Taking stand

[crash7]

3 seat tourney style game
-blinds go up every 5 hands
-all players start with 200 in chips

Blinds are in 1st level at 10.
Villian: this guy is aggressive. LOVES to continuation bet the flop with an ace. Loves hands A5 and better. Pushes with any hand J10 and better pre flop for 3xbb raises. Pushes implied odds and bets into draws. Relatively decent reads on opponents and willing to bet all in on a bluff to push player off their hand. Otherwise solid player that understands drawing odds and position.
Player2: this guy has a very poor hand selection and plays any face card especially if suited. [js][3s] [kh][2h] etc... Limps and calls. Plays almost every hand. Loves "pot odds" but doesnt understand hand value well enough to play it right. Favorite move is an all in check raise. Pounds top pair with over betting pot. Enjoys bluffing with overbets.
Crash: solid player. Easy to push around and bluff. Likes suited connectors and plays them for good pot odds. Takes stabs at checked pots when in position. For the most part very tight aggressive usually representing the best hand at showdown.

1st hand villian bets 3x bb pre flop and Crash calls with AQ off suit. Flop is J,9,7 rainbow. Crash checks and Villian bets all in for huge overbet. Crash folds.

2nd hand Crash folds from button. Player2 limps and Villian bets 3xbb. Player2 calls and flop comes up 10,5,2 rainbow. Player2 checks and Villian bets all in again with massive overbet. Player2 folds.

3rd hand dealer folds, Villian bets 8xbb and Crash folds.

4th hand Villian bets 3xbb Crash calls with [5s][7s]. Player2 folds. Flop is [4h][6h][9c]. Crash checks and Villian bets all in. Now, this player loves pushing overcards aggressively when they know their opponent misses a flop. After calling pre flop it is unlikely they think the flop has helped Crash. Crash thinks the Villian hasnt made a hand either and is pushing two face cards AJ, KQ or the sort. That gives them the outside straight draw and the additional 6 outs of hitting a pair with a live card. Thats 14 outs giving Crash about a 51.2% chance. Crash decides to go with their read and call. Villian shows [ah][3h]. Unfortunately for Crash they are a 3/1 underdog because of the Villian holding a 3 and the flush draw limitting Crash's odds. The turn is an [8c] giving Crash a straight and the river is of no help and Crash cripples the Villian.

Given the player's styles of play, was it right to take a stand on a draw such as this? The player had been all in 4 hands in a row and couldnt possibly flop a made hand or have AA every time. If I folded here with the blinds going up next hand and my chip stack it would be difficult to wait for a hand like QQ or AK to trap or catch this maniac type play. Under most situations calling here is a huge No No but with this situation does it become reasonable?

 

[mrsnake3695]

That's about the most ridiculous format I've ever seen. 3 players, 200 starting chips, blinds go up every 5 hands. What's the point, it's an all-in luckfest. There is no such thing as a right or wrong play here.

 

[ChuckTs]

#1) If this is a home game, change the whole tourney structure. If this is at a casino/bar/wherever, find someplace else to play. The structure favours luck, and you might aswell be playing bingo. Get 1000 chips each, and make the blind intervals at at least 10 minutes each. There are plenty of home game templates out there to help you out.

#2) I reraise (probably all in considering structure) with AQ. If villain is loose/aggressive, then we know we're way ahead of his hand range, and we can only hope he calls

#3) Stay away from drawing hands with this type of structure. You aren't deep stacked enough to make calling with small suited connectors worth your while. As played, I suppose you could gamble if you feel you have that many outs against naked overcards.

#4) Change the blind structure!!!

 

[mrsnake3695]

Listen to chuck, he may be Canadian but he knows what he's talking about.

 

[ChuckTs]

Hardy har har.

 

[crash7]

I completely aggree with you about the format. This is a home game and I have always complained about the blind structure and starting stacks. These two guys dont like counting out the appropriate amount of chips or keeping track of the clock to play by the standards I had suggested of starting with 1000 in chips and increasing blinds every 5 minutes. Both of these players are impatient and on the loose aggressive side. They prefer a "luck" game so the faster those blinds go up the better chance they have at winning. Although frustrating it is a game and the format can be adapted to. I am by far the most consistant player at these things and my natural playing style is the perfect opposite of my opponents.

Now as far as this post is concerned it is posted in the hand analysis area and not where we criticize the game itself. Im interrested in, given this rediculous game format, what people's advice or comments would be on the paly. Sometimes a player must adapt to a strange game format or house rule in order to get to where the money is. Now if youd like to criticize our bizzarre home game format please follow through with something constructive. Offer a list of possible blind and starting stack structures that you deem plausable for impatient loose players.

So in short, thanks but no thanks

 

[crash7]

Thank you chuck for saying something meaningful. Looking at it now i was likely ahead with the AQ against this guy and could have made a stand there rather than the 57. I'll see if in the future I can twist these knuckleheads into finding a compromise with the tourney structure. I feel with a better structure i could be winning against these guys 90% of the time or more.

 

[ChuckTs]

Now if youd like to criticize our bizzarre home game format please follow through with something constructive.

I did. Here it is again in case you missed it:

#3) Stay away from drawing hands with this type of structure. You aren't deep stacked enough to make calling with small suited connectors worth your while. As played, I suppose you could gamble if you feel you have that many outs against naked overcards.

And just a comment about the AQ hand:

#2) I reraise (probably all in considering structure) with AQ. If villain is loose/aggressive, then we know we're way ahead of his hand range, and we can only hope he calls

Hope I didn't offend you in any way with my post.

 

[mrsnake3695]

Trying to anylize a single hand in this format is pretty tough, but I do think Chuck did a pretty good job. with the blinds so high relative to chips stacks and playing only 3 handed, the value of big cards and pocket pairs goes up and the value of suited connectors goes down. You want to play hands that can win on their own without improvement. With only 3 players an ace high can win the pot where a 6h 7h has to have improvement to win. So with this format I would push any ace, any pair any king-9 or higher or any 2 cards 10 or higher. I would stay away for low cards because they don't hit often enough to justify the percentage of your chips that are going into the pot to see a flop and have to fold most of the time.

As for the format issues. Most of us here enjoy playing poker and even though we like to have fun we do take the game seriously. That format really is a luck format and one that should only be played for fun with friends and not to win money at. The varience is way too high. As for that specific hand you seemed to have a good read and did an anylisis of the situation so it's hard to fault your call although there is almost no hand villan could hold that you would be ahead off even if you may be a statistical favorite, you cannot win the hand here (assuming a call by villan) without improving.

And yes, chuck and I critisized your format. Why, because it's not really poker, it's a short step up from drawing for high card. I can't imagine anyone that takes poker seriously playing this structure. There are other games around. If your friends don't want to change then tell then they can play 2 handed. I doubt if they would care for that much.

 

[crash7]

my apologies to chuck as my post directly after him was not to him. I greatly appreciate chuck's comment. despite the rediculous nature of the game he took the time to analyse it anyway as well as offer a better format for the game. My comment about the criticizm was directed to mrsnake with the only advice of this game being rediculous and there is no right or wrong play. I can certainly tell you that if i find myself short handed with 20 or less blinds left in a tournament that chuck is the one giving me pointers and not the guy who says "what's the point?" Is that what you would tell the guy in 3rd at the final 3 with big blinds in the wsop?