th when I bet at him and he raised back at me, and I don't know the numbers of 6th but I'm guessing I was probably still a 60-something percent favorite at that point as well. Wtf. You guys suck at razz, so eat it.

Anyways, congrats again to Don for a job well done last night, which he describes on his blog as "Decent cards, good timing, a couple of suckouts against shorties, and one crucial hand." Now there's a man's description of a victory right there. Admits he got decent cards and owns up to the couple of suckouts which are always present in any significant mtt score. Like me this past Monday night in the MATH when I wrote about how my slow-played KK narrowly escaped disaster against Columbo's slow-played Aces when a King happened to hit the flop. To me there is just no point to denying that you got a little lucky at points and/or got good cards on your way to a nice mtt score. I would never lie and say I had good cards in an mtt if I didn't actually have good cards, but you wouldn't find me lying in the opposite direction either. What's the insult in admitting that you got some good cards for a change in an mtt? Do people think that takes away from your accomplishment? Maybe someone who is insecure about their own mtt prowess might think that, but surely I don't. Getting good cards is just part of what often goes into producing an mtt victory, be it the MATH, the Mookie or the friggin nightly 26k on full tilt. Anyways, in response to some recent goings-on among the blogger tournaments, I guess all I'm trying to say is that to say that someone was a card rack in a tournament is not an insult about their play in any way, shape or form. For the most part, if someone was a card rack they probably still could have fucked it up by playing badly, and if they won with good cards, it generally means they played well with their good cards. In a lot of ways, a number of good hands and good flops more requires you to play good poker than if you got nothing but shit dealt to you for two hours like we have all been treated to far more often than we would like. Denying that you were a card rack when you won an mtt when you clearly were and everyone was there to see it, however, that's kinda weak and silly in my book (and incidentally I am not talking about Don last night in the Mookie at all, that was just the springboard to this discussion). Don't be insecure about getting good cards to help you win an mtt. Almost every mtt I've ever won has included some good cards. And I wouldn't deny it. Because it doesn't take away one whit from the fact that you have to play well to win any mtt of any significant size. And that's my thoughts on that.

Now on to last night's episode of Lost. It was interesting and all, don't get me wrong, and I wouldn't be surprised if those two new characters are still alive and that we haven't seen the last of them -- getting buried alive on a show like this never usually seems to take -- but really what was the point of yesterday's show? You guys know how I feel about this sort of thing after the debacle with the car episode from a few weeks back. This week's show was surely not as horrible as that one -- at least with Nikki and Paolo, the backstory we got to see was all new and didn't seem totally forced like all the silliness with Hugo, Cheech Marin and his mom, the old car in the garage, etc. We already know Hugo's backstory, so for that car episode to just give me more worthless flashbacks with Hugo and then tie it all together with starting a stupid car that has yet to make another appearance on the show, that one was an abomination. Last night's wasn't bad like that. But it wasn't good. It was boring, when it comes right down to it. It reminds me a bit of what happened with the X-Files after a while -- once we the viewers know there is this massive story going on, the Others, what they're trying to do with Jack, Locke's father, what are they all doing on the island in general, etc., to have a show like this which is nothing but background and otherwise doesn't advance the real story of Lost at all, it's always going to be a letdown. I want to know wtf is happening with the Others and the characters we know who are over there with them now (Sayid, Kate, Jack and Locke). I don't care about these two new people, and if they think just throwing in that one scene of Paolo hiding at the Pearl Station and seeing Ben and Juliette having that cryptic conversation is going to sate me, then they don't know their audience. At all. I already know most of you thought it was a pretty worthless episode too, because if you like Lost and I know you do, then last night's show didn't do much for you. Looking forward to something better next week, though the scenes didn't do much for me either as I recall. Although I suppose one could do worse than a catfight between Juliette and Kate. Mmmmmmm.

