Learn Texas Holdem

Top 3 Beginner Rooms

• $10 bonus at Colt Poker Free $10
• $10 bonus at Cake Poker Free $10
• $400 bonus at Minted Poker

The flop came 5-6-7, 2 spades. Obviously I was very happy to hit my set, but the drawing potential on the board didn't elude me. Often I'm more than willing to bet enough (but not too much) to get them to chase with bad odds, and take it in stride when they do get lucky enough to hit. I figured with two people behind me I'd get at least one caller (or possibly even a reraise, which I was hoping for), so I bet out about 80% of the pot since both were in there with a preflop raise.

To my delight, the person in 5th position reraised me a significant amount. At that point I was pretty sure he had a very large hand or was trying to bet me out of the pot; I was okay with either option. My delight diminished, however, when, without hesitation, the person in 8th position called that large raise (which was about 3 times the size of the pot).

At this point I'm not sure WHAT I have. I take another look at the board and that straight and flush draw are staring me in the face. Plus there was the possibility that someone was holding 7-7 or 8-8 and I was all but dead in the water. Or possibly someone was betting their 8-9 suited and I was already facing a straight. I think ultimately I panicked and made a rash decision that could've been disastrous. I went all-in.

I had them both covered, but both had very nearly the maximum buy-in, so I had a lot (relatively speaking) to lose if I screwed up. I was holding my breath until they both folded. I ended up winning a nice pot but I can't help but think I messed it up. If I was up against only one player I think I would've just smooth called that sort of raise and got him committed to the pot, so I could possibly take his whole stack later in the hand. But the 2nd player worried me and all I could think is that I simply can't let either one of them draw into a hand without them risking everything they had.

I tell myself that I would've probably went down with my set of 5's and lost nearly everything if someone already did have a higher set or a straight, so that all-in call didn't risk anymore than I probably would've lost anyways...I tell myself that anyways. But it just bothers me that I think I maybe gave up a terrific opportunity to really cash in on that hand. Since they both folded it's obvious that neither had a set or a straight.

As much as I've thought about it I still simply don't know if I would do anything different in that hand if it happened again today. That's why I'm writing this, to maybe get your insight into what I may be missing here, what I maybe should've been focusing on, what should I have done differently...or if I should've gotten out of that hand altogether with a large reraise and caller in front of me. Oh and as for the players, both seemed fairly straightforward, betting when they had something and folding when they didn't, although I was never entirely convinced that the guy in 5th position (the initial preflop raiser) didn't just see my 80% bet as weak and try to raise me out of the pot. It actually surprised me that I didn't get an all-in caller. I was hoping for one (and only one) and dreading one at the same time. *L*

Thanks for any revelations you may be able to give me so that I may be a little better prepared the next time a hand of this nature pops up.

Answer:

First of all, let me qualify everything I'm about to write. In holdem you can never be 100% sure about anything except what your own hand is. When you are reading an opponent's hand and making a play based on it, approximations are all you shoot for. It isn't a perfect science. Your striving for being correct most of the time, or at least in the most important pots. What I mean by this is that sometimes you'll get stung in a hand like the above because someone played their hand wacky. Some guy could have raised or called with 84, for example, and bet your set. This happens.

For every time it happens though, you'll have dozens of times when it doesn't, when the guy raises with something typical. This is important to understand because you want to avoid playing scared poker. We don't try to defend against unlikely scenarios. You don't want to always assume you are up against the nuts because it causes you to make less money on your good hands, as well as giving the opponents an easier time playing against you -- for example if you checked every time a scare card hit.

I can't tell you exactly what either player had, since I wasn't able to view their play prior to this hand. If I had to guess, I would say that the first player had a decent hand like AJ to AA. The second player didn't reraise, so it is likely that he also had two big cards. Most players reraise with AK and better (JJ, QQ, KK, AA) so it isn't likely he has one of those. He could also have a pair like you or a suited connector. So we don't have much to go on yet preflop.

On the flop, I'm not sure if your bet is the best play. Given that you are in early position with two players, one of which raised preflop and the other who cold called the raise, it seems likely that one will bet if you check. My first instinct would be to not come out betting but to allow one of them to bet, most likely the preflop raiser, and then check raise. I like the check raise here because it is almost a certainty one of the players will bet and you want to at least make some money with the hand. Even if your intention is to check raise here all-in and put the pressure on, you would prefer some money in the pot before doing so.

What if both players had hands like AK and AQ and you fired out on the flop and made them both fold? You would get a tiny pot for your set. Sets are very powerful hands in no limit holdem and whenever I get one, especially when I'm not the preflop raiser, I try to milk them for all they are worth.

Now, there is an exception when I would come out firing on the flop and that is when I know for a fact that my opponent will misread my hand and raise me. Let me explain the line of reasoning. If you aren't the raiser preflop and on the flop you fire off into the preflop raiser, that is usually a perceived as weak play, a sign that you don't have much. The assumption is that if you had a good hand, you wouldn't bet right into the opponent but you would go for a check raise. Therefore when you come out firing, he assumes weakness...it's like a little test the waters bet. In the end, the opponent raised you anyway, so it worked out.

I want to make sure that you know that firing out on the flop with the intention of protecting the pot here isn't the best way to accomplish that. A check raise would probably be better. Now the player raises and the other calls. Here, an all-in may be ok. There are a couple reasons for why an all-in is a good play, and a couple against it. The first reason for the all-in is that the pot is pretty large now and there is a good chance you'll have one of the player's call your all-in. Secondly, the board is very dangerous and any number of cards could come off on the turn or river to either make you a loser, or suck the wind out of your sales.

