Sunday, July 13, 2008

Take a look and lets examine this hand...

From the Pokerslut Tour X (50047531), Table 2 - 80/160 Ante 15 - Limit Razz
Seat 1: muhctim (1,609)
Seat 2: Zerbet (2,511)
Seat 3: gadzooks64 (1,807)
Seat 4: applejackking (1,663)
Seat 5: rascony (1,625)
Seat 6: khanwoman (975)
Seat 7: Wisconsin Lefty (1,791)
Seat 8: InstantTragedy (4,940)
*** 3RD STREET ***
Dealt to muhctim [Ad]
Dealt to Zerbet [Td]
Dealt to gadzooks64 [3s]
Dealt to applejackking [9d]
Dealt to rascony [Tc]
Dealt to khanwoman [4d]
Dealt to Wisconsin Lefty [7c]
Dealt to InstantTragedy [2s 4s] [6s]
Zerbet is high with [Td]
Zerbet has 15 seconds left to act
Zerbet brings in for 25
gadzooks64 folds
applejackking folds
rascony folds
khanwoman completes it to 80
Wisconsin Lefty folds
InstantTragedy calls 80
muhctim folds
Zerbet folds
*** 4TH STREET ***
Dealt to khanwoman [4d] [Jh]
Dealt to InstantTragedy [2s 4s 6s] [Th]
InstantTragedy bets 80
khanwoman calls 80
*** 5TH STREET ***
Dealt to khanwoman [4d Jh] [5h]
Dealt to InstantTragedy [2s 4s 6s Th] [5d]
Zerbet: not as good as two pai
InstantTragedy bets 160
khanwoman calls 160
*** 6TH STREET ***
Dealt to khanwoman [4d Jh 5h] [Kc]
Dealt to InstantTragedy [2s 4s 6s Th 5d] [Kd]
InstantTragedy bets 160
khanwoman calls 160
*** 7TH STREET ***
Dealt to InstantTragedy [2s 4s 6s Th 5d Kd] [Js]
InstantTragedy checks
khanwoman bets 160
InstantTragedy calls 160
*** SHOW DOWN ***
khanwoman shows [8d 7s 4d Jh 5h Kc Ah] 8,7,5,4,A
InstantTragedy mucks
khanwoman wins the pot (1,425) with 8,7,5,4,A
The limits are now 100/200 with an ante of 15
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1,425 | Rake 0
Seat 1: muhctim folded on 3rd St.
Seat 2: Zerbet folded on 3rd St.
Seat 3: gadzooks64 folded on 3rd St.
Seat 4: applejackking folded on 3rd St.
Seat 5: rascony folded on 3rd St.
Seat 6: khanwoman showed [8d 7s 4d Jh 5h Kc Ah] and won (1,425) with 8,7,5,4,A
Seat 7: Wisconsin Lefty folded on 3rd St.
Seat 8: InstantTragedy mucked [Js 4s 6s Th 5d Kd 2s] - T,6,5,4,2

So where did the hand go wrong? I don't think I played this bad at all. I had a great draw and double bricked. Nothing I do will get me off this hand. Or should I have folded 6th or 7th street?

I leave it to the peoples!


Mitchell said...

3rd street: the pot, knock out opponents, see how strong the first player who completed really is. (he had 3 cards to a 7?)
4th street: Bet--since you re-raised on 3rd, you have the lead and maybe he folds
5th street: Bet--you have the lead
6th street: Check--he isn't going away, and will only cost you more if you miss and he hits good.
7th street: D' missed. He's not betting a 9 fact, my guess is that the 8-7 is the weakest hand he can bet.

TheRazzDoctor said...

You're pretty much clearly ahead the whole way and you played the hand fine. Checking on 6th would be horrible since against your opponent's likely range you're about a 2:1 favorite and are making what we call a "value bet." Your opponent can, and should, be betting a 9 low on the end once you checked, along with an occasional bluff, so I don't see folding here unless you're reallyyy sure.

Mitchell said...

Betting on 6th street is a common mistake.

Given the play up to 6th street, and that you both show mediocre lows, the correct play is to check on 6th street and call when you missed on 7th street.

It's true you may be a 2-1 favorite on 6th. But that is way too simple an approach to this hand, since you KNOW your opponent is calling your bet on 6th street (given his odds!). So by betting you have put yourself in a situation where you will lose two bets instead of one, (AND most likely you will only one bet when you hit good on 7th street).

Of course, when you check on 6th, you'll have to call on 7th street since your opponent may be bluffing.

Your hand example is a great one for the following rule:

When your opponent's hand and your hand both turn into mediocre lows on 6th street, CHECK.

TheRazzDoctor said...

Um, what? If you check 6th, you may only lose 1 bet instead of 2 when you lose, but you will win one less bet when you win. This is true regardless of whether you feel betting on the end is correct based on your holding. Since you will make the best hand almost twice as often as your opponent will and rarely will the river play depend on your 6th st action in this type of hand, you are giving away money by giving him a free card to beat you.

Also, how do you define "mediocre low?" In this hand, a T low (which may seem mediocre to most players) is a very good low because it's impossible for your only opponent to have a better one. If your opponent was showing a board of (xx)6789 then I'd say your T low is looking pretty poor. What matters is how your hand stacks up against your opponent's, not some arbitrary absolute value. Making up rules of thumb like this without mathematically sound analysis to back them up is a sure way to lose, or at least give back part of your winnings.

SirFWALGMan said...

Sitting at the Razz Table was your first mistake.

This is Razz you will lose with the best starting hand. A34 is always a big loser and anything that rhymes like 2,4,6,8.. really bad.. just win over time idiot. That is all you can do. Instead you get frustrated and blow off more money playing badly and wonder why you can never win. :).

Mitchell said...

"The mathematically correct play is not always the best play."
-Chip Reese

Poker League said...

Hey blog owner! If you would like to earn a months link on a PR 2 poker site for little effort, just write a short post about upcoming poker league with added prizes running each sunday! For any questions please contact me on the email provided, or talk to me (PlateFish) at If you play poker then you can have a link up on the front page league table if you play any of the 5 tournaments (as well as your sponsored link for a month).

Hope to hear from you soon,

The Monster Stack said...

I think TheRazzDoctor has it right. You were ahead and should have bet. You had a 10-low, which was the best hand and you had a redraw to the 6-5 low. Villain's call down was terrible with what was clearly the worst hand and he was drawing to a hard 8 at best, barring runner-runner. Unless he somehow suspected that you had absolutely nothing, it was a bad call down by him. The math is in your favor and Chip Reese was more than likely not referring to limit when he said that. In limit, you almost always must go with the math in a situation like that. You have to brick while he has to hit for him to win. You are a favorite and if you make that play enough times it will pay off in the end. Getting in extra bets in limit is important, but not leaving money on the table is even more important.