How not to play a set

[Four Dogs]

full tilt poker Game #741605331: Table Oakpoint (6 max) - $0.05/$0.10 - No Limit Hold'em - 8:13:29 ET - 2006/06/25
Seat 1: illegal22 ($27.10)
Seat 2: EdHitmen ($9.25)
Seat 3: Four Dogs ($14.20)
Seat 4: VENTTI ($3.55)
Seat 5: dog eat dawg ($2.90)
Seat 6: reillye4 ($9.45)
dog eat dawg posts the small blind of $0.05
reillye4 posts the big blind of $0.10
The button is in seat #4

Holecards:
Dealt to Four Dogs [

]
illegal22 folds
EdHitmen folds
Four Dogs raises to $0.20
VENTTI calls $0.20
dog eat dawg calls $0.15
reillye4 calls $0.10

Flop:
[

]
dog eat dawg checks
reillye4 checks
Four Dogs checks
VENTTI checks

Turn:
[

] [

]
dog eat dawg bets $0.10
reillye4 calls $0.10
Four Dogs raises to $0.90
VENTTI folds
dog eat dawg calls $0.80
reillye4 raises to $1.70
Four Dogs raises to $7
dog eat dawg calls $1.80, and is all in
reillye4 raises to $9.25, and is all in
Four Dogs calls $2.25
reillye4 shows [

]
Four Dogs shows [

]
dog eat dawg shows [

]

River:
[

] [

]
reillye4 shows a straight Five high
Four Dogs shows three of a kind Fours
reillye4 wins the side pot ($11 .95) with a straight Five high
dog eat dawg shows a flush Ace high
dog eat dawg wins the main pot ($8 .05) with a flush Ace high

SUMMARY:
Total pot $22 Main pot $8 .90. Side pot $13.10. | Rake $2
Board:
[

]
Seat 1: illegal22 didn't bet (folded)
Seat 2: EdHitmen didn't bet (folded)
Seat 3: Four Dogs showed [

] and lost with three of a kind Fours
Seat 4: VENTTI (button) folded on the Turn
Seat 5: dog eat dawg (small blind) showed [

] and won ($8 .05) with a flush Ace high
Seat 6: reillye4 (big blind) showed [

] and won ($11 .95) with a straight Five high

If I had bet out on the flop I might have won the hand right there or more likely been up against one opponent, dog eat dawg. As it turns out, he would have won with a back door flush, but he would have had to make a mistake to do it. When I saw his hand I was was a little surprised that he checked the flop.

 

[Styrofoam]

he wasn't going to let that go on the flop no matter what you bet. you got beat, and there was nothing you could do about it.

 

[Four Dogs]

Doesn't change the fact that I should have bet the flop.

 

[buckster436]

You should have gone allin on the flop, your mistake was that you let them catch up to you, had you gone allin you probally would have taken it down rite then,,,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buck:hello:

 

[shortstacked]

Doesn't change the fact that I should have bet the flop.

i think you should of dubbled the pot

 

[Four Dogs]

I'm thinking 1/2 to 3/4 sized bet. With this hand, I don't want to scare everyone out. But I do want to cut the field down to one opponent.

 

[Jesus Lederer]

I like a 3/4 pot size bet here, but i would never check a flop like that unless the guy who´s going to act next is extremely aggressive and i´m sure he´s going to bet. In that case i prefer the check, because i can trap one or two callers who are going to add money into the pot, making it more tempting to the original bettor when it´s my turn and i raise heavily.

But aside that particular situation, by checking this flop you aren´t going to achieve anything except maybe an induced bluff on the turn, but what you win by that induced bluff is nothing compared to what you are going to lose if you let someone hit his draw (which was very possible considering that it was 6 handed, the preflop action and especially the texture of the flop, which had a high straight draw, a low one and a a flush draw).

Checking a hand like a hidden set seems great to extract a lot of chips on later streets, making your opponent think that you didn´t get a piece of the flop and you´re betting with middle pair, top pair/weak kicker or a turn hit, but you can do that only when the texture of the flop is inoffensive and there´s no big possibility of someone drawing. Also if you start to analyze what´s the real thing you´re trying to achieve when you decide to check, you´ll find that there isn´t any good reason to do it. Many people say "i´m letting someone hit anything on the turn, and that combined with the hidden strength of my hand, means a lot of chips to be extracted on the turn and river". That´s a good argument when the flop has no texture, but when it has, what possible card on the turn could your opponent hit that makes his hand good enough to commit chips but weak enough to be beaten by you? The answer is almost none. So by checking in a flop with texture you achieve nothing and risk a lot.

