To get maximum value

There was a recent hand history that i posted that came up with some strange results. It was an easy slow play opportunity and yet only a few said that it should be slow played. Most said that i should bet out to avoid being sucked out on which got me thinking.

http://www.cardschat.com/f33/5-360-m...1st-act-84734/ (http://www.cardschat.com/f33/5-360-max-trips-flop-multiway-pot-1st-act-84734/)

Are some players so scared of the suckout that they do not get the maximum value from their hands?

Obviously the answer to this is yes they do but i wonder how many of them realise that this is a big hole in their game. In mtt play the whole difference between an average player who just scrapes round the money or some one who goes on regularly to make final tables or to win is that the winners and final tblers get maximum possible from every hand.
For a player to come out with a statement like 'you will still have 3k if u overbet and take it down now' to me is crazy. There are some instances when taking it down is the prudent option but to try to take down every pot u know u are ahead just to avoid the suckouts to me is nutzz. If u are ahead u want to get as much into the pot as possible.

Any ways i am drunk now so i will open this topic up for discussion.

If this thread has been done before thn oh well it will be done again.

yep, I completely agree with ya, Steve.

We've all seen it before; say someone holding AA for top set with a flush draw on board and people are suggesting to bet so much to "push out the draws".

Why do we want to make a draw fold? I agree that giving him proper odds to draw is terrible, but we want those draws to call. We have to make it expensive for them, but we still want them to call. If possible, we'd obv like to get their whole stack in the middle while drawing.

Silly stuff.

anyways i'm drunk too and dont want to start ranting, so nn

I think in early position, you can slow play give someone else a chance to bet, flat call. If down to 2 CR the turn. If still multiple people on the turn, I think you should lead unless another jack comes.

This is obviously directed to me and Calibanboy, I accept the criticism and the spirit it was intended for, and I know you mean it in a positive and constuctive way, but give me a chance to explain, as Caliban already did for his part.

I think you are reaching the wrong conclusions here based on 1 thread. Its only obvious that you want to maximize your hand when you hit something strong, I always try to accomplish that and many times when I look at HH's here that it what I try to put people in the frame of mind to do. When you hit the flop strongly your focus should always be " How can I get my opponent to double me up here?", and I'm always ready to take risks on that, only in very few circumstances I do worry about getting outdrawn, making sure I give the wrong odds to do that. I can't mention how many times here I've seen players scared when they have bottom set or top 2 pair and they get check/raised with no flushes or straights on the board yet.

That said I didn't like the situation you described in that thread, I don't like to slowplay against another 5 opponents no matter how good it looks, that is my opinion. This might be a weakness but I don't think its that bad, 6-way pots are uncommon anyways, and that is the ONLY reason I didn't like it. I'm glad you did slowplay it and doubled up. Good job. Just don't go to the wrong conclusions based on 1 post, read some others too, I don't normally play scared, actually sometimes I risk too much, which is probably a leak (a tendency to overestimate my hand) that should worry me more than the one you mention.

I commented in the original thread, although I sided with checking the flop. The main argument for betting seems to be that it's because there are 5 others in the pot. I think differently here in that with this flop and your hand it doesn't matter how many are in the pot. If someone after you has a piece of the flop (such as the player with AJ) then the vast majority of the time the will bet. They pretty much have to since anyone with a piece of the pot can't have the nuts (since we do) and has to bet out to protect his hand and see where he stands. When someone bets that will thin the field for you without you haveing to give away your hand. You can then decide if you want to reraise or smooth call depending on the size of the bet and the actions or the others. If nobody bets the flop then the chances are that nobody as any piece of it (there are no real draws available). If nobody has a piece of it then you bet will chase everybody away and you win a small pot with the current nuts which is not what we want. This is one of those rare situations where slow playing is almost madatory to try to maximize your profit.

I mentioned it in one of my earlier posts, and stef did too in his, that in MTTs you must accumulate chips and you have to take some gambles when the odds are in your favor which they clearly are in this case.

Hey calican and joe i was not picking out u2 from previous thread your answers just got me thinking upon the subject this thread was suposed to be more general rather than on the specifics of the previous thread. When i said bold if i made it sound like u said it caliban sorry didnt mean to but it is a view held by a lot of players, to be scared of the bad beat and to bet out people when clearly this is not the right play to maximise ure profits.


this can range from a hand i saw recently where guy mini bet the absolute nuts all the way to the river so tht he would win at least some chips off his monster to completly over betting the absolute nuts so u dont get drawn out on.

This is an excellent topic because I think alot of players miss out on value because they are afraid to get drawn out on. In certain instances it can be correct to allow your opponent to draw, especially when they could make a big second best hand. When they do, your EV goes through the roof if you're sitting with the nuts or close to it. Remember that your action should be to maximise value in the long run and this is done by allowing your opponent to make mistakes.

Sklansky says you shouldn't force your opponent into playing correct poker. When you overbet the pot to push out a draw against an opponent you know won't call, you are making his decision that much easier and forcing him to play correctly. He now knows exactly what you have too, so you're giving away all kinds of information for him to use, not only on this hand but in future hands against you.

Let your opponent make costly mistakes.

Just to confirm we not not have the nuts at this point. Although we almost definately leading. Its important to understand when you have the nuts and when you do not.....but thats another topic.

I think a check raise tells your opponents that you have a seven, especially as you are in the SB. The guy who went all the way with AJ is a donk to follow. An overbet is unorthodox and confusing ( why would anyone over bet a 7? - you are all thinking that ) and whilst it will remove draws it will not necessarily remove the same guy with AJ.

In this position I make this play.

In similar position with less players in the pot I very most likely play the same way as played by the original poster.

I like this post. I am going to play devils Advocate. Based on the fact that you have A7 here and have the 2nd nuts - trips. ( no-one can have 77 but JJ is possible). What card do you want people to draw too?

Heres how the different cards can improve someones hand.

Any low card can give one of the 5 limpers with PP a boat - beating you.
Any 8,9,10 can give someone a Straight - beating you.
Any 8,9,10 can give one of the 5 limpers with PP a boat - beating you.

So it sounds like the only real hands that improves and may induce further bet/call (but does not beat) you is Jx, where x hits. Or an A,K,Q where someone has AK or AQ and limped??

Those with the later hands are likely to be wary of the board with 77 unless they are a donk. Those who improve to better hands than 2P are likely to bet more strongly.

So my point is letting someone improve to the point where they will take a fight against you is normally only going to happen if they have you beat.

However the other point is if you have a donk who is prepared to play a J all the way to the finish already - they will probably do it both ways. I take the point that the Overbet may make this happen less - but i think marginally so as an overbet in first position signifies and Bully, a weak jack, as much as a 7.

I also have no problems people thinking that I bet when i am in the lead. It defines my image for me and allows me to steal.

Anyway - I see that people do not agree with my thoughts. I am cool with that and respect yours too. Thats poker hey.

As Stefanicov stated this is more of a general strategic post rather than an analysis of a specific hand. That being the case I stand by my original post and the point it makes. Losing one hand using a strategy that maximises value or EV over time is certainly going to happen because sometimes Villain hits the dream card. Maybe in tournament poker the thinking is different but I play cash games only.

In this example cards that could be very good for you are, as you stated, an A, K, or Q. With 5 limpers there's a decent chance an A is out. If you overbet this you aren't going to get callers so no-one is given the chance to make the mistake of staying in the pot. If you check it or bet very small you allow the chance of a mistake. Say someone limped AJ or KJ. Now there's a chance of a nice big pot.