Lastly, I got berated pretty good about a hand I played about 5 minutes in to last night's $75 bracelet race at 9:30pm ET, and I thought I would get everyone's take on who played it well and who played it poorly. I was UTG and open-raised the big blind from 20 to 60 with JTs. This is one of my favorite moves, raising it up preflop from early position with a high suited connector like QJs, JTs or T9s, one that can make a lot of nut-type of straights as well as decently high flushes and some nice high pair and two-pair hands, and it adds some awesome and much-needed variation when like me you're otherwise only preflop raising with pairs, high Aces and maybe high Kings, etc. So the guy immedately after me, UTG+1, reraises my 60-chip bet to 200. The action folds back around to me, and I make the executive decision to call for another 140 chips here. It's not a greatly +EV call, and surely if he had gone allin I'm folding in a heartbeat, but at the same time if I'm willing to open-raise from EP with JTs because of its tremendous potential then I want to be the kind of guy who will call another 140 chips early in an mtt with it as well.

So the flop comes down J94 rainbow. I check, and my short-stacked opponent moves all in for his last 700 chips into the 430-chip pot. I've got top pair and was hoping he would bet when I checked, so I make the call. He flips over pocket 5s. He proceeds to berate the shit out of me for my play of the hand -- in particular my call of his preflop reraise -- while we both watch a raggy 2 come on the turn but then a dirty fucking 5 fall on the river. So the guy sucks out the ridiculous 2-outer on the river, and berates my play for at least the next 5 or 10 minutes of action in this tournament.

Question: Did I play this hand badly? Did he? What did either of us do wrong in this hand, in your view? Should I have been subject to this anus's long-lasting diatribe in the chat about how horrible I am at holdem here? What do you think about the way this hand was played?

Labels: , , , ,


Blogger lucko said...

I wouldn't call your play good, but I wouldn't bash it either. His play in the hand was MUCH, MUCH worse.

10:54 PM  
Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

Yeah I certainly don't mean to say that my play of the hand was stellar. Like I said in the post, I love my initial raise, but my call of his preflop reraise wasn't the most +EV move ever, and in many situations I would be inclined to lay down there. Just not sure if I deserved all the beration in the chat afterwards.

11:03 PM  
Blogger crazdgamer said...

To be honest, I don't like the play from either of you, but he played it a lot worse than you did.

His re-raise with 55 is confusing. He should be putting you on nothing less than AK. He's a slight favorite at best, 80-20 dog at worst, and the rest of the table yet to act after him. The only reason he would re-raise was if he put you on a bluff from UTG, but this is level 1, so there's no value in bluffing.

Flop comes down, and I don't like his all-in bet. He only gets called by hands that beat him. I'm a bit iffy on your call, since you could very well be dominated by AJ (if this was the case, we'd be in for another rant against people who call with AJ) or an overpair, but you were ahead, which was good until the river.

He really lucked out. I can't possibly see how he's justified in calling your play bad. His was worse.

11:16 PM  
Blogger Blinders said...

You are both donks. It's a little early in an MTT to go to war like that with top pair crap kicker, or a bottom pair. When you raise and make the call with JTs, I am assuming you do this for the implied odds if you hit a big hand. Hitting your Jack is not exactly hitting a big hand.

I do hate when people complain that you made a horrible call when it was in fact the right call in the situation (you were way ahead).

11:25 PM  
Blogger slb159 said...

Yeah, I bombed out in the first hand of the final table when 3 of us were allin before 4th and I had 245...and end up with three pair and a T low. WTF?

Your pf reraise is def your style, so no one should argue with that. Whether it was a good move? Hard to say since you said it was early in the tourney and you most likely had little to no info on the guy.

His reraise pf confuses me too. But that shove was preety st00pid of him considering the two overs and str8 draw out there. Showed a lotta weakness with that move as if he thought you were an idiot with KQ and wanted to push you off a gutshot.

Btw...was it Fuel? Haha.

11:45 PM  
Blogger GrayCalx said...

Disagree with you on Lost. While it didn't really progress the main plot line or, for the most part, have anything to do with Lost, I thought it stood on its own very well as an entertaining Twilight Zone type of episode. All in all though its not now what it once was.

11:50 PM  
Blogger Alan aka RecessRampage said...

I don't like either plays but he certainly has no right to berate you... but then again, donkeys do what donkeys do...

I so wanted to take that down last night... some donkish moves at the final table cost me as I exited in 5th place...

12:00 AM  
Blogger bayne_s said...

The re-raise with 55 in UTG+1 this early in tournament was worst play of sequence and don't think the uber-aggressive Fuel would have done that with 55 here since it left stacks at less than 10:1 for set mining.

