Did I drop a clanger here???

[Ronaldadio]

Clanger means booboo!!! (For all none Englaish!!!)

This hand is one of those "after the event" ones.

The reason I folded was I knew if I called and the pot was reraised, I would be in a position I did not want to be in.

What would you guys have done???

PokerStars Game #8306976449: Hold'em Limit ($1/$2) - 2007/02/06 - 10:46:09 (ET) Table 'Electra' 10-max Seat #1 is the button Seat 1: bobbyhoof ($70.25 in chips) Seat 2: OrianasDad ($58 in chips) Seat 3: Timewalker ($40 in chips) Seat 4: jackow1 ($45 in chips) Seat 5: astone33 ($14 in chips) Seat 6: Thulsadoon ($41.75 in chips) Seat 7: snowlotus333 ($36.50 in chips) Seat 8: ronaldadio ($88.50 in chips) Seat 9: trenck ($14 in chips) Seat 10: ali5584 ($51.50 in chips)
OrianasDad: posts small blind $0.50
ali5584 said, "nh"
Timewalker: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ronaldadio [9h 9s]
jackow1: folds
astone33: calls $1
Thulsadoon: folds
snowlotus333: raises $1 to $2
ronaldadio: folds
trenck: folds
ali5584: folds
bobbyhoof: raises $1 to $3
OrianasDad: folds
Timewalker: folds
astone33: calls $2
snowlotus333: calls $1
*** FLOP *** [8h 9c 3s]
astone33: bets $1
snowlotus333: raises $1 to $2
bobbyhoof: calls $2
astone33: calls $1
*** TURN *** [8h 9c 3s] [2s]
astone33: checks
snowlotus333: bets $2
bobbyhoof: calls $2
astone33: calls $2
*** RIVER *** [8h 9c 3s 2s] [4d]
astone33: checks
snowlotus333: bets $2
bobbyhoof: calls $2
astone33: folds
*** SHOW DOWN ***
snowlotus333: shows [Jh Jc] (a pair of Jacks)
bobbyhoof: shows [Qd Qh] (a pair of Queens) bobbyhoof collected $25.50 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $26.50 | Rake $1
Board [8h 9c 3s 2s 4d]
Seat 1: bobbyhoof (button) showed [Qd Qh] and won ($25.50) with a pair of Queens Seat 2: OrianasDad (small blind) folded before Flop Seat 3: Timewalker (big blind) folded before Flop Seat 4: jackow1 folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 5: astone33 folded on the River Seat 6: Thulsadoon folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 7: snowlotus333 showed [Jh Jc] and lost with a pair of Jacks Seat 8: ronaldadio folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 9: trenck folded before Flop (didn't bet) Seat 10: ali5584 folded before Flop (didn't bet)

 

[robwhufc]

The reason I folded was I knew if I called and the pot was reraised, I would be in a position I did not want to be in.

That's enough then isn't it?

 

[Stefanicov]

That's enough then isn't it?

you gotta play your game and not follow the results of desicions you know are right

 

[dribbel123]

I think you played OK and you would not even have posted this here if someone showed A 5 at the showdown

 

[Vintage82]

Seem's a bit results orientated. If your happy to pass pocket 9's to a raise with players to act behind you, then it doesnt matter if the board comes Q-J-9 or 2-8-9.

 

[Ronaldadio]

You are all right

I just needed confirmation.

What I love about this site is you can ask what other people may think is a stupid question but get an answer.

I suppose I would have been better asking "what is your minimum hand for calling a raise with in middle position in limit" and not posting the hand

Also, Vintage82, I have noticed this "results orientated" quote a few times. What do you mean by that exactly???

 

[Vintage82]

Basically your looking at the results of the hand - but your not in it!

You made your decision and folded. You decided to fold based on position & amount of players behind you (not sure if I'm tight enough to do that myself, so kudos!). So what happens next, is entirely irrelevant.

Your looking at the showdown, but you would only know if you'd won that showdown by being part of the final hand, if you see my meaning.

