Most disgusting hand I have ever been a part of!

[xdmanx007]

GAME #1041967517 - (BLINDS $0.25/$0.50) NO LIMIT TEXAS HOLD'EM - 2005/10/22-02:11:06.5 (CST)
Table "Vanavana" (real money) -- Seat 6 is the button
Seat 1: BigLiveOne ($49.00 in chips)
Seat 2: royal doyle ($6.50 in chips)
Seat 3: catechin ($95.75 in chips)
Seat 4: xdmanx007 ($80.00 in chips)
Seat 5: Sleepy Eye ($57.00 in chips)
Seat 6: evileli ($9.25 in chips)
Seat 7: mhachman75 ($86.25 in chips)
Seat 8: GrndMaGertie ($13.00 in chips)
Seat 9: princegeo ($45.00 in chips)
Seat 10: helsknight ($0.25 in chips)
mhachman75: Post Small Blind ($0.25)
GrndMaGertie: Post Big Blind ($0.50)
Dealing...
Dealt to xdmanx007 [ Jh ]
Dealt to xdmanx007 [ Kh ]
princegeo: Call ($0.50)
BigLiveOne: Call ($0.50)
royal doyle: Fold
catechin: Fold
xdmanx007: Call ($0.50)
Sleepy Eye: Fold
evileli : Fold
mhachman75: Call ($0.25)
GrndMaGertie: Check
*** FLOP *** : [ Ac 9h 7h ]
mhachman75: Bet ($1.50)
GrndMaGertie: Call ($1.50)
princegeo: Fold
BigLiveOne: Call ($1.50)
xdmanx007: Call ($1.50)
*** TURN *** : [ Ac 9h 7h ] [ 3h ]
mhachman75: Bet ($6)
GrndMaGertie: Fold
BigLiveOne: Fold
xdmanx007: Raise ($15)
mhachman75: Call ($9)
*** RIVER *** : [ Ac 9h 7h 3h ] [ 3d ]
mhachman75: Bet ($19)
xdmanx007: Call ($19)
*** SUMMARY ***
Pot: $73.50 | Rake: $3
Board: [ Ac 9h 7h 3h 3d ]
BigLiveOne lost $2 (folded)
royal doyle didn't bet (folded)
catechin didn't bet (folded)
xdmanx007 lost $36 [ Jh Kh ] (a flush, king high)
Sleepy Eye didn't bet (folded)
evileli didn't bet (folded)
mhachman75 bet $36, collected $73.50, net +$37.50 (showed hand) [ 9c 3s ] (a full house, threes full of nines)
GrndMaGertie lost $2 (folded)
princegeo lost $0.50 (folded)
helsknight didn't bet
-----------------------------------------------------

 

[rocka13]

What can you say !!! Absolute shocker.
Hang in there XD.

 

[xdmanx007]

Well I have changed up my style a bit lately and started limping more with marginal hands. NO more in Ring games if I am going to play the hand I am raising it up! I have been running into to many suckouts and raising preflop will cut down on those. I had been trying to do a little more trapping by limping no more! Gonna blast away!

 

[Tammy]

Oh my. That really is horrifying. I don't think I'll be able to sleep tonight...it is so much how my entire day has been going, I feel sick.uke:

 

[Four Dogs]

I thought I knew the end of that story before I read it. I was certain he had quad 3's or the nut flush. Those would be the only hands that would have justified calling your turn bet. I'm sure that's what he was representing.
Just curious XD, what did you put him on before you called his $19 bet on the river?

 

[xdmanx007]

tbh Dog this guy was a complete idiot he played over 75 percent of almost 200 hands he was dealt in that game. When he called the turn I was thinking flush or flush draw. 2 pair entered my mind but I really didn't think he would have called with 2 pair when I screamed from the mountain tops I have made a flush, but he did call with 9,3 and caught another 3. I really thought he had a flush or flush draw when he called the turn. Anyways the only thing I really did wrong was limp preflop after t hat I think I played it about as good as you can play that hand. So in rings if I play I am raising from now I have been paying off way too many suckouts lately and the only way I know to cut down on that is kicking up the preflop aggression while slightly tightening up my starting hand requirements.

 

[lightning36]

Seems like more and more people will stay a long time with junk. You'd think that he would have gotten the message at least when you raised $15, but I guess he thought he was pot-committed. If I were you, I'd look to play at his table again ... hehe

 

[Alon Ipser]

I have a question. Is it proper to chase the flush after the flop? Especially with the ace on board. I normally would fold here. Is this a flaw in my play that I need to change?

 

[xdmanx007]

Totally depends on the situation. In a large multiway pot generally the answer is yes. Although in NL you won't be chasing as much because proper betting by your opponents will make you "chasing" an unprofitable play.

 

[Bill_Hollorian]

Hi XD and everyone,

OK what am I missing?

1.) 3 players with stacks that can hurt each other.

Flop is cheap, Nut flush in position so you slow play.
Please consider at least a small bet to reopen the betting round. Give your opponent some rope to hang himself, on this flop.
On the turn he improves to 2 pair which he bets 6 dollars at. You basically min raise. At this point he has to call 9 to win about 29. bad odds, but he thinks his 2 pair may be good. It brings a 4 flush, but his implied odds are HUGE. The nine dollars he needs to call your raise represents about 10 percent of his stack. Plus with the pre flop limp he pulls a pair.


My feelings are this, of course I have 20/20 vision here.
1.) Your in position no represents power, let's raise it up righ here pre flop.
2.) Slow play of the monster on the flop. You know what, a reraise opens up the betting round to give them the opportunity to make a bigger mistake.
3.) on the turn consider You raise to the size of the pot. Since that pot includes his lead out bet, consider tripling his bet as opposed to the total sum of the pot. Regardless, good play here.
4.) World class professional level call on the end... WOW! Most would have raised for value here, the call you made here is the key to the hand. This is where you saved money, and this is where your equity is long term.

The things above are for consideration. I don't know if I could have played it any better, but my question is, can anyone make a case that he had implied odds, and his bet call on the turn wasn't the worst thing in the world. Hell, he figured he may not need to improve, and if he did he may be able to bust someone?

XD great call on the end, was your mouse pulling itself toward the push all in button?

Bill

 

[xdmanx007]

Well yeah I suppose if you factor in implied odds then yeah he was justified cause if a 9 or 3 fell, as it did, he would get paid off HUGE. That is of course assuming one of his 4 outs fell. Of course this also assumes my opponent even remotely understands these concepts he was a donk that got horribly lucky. I raised him quite a significant amount at that point in the hand 2 1/2 times his raise but it would not have mattered unless I went allin he was calling. I must admit this hand making me physically ill though! Like I said I had been trying a bit of limping in late position with drawing hands to try and maximize my wins. Failed experiment I am going back to if I play it I raise it preflop in NL. I am not playing good players at NL50 so I need to go back to my old style which served me very well in NL. Limit is where changing gears will serve me well not NL. The reason I only called the river was because the board paired which is a always a huge red flag.

 

[Four Dogs]

Bill, are you seeing the same hand I am? World Class? Nut Flush? Monster Hand? That Ace of hearts is un accounted for, your opponent is betting like he has something, the board is paired, yes that is a red flag XD, and Mr. 75% just over bet the pot.
I understand you felt obligated but with a bet of that size you were far from pot commited. Lets pretend for a moment that you sprang into existence on the river. You see your advasary bet $19 for a $14.50 pot. The board is paired and you don't have the nut flush. Do you still make the call?
Hindsight is 20/20 and I myself am guilty of equally donkish calls, and sorry XD, but this one is just that. As bill said, he may have had nearly valid reasons for hanging around as long as he did. Lord knows you tried to shake him loose. But that last bet of his was the on-line equivalent of jumping out of his seat and spilling his drink.

 

[Poo_Poo]

he rivered you just where u love it

 

[Bill_Hollorian]

Actually four Dogs you are right, I did miss read the hand. I've always had trouble parsing those things. I though the Ah was on the flop... Opps.
And that does change things for me. I now actually feel very differently regarding this hand.
Thats why I made the nut flush, and the 4 to a flush comments. Ugh sorry, basically disregard my whole previous post.

Well, the implied odds thing is probably a point that is still debatable, but now I am not liking how this hand developed from start to finish.
Due to my previous bungle misreading the hand, I will take a 10 minute penalty and then revisit this thread.

Bill

 

[Poo_Poo]

oh and i would have put him on Ah 3x but i would never have layed that hand down , i think i would have played it just ( as wrong ) like you ...

 

[xdmanx007]

He bet half pot on the river and with the way he had been playing I had to call. I don't really buy the concept of pot commited tbh. So that wasn't why he got a call he got a call because he had been playing like a complete idiot bluffing and making stupid calls the whole game. I KNEW I had him on the turn I mean I knew I had him there. I really thought he had the ace and was hoping for a heart on the river. Regardless I fired hard enough on the turn to make his call incorrect. 4 outs with 1 card to come 10.5:1 he called $9 to win $29 so a bit worse than 3:1 from the pot so he made a bad play and got lucky. Implied would be 28 into 73.5 a little less than 3:1 anyways the numbers don't justify his turn call nor do they justify my river call. The only thing I could figure his river bet to be was either a bluff or him overplaying a weak hand. I really didn't think he boated obviously I was incorrect.

 

[robwhufc]

I don't think you can lay down King Flush in that situation - His $19 bet to me seems too big and screams bluff. If there was one mistake in hand it could be argued opponent shouldn't have called re-raise for $9, but he did have 2 pair which would be ahead if you only had pair of aces, which is most likely event. I imagined be called hoping river wasn't a heart, rather than trying to hit 3 or 9. Once he did he was going to win - I personally wouldn't have bet as much as he did to guarantee a call (or hopefully re-raise), but he was just lucky all the way through.

 

[Four Dogs]

Also TBH (I always try to be anyway) This is just the type of scenerio where I always get spanked silly, but I don't consider it a bad beat. I consider it a weakness in my game. The power of a maniac image is that it's almost impossible for other players to ever put them on a real hand. But it will come, and when it does they are paid off handsomely. I can't even say that it's a bad strategy. The only problem with it is that people that play like this will have huge swings of variance and will accordingly need a huge bankroll to absorb them.
If anyone has picked up Phil Gordons Little Green Book there's an interesting section near the end where he reflects on an unbeatable player he calls BOW; Biggest On-Line Winner, who's strategy breaks down like this.
1) Get in the pot cheaply
2) Massively overbet with premium draws
3) Massively overbet with the nuts or the best hand.
In short, due to his image as a maniac, anyone with a battle hand will call him right to the river when he has the nuts. But few people are willing to call his rediculous bets with just top pair or even 2 pair.
I guess the lesson is that just because someone is a maniac doesn't mean that there isn't method to his madness.

 

[twizzybop]

No shocker here.. everyone limped in. Is it the person who won's fault that everyone let him/her limp in?

That is the dangerous thing about letting limpers in. One need to make them pay to limp in. If you limp in with a few others, one has to think of all the possible hand combos that come when all the cards hit. One always has to protect their hand and I do agree make someone pay to win. I think of it this way.. You need to pay for the cards to play em.(yes write this down just in case you do play me).