Ok, Just Tell Me “Don't Fold” and I'll Move On

[shipitfish]

Here's another one of these. I am only even considering I made a mistake because the player in question was extremely tight.

In a $1/$2 NL HE $200 Max online, 10 players, the hijack seat limps, cutoff raises all-in for $8.50. I reraise to $25-to-go (having started the hand with $250) from the SB with K K. An Ultra-Tight player in the BB (who has me covered) smooth-calls and the limper folds. I have Ultra-Tight on QQ or AA, maybe AKs, but he probably folds even the latter 90% of the time in that spot.

The flop is A K Q. I check with the intention of raising, since I know he probably flopped a set. He bets $20, I raise to $100, and he goes all in and I call immediately, expecting to either see a set of queens or of aces. It's aces.

I should never, ever consider just betting out and being done with the hand if he stays in the pot, right? I should try to get the money in, right?

Man, playing poker this many hours yields set-over-set too often. :)

Comments

[timprov.livejournal.com]

I don't understand anyone's play in this hand, but yes, don't fold.

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

You agree with swolfe, I assume, that I should bet out?

[timprov.livejournal.com]

Yeah, checking sucks royally if he ever shows up with JJ here.

[swolfe.livejournal.com]

don't fold.

also, go ahead and bet the flop...it doesn't matter if his range is really as tight as you think, and gets better value if it's wider. a check-raise after a reraise is way too obivously a set and will lose you value against AX.

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I check-raised in hopes to trap him some if he did have AK. I suspected he'd lead for the pot size with that, and wanted him pot stuck on the flop. But, leading was probably good too.

[bwdpoker.livejournal.com]

Couldn't agree more.

yeah...

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

I am starting to believe the check-raise is useless in NL HE except when you flop two pair. :)

Re: yeah...

[swolfe.livejournal.com]

that or if stacks are short enough for the check-raise to be all-in. there's almost never any other time when it's correct to check-raise IMO.

Re: yeah...

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

I'm coming to that conclusion as well. I see people check-raise only when they flop sets all the time and get no action because it's obvious they have a big hand. The fundamental thing is that people just don't give much action in NL HE unless they have at least a strong top pair, so you might as well bet into them with something bigger to entice them to play such a holding too hard, rather than get that one little continuation bet out of them when they miss the flop and fold to your check-raise.

It contrasts so much with limit HE, where you check-raise all the time to kill the pot odds behind you and get heads up with the bettor. Indeed, you often do this in limit when you know you are beat to increase your pot equity by forcing hands like middle pair and an overcard to fold. I am still intrigued so often that limit HE and NL HE look so much alike but actually have almost nothing to do with each other.

Re: yeah...

[swolfe.livejournal.com]

i should point out that i'm primarily talking about on the flop. i check-raise the turn in NL all the time, but that's a different situation and still most of the time more value is gotten by betting than check-raising.

Re: yeah...

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was talking about the flop also. Usually, when I check-raise the turn in NL HE, it's because I got raised on the flop and I expect my opponent to bet enough that he'll be pot committed to call when I check-raise.

[roryk.livejournal.com]

you flopped a set the goal is to get all of the money in

if you check raise you give him a shot to get away from hands like AK
or AQ or KQs or something if he has those 20.

if you lead out, he has to fold those hands for 20 which he will never
do. he will probably raise you. if he does raise you then he is putting in 100 and now it is easier to get the rest of his money in when you reraise all in since he is more pot committed.

also if you put him on QQ or AA then he is even money to have both those
hands. so you have 50% equity vs his range and you can never fold because of the dead money in the pot. you spend your time worrying about the wrong things.

[shipitfish.livejournal.com]

Thing is, in the games I'm playing in, there is nothing else to worry about. What I'm actually thinking about all the time that is too detailed to post about quickly (but which I want to post about soon) is that I don't think I want to play poker much longer primarily for the income, because, while I can obviously pick games that I'm a huge favorite to and can make substantial income in them, I don't really like it all that much and don't like how I'm spending my time. More on this on future posts, but I think you'd probably agree that is thinking about the right things. :)