If he has AA here and one of cards on the flop matches your suit he's 73% to win and he has played hand poorly not to extract more value.
You are more likely to see this play with an AK early in FullTilt donkaments (especially those with token denomination buy-in). Since this is a bracelet race with skewed payoffs you want to go big or go home. I don't make call for all my chips but can make it for all his chips.

I will have to run 3rd paragraph through Babblefish 1.0 program to see who you mean.

12:19 AM  
Blogger smokkee said...

i like that guy's play.

he represented a big pocket pair preflop. if you've seen him make this play earlier, it was a good call. otherwise, i don't know how you'd think you were ahead after the flop.

12:33 AM  
Blogger Schaubs said...

I agree, early on and he is reraising from a relatively early position... I'm out of there and wait for a better spot with a better hand in better position. Chip spewer. ;)

As far as the mookie, I am sure you had me each time you pushed me around, I mean you would never consider bluffing the Ola TAG image would you?

12:45 AM  
Blogger columbo (at eifco dot org) said...

I hope its not donkey play, I make this same move on a regular basis.

1:01 AM  
Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

Columbo, I assume you mean my utg raise with the JTs? If so, I say no way that is a donkey play, regardless of any comments to the contrary here. My call of the reraise is definitely a borderline not-great play, but as far as the original raise, at least when you play the preflop game that I play, this move is significantly +EV overall. I can say that from experience with the utmost confidence.

1:10 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

Thoughts on the hand:

On his reraise, the range of hands I'm putting him on leaves JT as an underdog in every instance (AA-TT, AK). Maybe that's a tight range, but considering he's a shortstack, I don't think he's trying to get cute. I'm surprised at his reraise considering what he's holding - if I'm reraising an UTG raiser, I'd imagine I'm getting a call for just 140 more (if you don't come over the top). Knowing that, I personally would rather just call and set mine then risk a call to my reraise and inevitably push a small PP on a flop that has me dominated. Even folding 55 in this position (with a UTG raiser) isn't out of the question for me.

If's he's trying to represent a big PP preflop, I don't think he represents it postflop, and it begins to seem more like AK, and I think the call is certainly justified. Bottom line: if he's trying to win the pot preflop, I don't think his raise is enough. You're getting about 3:1, and you're shown a strong hand by raising in EP. A better raise by him would have been in the 300-350 range, especially if he's willing to commit himself to a push on most flops.

Thoughts on Lost (spoiler for those who haven't seen it):

It was a waste of an hour, but a much needed episode, because the idea of Nikki and Paolo as new supporting characters wasn't going anywhere. The writers probably got (justified) negative feedback about introducing these two characters and found a way to explain who the hell they were as well as kill both of them off quickly.

What I don't like about the episode is how they tried to resolve a bunch of other issues (ie. Sun finds out Charlie kidnapped her, we find out that Ben & Juliette may be working together after all). And the whole idea that K&P found the hatch and the plane first, but were so caught up in their quest for the diamonds that they weren't even concerned with telling anyone, is just rediculous.

They had to either kill them off or somehow work a way for Nikki to be a stripper in every episode. Although it was probably the less popular of the two, they chose the most logical idea.

1:19 AM  
Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

Good comments, Matt. Allow me to respond:

1. I think you're right that I was technically an underdog to most of his hands when he reraised me UTG+1 preflop (and I fully knew that when I hesitatingly decided to make the call). But, if he has a lower pocket pair, I'm only a very slight dog since I am suited, connecting as well as with overcards (like 51-49 or so). And, with a Jack and a Ten I am actually less worried about being dominated than I would be if I held a low Ace or King. And, keep in mind that since I only need to call another 140 into the pot that now had 290, I was getting basically 2 to 1 on the call, so I could be somewhat of a dog and still make the call profitably.

2. In his shoes, not only is folding the 55 preflop "not out of the question", but I would say it is the best move of all his choices there, and is most certainly what I do in that spot all the time. A shitty pocket pair against a UTG raiser? I'm either dominated or I'm a 51% favorite, so why on earth would I call that? Calling I think would be next best to do some set mining, and raising like he did is the worst of his options IMO.

