10NL FR Did I Play This Wrong

pokerstars Game #19767754924: Hold'em No Limit ($0.05/$0.10) - 2008/08/20 - 16:58:34 (ET)
Table 'Ioannisiani' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: lastnamenoww ($10.70 in chips)
Seat 2: Bernardo76 ($19.35 in chips)
Seat 3: curmudgen ($7.45 in chips)
Seat 4: Wismeryll ($10.75 in chips)
Seat 5: Alderisio ($9.95 in chips)
Seat 6: JurnsPoker ($7 in chips)
Seat 7: jrc3 ($8.35 in chips)
Seat 9: fajnymis ($9.75 in chips)
Bernardo76: posts small blind $0.05
curmudgen: posts big blind $0.10
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to JurnsPoker [As Ac]
Wismeryll: raises $0.30 to $0.40
Darchrow84 joins the table at seat #8
Alderisio: calls $0.40
JurnsPoker: raises $0.30 to $0.70
jrc3: folds
fajnymis: folds
lastnamenoww: folds
Bernardo76: folds
lastnamenoww is sitting out
curmudgen: folds
Wismeryll: calls $0.30
Alderisio: calls $0.30
*** FLOP *** [6s 4c 3s]
Wismeryll: checks
Alderisio: bets $1
JurnsPoker: raises $5.30 to $6.30 and is all-in
Wismeryll: folds
Alderisio: calls $5.30
*** TURN *** [6s 4c 3s] [Jh]
*** RIVER *** [6s 4c 3s Jh] [9d]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
Alderisio: shows [4d 4h] (three of a kind, Fours)
JurnsPoker: mucks hand
Alderisio collected $14.15 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $14.85 | Rake $0.70
Board [6s 4c 3s Jh 9d]
Seat 1: lastnamenoww (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: Bernardo76 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: curmudgen (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 4: Wismeryll folded on the Flop
Seat 5: Alderisio showed [4d 4h] and won ($14.15) with three of a kind, Fours
Seat 6: JurnsPoker mucked [As Ac]
Seat 7: jrc3 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: fajnymis folded before Flop (didn't bet)

Wismeryll: raises $0.30 to $0.40
Darchrow84 joins the table at seat #8
Alderisio: calls $0.40
JurnsPoker: raises $0.30 to $0.70

Click to expand...

What in the blue-hell is that?

I think thats like a min-min-min raise. Seriously, make a real 3bet here, pump it up to like $1.20 +

ajrobin said:

I think thats like a min-min-min raise. Seriously, make a real 3bet here, pump it up to like $1.20 +

Click to expand...

Jesus, at least. I was thinkin' $2.20 would be more appropriate.

Jurn8 has a bad habit of doing the min 3bet. There are 2 examples in his current blog post of the same thing.

Edit: Actually I think this is one of the hands posted there.

That min 3bet should be completely wiped out of your plays, plain terrible. Also, why overbet the pot on the flop with such a coordinated board? Your minreraise drove NO hands away...

c9h13no3 said:

What in the blue-hell is that?

Click to expand...

alryt dont just slag me off, can you explain to me what i SHOULD have done here ??? im not as good as you are and dont understand the concept of 3 betting thats y i posted for help!

WVHillbilly said:

Jurn8 has a bad habit of doing the min 3bet. There are 2 examples in his current blog post of the same thing.

Edit: Actually I think this is one of the hands posted there.

Click to expand...

Thanks WV at least somebody reads my blog lol !! i need help with this obviously

Ok after everybody has taken the piss out of me for how bad i am i now realise what i was doing when you get the chance to re raise i was just pressing the amount shown and didnt realise it was best to then 3 x Min Bet.
Sorry for not realising it and i will now do this and post another hand to ask if this is correct, thanks for everybodys help

if you want to make a pot sized 3bet preflop, which would be appropriate here, you need to pop it up to $1.75.

Jurn8 said:

Seat 6: JurnsPoker ($7 in chips)

Click to expand...

This is also wrong. Either buy in for $2 and play a short stack strategy or buy in for $10 and reload continuously to stay at $10 at least and play a deep stack strategy.

buy in is $6 belgo

Jurn8 said:

buy in is $6 belgo

Click to expand...

PokerStars Hold'em No Limit ($0.05/$0.10) has a maximum buy in of $10. It may suggest that you buy in with $6 when you join the table, but you can choose to buy in for more or less within the $2 to $10 limit.

would you suggest buying in for 10 or 2 and what are the reasons for this

The problem with min raising, is that you give almost atc odds to call. It is a serious mistake to raise very small with aa, in the hope of getting action. You are giving phenomenal implied odds to other players (basically, if they hit their hand they have an expectation of gaining further bets from you) and you have terrible reverse implied odds (basically meaning that you are unlikely to be able to get away from this hand, even when you are beat).