 

[dribbel123]

I suppose I would have been better asking "what is your minimum hand for calling a raise with in middle position in limit" and not posting the hand

I think that the hand you posted gives more information then just asking about the minimum calling hand for middle position. If the guy in front of you hadn't raised, I think that I would have called the hand.

Also, Vintage82, I have noticed this "results orientated" quote a few times. What do you mean by that exactly???

You shouldn't bother about the outcome of a hand if you're not in it. You based your decision on your cards, your position and the money that you have to invest to join the game.

 

[Stefanicov]

Results oriented can be usefull to notice if specific hands tht you r not playing are winning more than you thought they would but in this case if 99 went against qq and jj it will be crushed in the long run so although it may have won this time had you played it you know it wont in the long run so there4 you know you made the right desicion

 

[Ronaldadio]

Basically your looking at the results of the hand - but your not in it!

You made your decision and folded. You decided to fold based on position & amount of players behind you (not sure if I'm tight enough to do that myself, so kudos!). So what happens next, is entirely irrelevant.

Your looking at the showdown, but you would only know if you'd won that showdown by being part of the final hand, if you see my meaning.

OK, I understand. To take it one stage futher, if I somehow could have seen the other 2 hands preflop I would have folded, so I suppose I made the correct decision at the time.

I also think the point made by Vintage82 is the reason I posted. If I had 1010 I would have called. So, when its that border line and u then see your hand hit after u have folded it does cause frustration - especially when this is your stats for the session
During current Hold'em session you were dealt 127 hands and saw flop:
- 9 out of 13 times while in big blind (69%)
- 2 out of 14 times while in small blind (14%)
- 7 out of 100 times in other positions (7%)
- a total of 18 out of 127 (14%)

So when you get a half decent hand, fold it, and then it hits, it can make u made

 

[Stefanicov]

hey just remember tht playing a good game in the long run will make you mucho $$$$$$$$ so keep playing a good game and youll be at the wsop in no time

 

[Ronaldadio]

hey just remember tht playing a good game in the long run will make you mucho $$$$$$$$ so keep playing a good game and youll be at the wsop in no time

Your on!!! I`ll see you at the final table??? 2008 or 2009, which one?

 

[Stefanicov]

Your on!!! I`ll see you at the final table??? 2008 or 2009, which one?

I need to get the good game first

 

[mrsnake3695]

I have a slightly diff take on this as I usually do, lol. I would have called here. And I thought that before reading the rest of the hand. When you folded it was one raise (2 bets) to you. What can raise here, almost any pair and hands like ace-king, ace-queen, and depending on how aggressive/loose the table is some othere hands too. So it's about 50/50 you have the best hand to the raiser. You do not know if anyone after you is going to reraise or call or fold. A reraise is rare and can't be assumed. With the action if you hit you can make alot of money in this hand because sets are the hardest hand to put someone on. And even if you don't hit, AK will likely keep betting and if there is no ace/king on the board you can call down with your pair and win a nice pot. Pairs are very powerful in limit holdem and should not be given up lightly. Most pairs you play for set value to win big pots. if you hit a set here you win big in a raising war, if you don't hit, if its bet then raise you can then fold.

Another thing you mention is if you had 10/10 you would have called. What makes 10/10 so special. You still have to play it for set value against 2 raisers so it's really only slightly better than 2/2. What hand do you suspect villan(s) have? If you think A/K A/Q then 10s, 9s or even 2s play the same. If you think they have a big pocket pair like QQ or even AA, then again 10s play the same as 9s or 2s, etc. So, I don't really see the point of playing 10s but not 9s. Given the range of hands the villans could be on, especially if there is a reraise, 9s and 10s should play exactly the same.

I also think that 14% in a limit cash game is way tight. Only 7 out of 100 times when not in a blind. Wow that is super tight. You should be putting on some pressure from late position at least, and loosing up your starting requirements depending on position and number of players in the pot.

 

[Bombjack]

I'd 3-bet 99 for isolation and position.

 

[Ronaldadio]

Interesting stuff!!!