3. Very good point that his raise wasn't nearly enough if he wanted to take the pot down before the flop. As I mentioned in my post, he goes allin on that preflop reraise and of course I'm outtie in 2 seconds flat. But instead he didn't think through what he even wanted to get out of that raise to begin with, and the end result was a bet that was too small to push me out, and it ended up costing him the whole pot.

4. Totally agree about his actions on the flop -- definitely did not strike me as someone who was pushing an overpair preflop. Seemed much more like AK or AQ. If I had missed the flop entirely, I would surely have folded my shitty hand even to that weak-looking flop push. But, making top pair on the flop, and with my opponent being so short, I knew as soon as I saw the flop that I was getting it all in and would most likely win the hand. I just didn't bet out because I didn't want him to fold in case he had had a hand like AK or 88 to reraise me preflop like he did.

5. So you think Nikki and Paolo are dead and gone now? I am not so sure. I also don't give a cripe so it really doesn't matter. And I don't agree that they had to kill them off like they did. I definitely agree that one of the weaknesses of the show is how they bring on new characters out of the blue like those two -- and while we're at it that there just happened to be so many attractive people on the one flight at the same time -- but I doubt the reaction has been so negative that they needed to kill these people off. Why not just not focus on them anymore and have them in a few scenes here or there?

And lastly, I think I made this point in my post, but I think they only throw in that stuff about Ben and Juliette just to give people something to hang their hats on as far as some connection with the Others in this otherwise worthless episode. I'm sure the audience reaction to the car episode was so awful that this is how they react to that.

Nice comments.

1:46 AM  
Blogger Jordan said...

I like your play. You explained it perfectly, so I'm not even going into details. You made a play, it fell into place, and you got sucked out on anyway. Well played, sir.

3:43 AM  
Blogger Jordan said...

After reading the comments, let me add something in response to Smokkee.

Grubby once wrote that when a player open pushes all-in on the turn, he's usually bluffing. I'm sure he added more qualifiers to that statement. Whatever the case, that always stuck with me. If he had AA or KK or something similar, he is not pushing on that harmless flop. Instead, he is going to try to extract chips with a more reasonable bet. Instead, he pushes to try to force Hoy to fold. Hoy correctly picked up on that and called.

3:54 AM  
Blogger Fuel55 said...

JTs vs 55.

Preflop: Hoy 3/10 Opponent 3/10
Postflop: Hoy 9/10 Opponent 2/10

Opponent's push looks like AK and Hoy makes excellent move. 55 is redonkulous.

4:27 AM  
Blogger smokkee said...


the guy pushed all in on the flop after Hoy showed weakness pre/post flop. he played his hand well IMO.

4:28 AM  
Blogger The Poker Enthusiast said...

It amazes me when players over bet a pot when they have an under pair. Though I'm not sure I like your play, his raise all-in post flop bet is only going to be called by a hand that has him beat. It is you style to play hands like JT suited and you have the ability to get away from it if it doesn't look good. His push looks like the act of desperation that it was and it paid if with a two outter hitting for him.

4:34 AM  
Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

FWIW I think his biggest mis-play was not folding the 5s preflop, followed closely by his reraising instead of just calling with the 5s. I don't think his push on the flop is that horrible given that it's a draw-heavy flop that is somewhat likely for me to call with, and yet simultaneously somewhat unlikely for me to have connected with.

The other thing that hasn't really been mentioned in this analysis is that the guy was already somewhat short stacked. It really wasn't that much more for me to call on the flop when he pushed all-in. He should have known that increased my likelihood of calling his bet.

To me the big question in the hand is: How bad was it for me to call his reraise preflop with JTs? Like the enthusiast said, I know I will get away from this hand if it doesn't connect -- and as I stated above somehere, if I don't make a pair or a primary draw on the flop then I am outta there like Vladimir -- so I wasn't too concerned with calling it. Although in many situations I am laying down here to a reraise. If he had just reraised a little bit more than he did, I would have laid it down. Which gets me back to my original point above, his preflop action was where he effed this hand up the most IMO, not after the flop.

4:44 AM  
Blogger jjok said...

First off, didn't Locke tell Paolo not to bury the diamonds on the beach because things buried on the beach tend to wash up with the rising tides?



