ensign_lee's better hand

OK.

To counteract the effects of me looking like an idiot here, I'm going to post a HH that I'm very proud of. You know, the good kind of hands, the ones where you're NOT on tilt. :P


***** Hand History for Game 1988915679 *****
$400 NL Hold'em - Monday, May 02, 17:58:33 EDT 2005
Table Table 36662 (Real Money)
Seat 7 is the button
Total number of players : 10
Seat 1: chaser2 ( $94.6 )
Seat 2: hatinJacks ( $90.36 )
Seat 3: Stings ( $1442.58 )
Seat 4: alwayzwright ( $236.45 )
Seat 5: luckylardy ( $702 )
Seat 6: Crazy_fun ( $452.9 )
Seat 7: surindergit ( $595.65 )
Seat 9: ewlee ( $369.6 )
Seat 10: Exceed1 ( $532.6 )
Seat 8: amexos ( $400 )
ewlee posts small blind [$2].
Exceed1 posts big blind [$4].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to ewlee [ Qs As ]
chaser2 folds.
hatinJacks folds.
Stings calls [$4].
alwayzwright folds.
luckylardy folds.
Crazy_fun folds.
surindergit folds.
ewlee raises [$14].
Exceed1 calls [$12].
Stings calls [$12].
** Dealing Flop ** [ 4s, 6s, Jc ]
ewlee bets [$30].
Exceed1 folds.
Stings calls [$30].
** Dealing Turn ** [ 8s ]
ewlee bets [$60].
Stings raises [$120].
ewlee raises [$120].
Stings is all-In.
ewlee is all-In.
** Dealing River ** [ 5c ]
ewlee shows [ Qs, As ] a flush, ace high.
Stings shows [ Jd, 9s ] a pair of jacks.
Stings wins $1072.98 from side pot #1 with a pair of jacks.
ewlee wins $752.2 from the main pot with a flush, ace high.


---
Stings was a loose passive who wouldn't stay in the pot when he had less than middle pair, so the call on teh flop worried me, but I doubted that one of my cards was one of his kickers, so I had overs + the flush draw (that hit on teh turn). It took me a little bit to decide what to do on the turn.
I figured a half pto bet would draw him to me, but I guess he put me on QQ or KK or AA or something and wanted to represent the flush that I had. When he reraised me, I had to think about that too. I was pretty sure he didn't have a very good hand; he might have had a smaller flush or perhaps two pair or something ; he might even have top pair and that's it. If I just called and then checked (trying to check raise), then unless he had a smaller flush, he'd check, and all I'd get would be that extra $60 that he put in on his turn raise. If I raised here and he folded because he had a weak hand, then I'd onyl get the $60 here, but that wouldn't be any different that calling and then checking. If I reraised him huge, he couldn't call with anything less than a smaller flush and I wasn't sure I coudl put him on that just yet. Plus, if he had a smaller flush, he'd probably call a smaller raise + an all in bet on the river.

I think the minimum reraise of $60 was appropraite on the turn, feigning some weakness to try to get him to come over the top, which then I glady called with the nuts at the time.

This is more like it.

---
Critiques? anything you think I should have done differently?

I think the minimum reraise of $60 was appropraite on the turn, feigning some weakness to try to get him to come over the top, which then I glady called with the nuts at the time.

Did I miss somthing?

** Dealing Flop ** [ 4s, 6s, Jc ]

** Dealing Turn ** [ 8s ]

Seems to me the nuts right now would be 5s 7s.

Stings was a loose passive who wouldn't stay in the pot when he had less than middle pair, so the call on teh flop worried me, but I doubted that one of my cards was one of his kickers, so I had overs + the flush draw (that hit on teh turn).

Based on this I would not be at all suprised if he called your preflop raise of 3.5BB especially with that stack of his with junk like a low suited conectors such as 5/7s.

Although I guess the odds of this would be pretty slim though right?

Either way I like the betting from you, and what a huge win! Nice one.

That minimum reraise was the me betting $60, him raising it to $120. I could have raised it more than another $60 to $180. And yeah; I didn't take into account the straight flush, but ya know what? If he'd had that, I would have pounded my head into the wall repeatedly and been like holy crap...I just lost to a straight flush... :P

Also, the preflop raise was 4x the BB. I was the small blind, remember, so me raising $14 ends up being a $14 raise. And the raising war? Here's how it went: I bet $60, he raises to $120 by raising $120, I raise to $180 by raising $120 (so it's really only a minimum reraise), but yeah.

Sorry first quote was too long I guess... or I should have bolded the nuts part Was just pointing out the straight flush was a posibility over your ace high flush.

** Dealing Turn ** [ 8s ]
ewlee bets [$60].
Stings raises [$120].
ewlee raises [$120].
Stings is all-In.
ewlee is all-In.

So he raises trying to rep the flush... meanwhile u had the nut flush(assuming anyone with the 5/7s would have folded to the 4BB pfr)

I have no idea why he would have raised the re-raise by going all in... by then I guess he was just really hoping that....

a) you were bluffing the flush
b) you were on over cards and his J was good
c) likes giving to charity and you lucked in going HU vs him

I guess by then he was probably pot comited but other than folding the J/9o preflop he should have just called ya I think and see what happened on the river.

But I am just bored at work and posting my thoughts if I am wrong or out of line on anything pls tell me I am by all means no expert... and really all I do is read poker all day and play a weekly live tourny... still trying to grow the balls to deposit online.

Originally Posted by ensign_lee

I doubted that one of my cards was one of his kickers

How can you make that assumption?

Originally Posted by Les_worm

Originally Posted by ensign_lee

I doubted that one of my cards was one of his kickers

How can you make that assumption?

Because he would have reraised my flop bet, if he'd had bigger cards. Plus, I just wasn't getting that "vibe" from him. You know, that gut thing. And even if one of them was, that still gave me my other card as an out. I think that gives me a 47% or something against his pair on the flop?

Stings was a loose passive

I should say... what hand does he beat here.... J7?

Nope even that woulda beat him... 7 woulda been the straight.

With all the outs, and the fact that he had only a pair of jacks... I have no clue why he would bet into this hand. Obviously the bluff wasn't working, he should have cut his loses and got the money back on another hand.