Another thing you mention is if you had 10/10 you would have called. What makes 10/10 so special. You still have to play it for set value against 2 raisers so it's really only slightly better than 2/2. What hand do you suspect villan(s) have? If you think A/K A/Q then 10s, 9s or even 2s play the same. If you think they have a big pocket pair like QQ or even AA, then again 10s play the same as 9s or 2s, etc. So, I don't really see the point of playing 10s but not 9s. Given the range of hands the villans could be on, especially if there is a reraise, 9s and 10s should play exactly the same.

You might not agree, but what I`m saying is my cut off point in limit for a raise, depending on my read of other players and my position, is different. So with 1010 I would have called. If it had been raised then reraised I might have folded (Probably not due to pot odds)

I also think that 14% in a limit cash game is way tight. Only 7 out of 100 times when not in a blind. Wow that is super tight. You should be putting on some pressure from late position at least, and loosing up your starting requirements depending on position and number of players in the pot.

I`m new to limit. I am still caught between playing more hands and playing tight. Some of the people who I`m lead to believe are good limit players suggest to tighten up. Also, I would have had a tendancy to call more on the blinds, but again I was advised not to.

Also you need to accept that this is only one game - I do mix and match.

One final point. If u had been able to see the other peoples cards before the flop what would you have done?

 

[Bombjack]

One final point. If u had been able to see the other peoples cards before the flop what would you have done?

Umm... fold, why would you want to be in a pot against 2 higher pairs where you're an underdog from the start? Fine in No-limit because you get great implied odds, but you can pick better spots in Limit.

 

[mrsnake3695]

If I could see the others hole cards i would be rich, rich, rich. The problem is you don't see the others hole cards so we have to make decisions based on the available information. The information we have here is one person raised. Could he have raised with AK, AQ, AJ? Could he have raised with 88 or 77? Sure he could have. 99 is favored over all of these hands. Even if you suspect villan might have an over pair this is still ok. If you do flop a set you can win a big pot against an overpair since sets are hard to put someone on. Sets are not as rare as one may thing. You flop a set about one out of every 7 times.

There are of course different ways to play any poker game and I am certainly not saying that what I said is the only way to play. It just seems to me that folding a medium pocket pair to one raiser (even with others to act after you) combined with only seeing the flop 7% of the time when not in the blinds seems very, very tight.

I am not advocating playing real loose and playing any 2 cards by any means. Just don't be too quick to thorw away playable hands. Unlike no-limit, on of the keys to limit is post flop play and knowing when to get rid of a hand or when to call down or raise etc. For instance if you have 99 and the flop comes A,K,6, then you can safely toss your 99 to pressure, but if it comes A,K,9, now you can make a lot of money which is one of the other keys to limit, which is to try to make a big pot. With the same flop if you have AA the chance that you will win a big pot id lessened significantly for obvious reasons.

Anyway, sorry for rambling, Different opinions and debate is good. It's how we learn.

 

[Ronaldadio]

I agree and disagree at the same time

I did have a read on the table - when u play so few hands u have little else to do but watch others

The origional raiser was tight, and the guy on the button constantly raised on the button - regardless. So I knew if I called I would be facing maximum raise to be in the pot.

The point I made about If u knew what the other 2 had would you have folded, what I meant was, some of the guys tell me I`m too results orientated i.e. I look at what happened after I folded. So, the point I`m making is that at the time I folded it was the right decision. I was up against two overpairs. The fact I would have caught the 9 on the flop would not have made it good play. It would have made it a very lucky play.

Having said all that, u have put across a point thatI was playing 2 tight. To an extent, I don`t disagree

 

[Explosionsinthesky]

Basically your looking at the results of the hand - but your not in it!

You made your decision and folded. You decided to fold based on position & amount of players behind you (not sure if I'm tight enough to do that myself, so kudos!). So what happens next, is entirely irrelevant.

Your looking at the showdown, but you would only know if you'd won that showdown by being part of the final hand, if you see my meaning.

you can also be results oriented in another way, like when you call a raise and a reraise with J5 and flop is 555 and you stack KK and AA, a lot of newbs will say "well I won didnt I?" when that just doesnt justify calling with that sort of action ahead of you.