Guys a shortstack and no one seems to mention that. Still, he shoulda called or folded preflop with 55.

Just not a fan of his raise from UTG+1. If he's in the cutoff or button, I can see it. But his raise with a bunch of folks left to act is kinda dumb......

I don't mind your call preflop with the exception that he's a shortstack and your possible return on the hand is only moderate at around 900 chips of his chips.

Your flop call of a push, however, I don't care for too much. He's representing a big hand, and top pair of J's is only meh to me here.

Lots of folks are calling it desperate for him to push. I kind of see their point, but not really. There would be zero purpose in him betting pot or close to the pot on the flop, leaving him ~250 behind.......what would be the point?

He tried representing a big pocket and it failed.

I think the real question I would ask myself is how you would play your shortstack on that flop with an overpair (assuming your in his shoes). Would you push too on a somewhat coordinated flop?

I would seriously consider it.....

5:16 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

Good point about Locke, jjok. And considering that they show Nikki's eyes opening just before the dirt falls could be some foreshadowing as well.


If I remember correctly, it was mentioned that the paralytic poison lasts for 8 hours, and given the time frame, they should start to feel the effects fading right around when they were getting buried. So, if this isn't the last we see of them, then either she claws her way out and has some 'splainin to do, or she arises from the dead...and has some 'splainin to do. I don't like either of those directions.

About the hand, I agree that the push on the flop makes sense considering Hoy's shown weakness of the preflop call\check. But what screams AK (or underpair) to me is the push on a mildly uncoordinated flop, especially considering:

1. His reraise is still giving Hoy odds to call
2. Hoy only called, didn't push back

So what's Hoy's range here:

AA-QQ, probably seeing a Hoy re-reraise preflop
JJ-99, the opponent is most likely dominated
AK-AJ, the opponent is ahead, Hoy's drawing to 3-5 outs on the turn\river
KQ-KJ, doubtful
88-55, possible considering the odds he's giving Hoy, but that leaves Hoy drawing to 2 outs.

I think that's a pretty fair range. Assuming the shortstack is holding an overpair, either the shortstack is dominated but won't be able to fold, or is dominating by about 5 outs or so.

The push protects his hand, but as a shortstack, he's either going to push into a dominated hand, or scare his opponent off a hand that is unlikely to catch up. That's why the push seems like AK or similar to me - what is afraid of on the turn\river that he's not willing to let Hoy see for free?

Admittedly, if I'm holding AA or KK in the UTG+1 spot, I'm more apt to push as well, but I think there's an argument in this scenario for giving your opponent a chance to catch up.

6:10 AM  
Blogger Eric a.k.a. Bone Daddy said...

I always get the biggest kick when people get insulted that you didn't fold.

Weak is strong, strong is weak, great call; shitty result.

7:22 PM  
Blogger Hammer Player a.k.a Hoyazo said...

FWIW I had no doubt that he was pushing on this flop if I checked to him regardless of what came down, just due to his stack size. So when I made top pair, I figured I was only beat by AJ, JJ, QQ, KK or AA. And I felt there were a whole bunch of hands he could have reraised me with preflop other than just those 5 holdings. Let's say any pair, any high Ace, and suited medium Ace and probably KQ as well. So I went with my read and I made the call. Truth be told as I said somewhere above, I thought he either had 88, 99 or AK. It's nice when your read is off, but it's actually putting your opponent on a better hand than he even has.

With a preflop move like he pulled, he deserved to be forking his chips over to me. IMO that was a hideous play preflop. If you can't lay down 55 from UTG+1 facing a UTG raise, then you just aren't gonna hack it at nlh.

8:05 PM  
Blogger StB said...

Lots of comments, but I didn't see anything that helped define the image you are looking for.

Say you fold to the raise. Because it is early, your raises are going to get no respect so you will need to tighten up. Calling isn't such a bad play as it sends a message. It is 5 minutes in. You can make up the chips no problem if you have to fold the flop. His little raise doesn't say too much. You pointed out that you can connect big with this hand. So playing it means a bigger payout.

On the J high flop, I would have bet or folded. I don't think hoping he will bet is a great idea. You had the chance to put the pressure on him.

It would be nice to know how he had lost a third of his stack early in the tourney as well.

10:56 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home