If you assume you have the best hand, which you do, all-in seems fine. With one opponent, maybe yes give him some opportunity to draw, but with two opponents and that board, I would prefer to win it soon. You want to try to avoid situations where you can't fold either. Say you built a huge pot and the river put a third spade plus four to the straight. Now the pot is so large and you have so much involved, you'll be forced to make a crying call. Get the money in when you think you have the best hand. The first reason against the all-in is that maybe the all-in was a much too large bet still relative to the pot.

The idea is why bet everything when a smaller amount would likely accomplish the same goal? The benefit of betting less to accomplish the same thing is that it leaves you in a less risky spot. Secondly, in no limit holdem, as a general rule, you shouldn't bet more than what a person with a worse hand can call with. This isn't always practical, but it makes a lot of sense. Since you have the ability to bet whatever amount you like, you can inadvertently shut out all the worse hands that might pay your good hand off. No limit holdem cash games are about finesse. One thing you'll learn as you get more experience is what they call "pricing people in."

That means you give them a price that they will call, even though they figure they are beat. Say you have a set of Aces on the river and it is the nuts. If you go all-in here, no one will call. The better play is to try and bet something that could get called, right? Like I mentioned a couple sentences ago, this isn't always practical. The biggest exception to pricing players in is when the board is dangerous. If there is a good chance your weaker bet will end up biting you in the ass by letting a worse hand catch up, then obviously it isn't a good play. (Other exceptions might be tourney play when time is short.) In your hand, you don't want to give anyone free cards so this isn't an option. All in all, I think you played the hand well.

Now, let me mention a few things about the general question: How much should you allow players to draw against you in no limit holdem? Let's compare the two extremes:

1. You go all-in every time you have a hand and suspect an opponent is drawing.

- this shuts out worse hands that might have called had you bet less. This equates to making less money on your good hands. This is analogous to going all-in preflop whenever you have AA.

- this is a huge hole in your game because someone could outflop you and have your entire stack when you only have a moderately strong hand.

- you shut the draws out or make it very expensive to draw for them.

2. You bet very little and wait to see what happens before you commit chips.

- you won't make much money this way either

- the draws will get great odds to call, plus you'll lose to other longshot draws like hitting an Ace on the river when you have KK

Notice that in either case, you don't make much money. The solution is in the middle somewhere. The correct way to bet in no limit holdem has to do with a number of factors. The first factor is the size of the pot. The larger the pot, the more you bet. The next factor is the opponents and how they play. The more opponents, the more you have to bet -- this goes for both preflop and post flop. For example, the amount you raise preflop with AA or KK is more when there are lots of players who already called, than if there was only one player. Secondly, the opponents skill level and style of play also matters a lot. You'll find some players who will call enormous raises with next to nothing. Against players like this, up your bets and milk them. There is no reason to stick to rigid betting amounts relative to the pot.

Let's look at a scenario where you have AA against two players and the flop is something like J-7-3 with two spades. You bet the pot on the flop. Any person with a Jack or a spade will most likely either call or raise. For the sake of simplicity, let's just say one of them has a spade draw and calls. (If he raised, you would reraise...amount relative to the pot.) Now, notice that if he misses the turn card, it doesn't come a spade, your next bet will again be pretty big. Say the pot was 100 coming into the flop. You bet 50 on the flop. A spade draw would call. Now the pot is 200. Now the turn bet you can bet anything you like from 75 to 100 to more, depending on what you want to accomplish. I would most likely bet something in the middle like 100.

It is more than the preflop bet. See now, his chance of hitting that spade has dropped significantly. He only has around an 18% chance of hitting it on the river. He gets 4:1 on the call to hit the flush and has to put in 100 for a 200 pot. For him to make money here, he would both have to hit the flush and get me to pay him off enough on the river to justify the 100 call on the turn. I like those odds. And notice that things didn't look that crazy. You didn't really go all-in or make huge bets. The amounts stayed relative to the pot and it feels like you are babying him along.

There is one more thing I want to mention on this topic and it is defensive betting in no limit. Defensive betting is a way to help prevent opponents bluffing into you after you check when a scare card hits. This applies mainly to heads up situations since with more players, it is more likely that a scare card hitting the turn or river will complete one of their hands. A scare card for our purposes here will be the third flush card hitting. What you don't want to do is check to them when the flush hits. If you have had the initiative the entire hand (you are the one in the driver's seat betting with what you think is the best hand), and you check, it leaves you open to the chance of getting bluffed.

What your check says is, "I don't have that and it scares me, please don't bet." What you do to prevent this is actually counterintuitive, you bet yourself. You don't bet a lot, just something. Notice that in no limit holdem, for someone to raise you, they have to double the bet. So in our hand above if the third spade hit on the river, you might bet another 75 or 100. If the player raises you, now you know for a fact that you are beat and you can fold. (Note you don't need to do this against players with very little chips since they aren't a threat, but you would still bet since you want to get he money in.) The same goes for the turn or river. See, how players act after you bet into them gives you information that checking doesn't.

It seems stupid to bet into someone on the river for information, but it is necessary because you run the risk of getting bluffed out if you don't. This same line of reasoning applies to when you have a hand like KK and an Ace hits. You don't check. You bet something and see what the opponent does. Then you use that information to correctly play the rest of the hand, either folding if need be, or following up with other bets.

Your rating:

User Rating: (0 Votes)

• Share on Facebook
• Print
• Digg
• Del.icio.us