When to go All In

So I got a Poker 101 book thrown at me because I went all in after the river card, I had a full house. The opponent folded their hand. Is that a bad poker play?? The other player was to say-the-least more than angry.

If your opponent folded his hand, instead of making a call and paying for a full house, this is a good game for your opponent. If you have a strong hand that will definitely win at the showdown, then the opponent's fold is the money you lost. More precisely, of course - not lost, but simply under-received.

I think you'll need to provide more context in order to get people's views. How much was in the pot? What was your stack? What was villain's stack? What were the rounds of betting like?

Presumably you thought you were going to win with a full house. You then should've been sizing your bet to get a call. "All in" must've been too big since villain folded.

If the opponent has a card that is not worthy that it should be fought for, he will fold. You may not know in advance what you should do. A small raise or allin. But sometimes it is possible by the actions of the enemy.

Yeah, we need more details than this. Why was the opponent angry ? If you had the best hand but your bet was too big and that caused him to fold, he should be HAPPY, not angry. And who "threw the poker book" at you ? Was it the opponent or somebody else ? It sounds like they thought your all-in bet was too big given the action up to that point. This may have been the case. If your opponent was mostly checking and calling, you probably should have bet an amount that would give you a good chance of getting paid, maybe 1/3 of the pot or so.

For me that's not a bad play! You can win big if somebody calls...

HobokenNJ said:

I think you'll need to provide more context in order to get people's views. How much was in the pot? What was your stack? What was villain's stack? What were the rounds of betting like?

Presumably you thought you were going to win with a full house. You then should've been sizing your bet to get a call. "All in" must've been too big since villain folded.

Click to expand...

I don't remember the exact numbers, but the situation was as follows:
Opponent had a stack much larger than I - double my chip stack
He bet pre-flop, I called
River he raises, I re-raised
Turn he checks, I go all in, opponent calls - (sorry i misspoke in my above scenario - he didn't fold)
Opponent then curses me out for not knowing the Poker rules... this is where I am not sure what I did wrong.

You should have pretended that you had a weak hand so your opponent can make a bet on the river so you can make more profitable your hand, my opinion.

Seems like he was mad because you beat him fair and square. I find some players who think they are awesome, get really pissy when they get beat. That's when I know they are not as good as they think. I liked the play, as you got all your money in and you got the call. Great job!!

Kirs10c said:

I don't remember the exact numbers, but the situation was as follows:
Opponent had a stack much larger than I - double my chip stack
He bet pre-flop, I called
River he raises, I re-raised
Turn he checks, I go all in, opponent calls - (sorry i misspoke in my above scenario - he didn't fold)
Opponent then curses me out for not knowing the Poker rules... this is where I am not sure what I did wrong.

Click to expand...

With an opponent showing that much aggression, I think your all-in was a perfectly acceptable move there. I'm not sure what "poker rules" he is referring to. As long as you aren't breaking rules like acting out of turn or making other morally questionable actions, you aren't doing anything wrong. Opponent is most likely just mad that he lost a big hand and thinks he is a better player than you. This is pretty common.

kowrip said:

With an opponent showing that much aggression, I think your all-in was a perfectly acceptable move there. I'm not sure what "poker rules" he is referring to. As long as you aren't breaking rules like acting out of turn or making other morally questionable actions, you aren't doing anything wrong. Opponent is most likely just mad that he lost a big hand and thinks he is a better player than you. This is pretty common.

Click to expand...

I know I am an amateur, but I was pretty sure there are no betting etiquette rules. Thanks for confirming my thoughts.

I've learned that when you're on tilt, any time feels like a good time to go all-in. ;_;

I don't think it was a bad play, it doesn't make any sense to think of "what ifs." He might have folded even if you bet the smallest amount, we will never know.

maybe jam a value bet?? not in the range of an all in. could've gotten more of his chips with a small to a medium value bet.

Kirs10c said:

So I got a Poker 101 book thrown at me because I went all in after the river card, I had a full house. The opponent folded their hand. Is that a bad poker play?? The other player was to say-the-least more than angry.

Click to expand...

Maybe with Full House at River, would be a better option no go All-In, instead make a bet with the amount of money that you think that your oppenet could to call, this is better because you will win more money, if you go All-In you scare away your opponent and you only will win the amount of money in the pot, but you could get much more out of it in a hand like Full House achieved in the River, I think poker tries to get the most out of the hands we get, and in fact this is what I recommend, I think there is Make the most of opportunities.

Or maybe also is a good idea to make a low bet, so your apponent do not think that you have a Big Hand and maybe he/she Raise that bet allowing you to win more!

What do do thinks about this answer?

that is why ALL AROUND, included a river.
maybe little bit angry but It is lucky!

Each player raises his own line of the game and changes it depending on the opponent’s game, and if the opponent is angry, this is his problem.

I think when you have a small stack and a good card

Kirs10c said:

So I got a Poker 101 book thrown at me because I went all in after the river card, I had a full house. The opponent folded their hand. Is that a bad poker play?? The other player was to say-the-least more than angry.

Click to expand...

I am not an expert, but I would say it was a bad play if you have the nuts. The purpose is to extract as much money as possible, so to that purpose you have to read your apponent. Raise what ever amount you think they might go for. Even the smallist amount means more for you.

Kirs10c said:

I don't remember the exact numbers, but the situation was as follows:
Opponent had a stack much larger than I - double my chip stack
He bet pre-flop, I called
River he raises, I re-raised
Turn he checks, I go all in, opponent calls - (sorry i misspoke in my above scenario - he didn't fold)
Opponent then curses me out for not knowing the Poker rules... this is where I am not sure what I did wrong.

Click to expand...

Nobody can answer your question without key details of the hand - for example your cards and the flop, turn and river cards.

Also what game you were playing.

If You more than know that opponent will lose, you should raise not go all in. Going all in after river will always scare players who have only one or two pairs.

i dont like when everybody for one table go allin every turn but wait and in

Kirs10c said:

So I got a Poker 101 book thrown at me because I went all in after the river card, I had a full house. The opponent folded their hand. Is that a bad poker play?? The other player was to say-the-least more than angry.

Click to expand...

It was a good move, it all depends on how aggressive the opponent is and how many chips he own.

Normally I do not use that strategy unless the opponent is a fish

I go all in in position;generally when I am in the dealer position and everybody folded so It's only me the SB and BB;Though this is a good oportunity to go all in and steal the blinds.
But this doesn't work out well every time.Sometimes you find AA and KK and this is a disaster.

Generally speaking a full house is a great hand to go all in with it but there are some exceptions without much details we can't know for sure if play was right or wrong. Also I am lost in your description of hand everything is mixed up.

Throwing stuff at people is rude. I would throw the poker book back where it came from.

If opponent lost the hand and is angry that is his/her problem. It does not give them the right to abuse (verbal or physical) you in anyway. If they abuse you, you should report to who ever in charge of table. Every player is entitled to play their game in peace and not worry about abuse or harassment.

If he/she is angry if you made a bad play then he/she has no clue what they are doing as every player welcomes bad play by opponent. Or is this just me?