If you have 44 in this situation (like villain) and you simply set mine, then this is a winning play if hero (you) is willing to go to the felt with aa. It costs 40c to see the flop, and villain can win something like $9 (pot + your stack). So with implied odds, villain is getting something like 22.5:1 odds when they have about 7:1 equity in the pot (odds of flopping a set). And the flip side of this is that this cannot possibly be a winning play for you. If you are going to stack off with AA no matter the flop here (probably not bad in nl10) you will lose money because of your preflop sizing.

Say instead that you bump it up to $2. Villain now has $1.6:~$8 or 1:5 odds when giving 1:7 odds. So, in this case, it becomes a winning play for you, even if you stack off when villain hits a set.

Jurn8 said:

would you suggest buying in for 10 or 2 and what are the reasons for this

Click to expand...

because buying in for a middle amount leaves you in no man's land. If you buy in for 2, you can play short stacked strats and do things like push big aces/pps when there is dead money in the pot, or you can raise and push flop etc. Since you don't have money behind you, it is always correct to push tptk etc.

Buying in for full allows you do play high implied odds cards like s/cs and pps.

You cant really do either of these w/ mid buy in. You also can't really do things like bluff since your fold equity is alot less. But basically, you are too deep to try and push pf or to raise pf and push flop and you are too shallow to play implied odds hands and too shallow to actually "outplay" anybody since you just get committed to a pot far too easily.

Jurn8 said:

would you suggest buying in for 10 or 2 and what are the reasons for this

Click to expand...

it depends the kind of strategy you want to play.

if you buy in for $2, you need to play mostly high cards and you will play for stacks anytime you flop top pair.

if you buy in for $10, you can play small pocket pairs, suited connectors and other hands where you can flop a monster. The flip side is that you should avoid playing for stacks unless you have a very strong hand. Typically, top pair top kicker is not strong enough for that anymore.

Both strategies work if you apply them properly.

ok sounds good to me cheers belgo !

I think 20 bb's is a little small. I'd say 35-55 bb's would be about right for a short stacker. You want the ability to be able to fold on the flop. The key is just to be able to commit with 1 pair hands without having to worry about set miners, ect.

55bs BB is 5.50 and im in with 6 so thats about right, you guys who work hard in this hand analysis section are really helpful and know what ur chattin,

WV
Belgo
C9

Cheers guys iv got some more hands which i will post later lol sorry

Jurn8 said:

55bs BB is 5.50 and im in with 6 so thats about right

Click to expand...

See, with a stack size of 6$, people start to have implied odds against you to set mine, and play stuff like suited connectors even if you open the pot with a raise.

IMO, the point of playing a shorter stack is to be able to commit on the flop, and its pretty hard to do that when you're more than 50 bb's deep. New players tend to play the turn & river very poorly, and so if you leave money behind that you have to make turn & river decisions with, you tend to lose a lot of money.

You *can* buy in for 2$, but there you're mostly just looking to play preflop poker (your M = 13.3 if this were a tourney). I think new players are at least good enough to be able to play the flop well, as well as preflop. So I'd advocate buying in for more than just 2$.

But once you get above 55-60 bb's, you should probably rat-hole & leave the table, or reload your stack to a full one. Playing an awkward stack size sucks.

I think 25-30 bbs makes for the easiest short stack decisions. At 25bb you can raise 4bbs with your big cards / pair hands and then have basically a pot sized bet (assuming 1 caller) left for the flop. If the table is particularly loose and you expect multiple callers anytime you raise, a slightly larger stack (I'd go no more than 40 bbs) works well.

i dont like the idea of short stacked poker, just dont like playing premiums all the time i like to play suited connectors n high suited gaps in late.

I would feel as though i have to push on the flop for example if i have AK raise 4 x BB get a caller so the pot is 95 say if both blinds fold that gives me with 1.60 and say the board comes 3 5 10 rainbow i bet 60 leaves me with $1 he calls now i no fold equity on the turn so he could jst bet n leave me struggling if i miss on the turn where as if i shove on the flop he may just call because im short stacked.

I might be talkin crap to you but thats how i see it.

Jurn8 said:

i dont like the idea of short stacked poker, just dont like playing premiums all the time i like to play suited connectors n high suited gaps in late.

Click to expand...

Then you must buy in for 100bb and reload if you go below that. If you buy in for 60bb like you do now, those hands are not profitable.

I agree if you can buy-in for a full stack (and keep it full) that's the way to go. I personally hate shorties because they destroy my implied odds and if I decide to play for their stack I'm often getting in with the worst of it.

So if you want to play a full stack that's great, but starting hands with $6 or $7 makes your preflop decisions much more difficult. Full Tilt has a setting to auto top-up, so it reloads automatically (even after I post each blind). I don't think Stars has the same functionality built-in but there are several AHK scripts that will do this for you.