I´m glad both opponents hit and you lost the hand, so you could realize of your mistake.

i think you should of dubbled the pot

You should have gone allin on the flop, your mistake was that you let them catch up to you, had you gone allin you probally would have taken it down rite then,,,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buck

I think you´re being results oriented. As dogs said, with a set you don´t want to scare everyone out. You´re killing the implied odds you have with a low pocket pair if you take the pot right on the flop (you can do that anytime with a simple continuation bet if you don´t hit). The low and middle pocket pairs work based on implied odds, you want to be paid by players chasing something and especially holding high pocket pairs or TPTK.

 

[buckster436]

I like a 3/4 pot size bet here, but i would never check a flop like that unless the guy who´s going to act next is extremely aggressive and i´m sure he´s going to bet. In that case i prefer the check, because i can trap one or two callers who are going to add money into the pot, making it more tempting to the original bettor when it´s my turn and i raise heavily.

But aside that particular situation, by checking this flop you aren´t going to achieve anything except maybe an induced bluff on the turn, but what you win by that induced bluff is nothing compared to what you are going to lose if you let someone hit his draw (which was very possible considering that it was 6 handed, the preflop action and especially the texture of the flop, which had a high straight draw, a low one and a a flush draw).

Checking a hand like a hidden set seems great to extract a lot of chips on later streets, making your opponent think that you didn´t get a piece of the flop and you´re betting with middle pair, top pair/weak kicker or a turn hit, but you can do that only when the texture of the flop is inoffensive and there´s no big possibility of someone drawing. Also if you start to analyze what´s the real thing you´re trying to achieve when you decide to check, you´ll find that there isn´t any good reason to do it. Many people say "i´m letting someone hit anything on the turn, and that combined with the hidden strength of my hand, means a lot of chips to be extracted on the turn and river". That´s a good argument when the flop has no texture, but when it has, what possible card on the turn could your opponent hit that makes his hand good enough to commit chips but weak enough to be beaten by you? The answer is almost none. So by checking in a flop with texture you achieve nothing and risk a lot.

I´m glad both opponents hit and you lost the hand, so you could realize of your mistake.




I think you´re being results oriented. As dogs said, with a set you don´t want to scare everyone out. You´re killing the implied odds you have with a low pocket pair if you take the pot right on the flop (you can do that anytime with a simple continuation bet if you don´t hit). The low and middle pocket pairs work based on implied odds, you want to be paid by players chasing something and especially holding high pocket pairs or TPTK.

TRUE, but winning a small pot is better than losing to someone who is drawing to something, and then beats you,.. buck

 

[colin_147]

I´m glad both opponents hit and you lost the hand, so you could realize of your mistake.

I think thats a bit harsh, JL. If players want to improve, as we all do, then you need to analyse your play all the time, whether you are winning or not.

Looking at it, 4dogs knows he has to bet out with a flop like that. I dont agree you need to push all your chips in at this stage, you want to maximise your winnings when you hit a set in this situation. Yes, its a pretty scary flop but in future even with a small set you need to bet out, especially with an Ace on board, as players will most likely call with any ace or connecting cards

 

[twizzybop]

Yes a pot bet or a little over a pot bet would have gave any chasers incorrect odds to call..You are dominating any hand here besides holders of JJ and AA.. Unless some donks are mini raising with those hands(own fault of thier own for making mini-raises with those hands)... A bet on the flop would let get some sort of idea where you stand.

 

[xace100]

i cant belive noone bet the flop simply bcos of the flush draw. then bcos of this the AK also caught the nut flush draw he was never going to lay after that card, as far as i can see the only person who played the hand right was the straight he caught the nuts at that point and got his chips in and was unlucky. In super system doyle says that u should always be prepared to lay the lowest set down, i know its hard but sometimes its better to lay the best hand esp when ur raisin and gettin so much resistence u have to think ur beat at this point.