n3rv
Visionary
Silver Level
Hi guys,
Often I find myself in a position where I flop what is likely to be the best hand, and I know my opponent is trying to push me off it with a weaker holding (they may have Ace high, over-cards, a backdoor draw etc. or just plain old 27o).
I find if I re-raise in this situation I tend to "take the pot down" right there and then, getting the chips they have generously tested me with. However, I know in many cases this is not the optimal way to play with an aggressive player willing to gamble or bluff more at the pot on later streets if I simply call and slow play my top pair (or whatever other decent hand I may have).
When I do just slow-play and call I know my hand could hold-up or improve, but I also know overcards and backdoor draws will come and I will have to make tougher calls on later streets. I have no problem doing this. The issue is if my overly-aggressive opponent actually hits runner-runner and my hand improves I will have to make a tough fold on the river. This is something I am less inclined to be able to get away from and thus makes the play sub-optimal to me overall (losing a big pot too often vs. winning a small one).
One could describe a runner-runner situation as a cooler or a bad beat - something you can't get away from - but I feel this kind of suck-out is preventable more often than not by simply being more aggressive when in the lead.
E.g. http://www.pokerhandreplays.com/view.php/id/6074040
I know re-raising on early streets is not the best play here as it is likely that only weaker hands are folding and better hands are calling - however, if I do re-raise it is less likely that I make a bad call on the river, and it is more likely to prevent a suck-out. At least by being more aggressive when in the lead any bad beat wll be caused by even more bad decisions by my opponent when they were behind, as opposed to a bad decision by me when I was eventually behind.
Do you agree that there is some logic in trying to avoid a suck-out on a later street, or do you feel that maximizing value is most important and that I should just induce the bets and try to lay down the river when the board changes even if I know he likely gambled or bluffed the flop and the turn?
Sorry for the long post, I hope someone understands what I am getting at. Thanks in advance for any help here.
Often I find myself in a position where I flop what is likely to be the best hand, and I know my opponent is trying to push me off it with a weaker holding (they may have Ace high, over-cards, a backdoor draw etc. or just plain old 27o).
I find if I re-raise in this situation I tend to "take the pot down" right there and then, getting the chips they have generously tested me with. However, I know in many cases this is not the optimal way to play with an aggressive player willing to gamble or bluff more at the pot on later streets if I simply call and slow play my top pair (or whatever other decent hand I may have).
When I do just slow-play and call I know my hand could hold-up or improve, but I also know overcards and backdoor draws will come and I will have to make tougher calls on later streets. I have no problem doing this. The issue is if my overly-aggressive opponent actually hits runner-runner and my hand improves I will have to make a tough fold on the river. This is something I am less inclined to be able to get away from and thus makes the play sub-optimal to me overall (losing a big pot too often vs. winning a small one).
One could describe a runner-runner situation as a cooler or a bad beat - something you can't get away from - but I feel this kind of suck-out is preventable more often than not by simply being more aggressive when in the lead.
E.g. http://www.pokerhandreplays.com/view.php/id/6074040
I know re-raising on early streets is not the best play here as it is likely that only weaker hands are folding and better hands are calling - however, if I do re-raise it is less likely that I make a bad call on the river, and it is more likely to prevent a suck-out. At least by being more aggressive when in the lead any bad beat wll be caused by even more bad decisions by my opponent when they were behind, as opposed to a bad decision by me when I was eventually behind.
Do you agree that there is some logic in trying to avoid a suck-out on a later street, or do you feel that maximizing value is most important and that I should just induce the bets and try to lay down the river when the board changes even if I know he likely gambled or bluffed the flop and the turn?
Sorry for the long post, I hope someone understands what I am getting at. Thanks in advance for any help here.
Last edited: