Why can't it be both? It's quite easy for two people to play a hand horribly - as happened here.
Didn't say it couldn't. I was told I shouldn't focus on my opponents plays, but my own. However sometimes, if I bring a hand here, some might say "you played correctly and villain was wrong". That's what I ment by MY play and VILLAINS play. Didn't say it couldn't be both. (see below)
You committed yourself on the flop. You may as well have just shoved there and then rather than overbet the pot, as you were shoving the rest of your chips in no matter what came on the turn, correct?
As stated (several times) above, (normally) I would not shove after seeing the A. At the point I saw the A I was on tilt and have faulted myself for this (several times above).
One thing that is crucially important in any given poker hand is thinking ahead.
Again, strike my post-turn play, as I've said again (and again) I screwed up from there on. What makes you think PF I wasn't thinking ahead?
You shouldn't be doing anything without thinking how it is likely to affect the rest of the hand. Okay, you raised 6BBs pre - we can argue all day over whether that's excessive. If we raise 3BBs and get two callers who are calling with ranges that are behind TT
Behind TT which may include future flush/str8 draws which I'd rather push out PF personally.
then we're still profiting as while we will win the pot on average less often (an obvious consequence of being up against an extra player), we will win more chips on average when we do win the pot.
I'd rather try to win the pot more often, which is where the pot sized bet should've shut him down, unless he had a higher pair. Which I
still would've made the wrong turn call (I know).
Really c9hthingy is bang on with his analysis. You say in countering his proposed analysis of how the hand 'should have gone down' that you overbet the flop because you would need "at least a pot sized bet to push rag hands out". Why do you want to push rag hands out?
Because the point of poker is to win. If I would have weak bet this whole hand and come on here saying "someone sucked out a str8/flush on the river, I would've been told I should've bet more PF and flop... how do I know? Because I've been told this.
The whole point of poker is to force your opponents into making mistakes. Sure, your opponent made a mistake here, but it wasn't a consequence of you outwitting him - you've admitted as much in not claiming you overbet,
I have never said I overbet PF or flop, only on the turn because (again) I was tiled. I feel I made a bet which
should have pushed villain out. And this is where analyzing villain's play is important because if he had done the correct thing and folded on the flop, I would've pulled down the pot. Now, had he called and not hit the A on the turn I would've made more $$ from his mistakes. Instead, I saw the A and tilted.
for example, because you had a "villain reads overbets as bluffs" read on him, but rather because you "wanted to push rag hands out"!
Again, if I didn't push rags out and they sucked out by the river I would've been wrong there also (right?).
Take a step back. Ignore the fact that villain had AQ here. Put villain on a range of hands given his preflop and subsequent flop play. Given this range, can you honestly say you think you played the hand well from start to finish?
As said above, not from start to finish, turn+ I was a
, but PF & flop, I
thought I played it as y'all have taught which is not to let the small hands catch up.
Steve and c9hthingy said pretty much everything else I wanted to, so I'll leave it at that.
Again, thanks for your analysis, I do take everything y'all say to heart and try to improve. The analyses(sp?) above just contradict what I've been told before (here) which is that I tend to under bet and allow too many hands to see too much. Now I've raised my bets and I'm betting too high?