As of November 2021, the APT Forum is closed to new posts. Like with many online forums, usage has decreased in recent years. All previous posts are still available.
As played, no. However, I don't understand what you were trying to do with this hand here. You played very passively pre-flop then hit top pair top kicker and still played it passively on 2 streets, only to have to fold in the end. How strong does a hand have to be before you play it positively? No disrespect intended but I'm curious. The way you played the hand left you having no idea where you were and simply guessing. That's not going to translate to winning poker in the long run.
Say you played it more traditionally out of the gates. You are facing an UTG open with AKo. This is a super-strong starting hand but one that also is going to flop 1 pair or give you over-cards on most flops. I am not interested in turning this hand into a speculative one and opening the door for others to come into the pot. I want this hand heads-up in position so I'd 3-bet here and isolate the initial opener (or force a fold and take the nearly 5BB out there uncontested).
Facing your 3-bet, he can fold, call or 4-bet. A fold is fine by you and a 4-bet has you 5-bet shoving. If you get a call, you have the initiative and with TPTK on this board, you are betting. That would have ended this hand on the flop in all likelihood.
Play your strong hands strong, especially in position. By doing so, you put yourself in position to take down pots at all stages of the hand and not need to simply have the best hand at showdown to win.
Think you should have raised the flop aggressively (may be 4X his bet?). That may have triggered a fold right away, since his hand was completely speculative at that point. If you get a lot of resistance then you have to reassess the real strength of your own hand. Agree with 1warlock though, you've got to play this hand harder than you did. If anything that helps you find out how much push back you're getting.
@1warlock said:
As played, no. However, I don't understand what you were trying to do with this hand here. You played very passively pre-flop then hit top pair top kicker and still played it passively on 2 streets, only to have to fold in the end. How strong does a hand have to be before you play it positively? No disrespect intended but I'm curious. The way you played the hand left you having no idea where you were and simply guessing. That's not going to translate to winning poker in the long run.
Say you played it more traditionally out of the gates. You are facing an UTG open with AKo. This is a super-strong starting hand but one that also is going to flop 1 pair or give you over-cards on most flops. I am not interested in turning this hand into a speculative one and opening the door for others to come into the pot. I want this hand heads-up in position so I'd 3-bet here and isolate the initial opener (or force a fold and take the nearly 5BB out there uncontested).
Facing your 3-bet, he can fold, call or 4-bet. A fold is fine by you and a 4-bet has you 5-bet shoving. If you get a call, you have the initiative and with TPTK on this board, you are betting. That would have ended this hand on the flop in all likelihood.
Play your strong hands strong, especially in position. By doing so, you put yourself in position to take down pots at all stages of the hand and not need to simply have the best hand at showdown to win.
+1 excellent analysis
Recommended training:
Set game to deal AK from all positions. Open raise or 3 bet every time for 50 hands.
Ak plays well heads up but not as well multi-way. Isolate and play in position.
I agree with the above analysis. AKo needs to be played aggressively preflop. You need to take the betting initiative with that hand, and indeed with lots of other hands.
Another takeaway from this hand is it demonstrates the power of backdoor flush draws. V's hand improved to a nut flush draw on the turn and gave him a barrelling opportunity. It was hard for you to see that flush coming.
V's river bet was 194 into 257. You need 194/451 = 43% equity to break even on this call. But what were you beating here? Hardly anything. Does V barrel with TT into this runout? With QQ? With KQ? You have a bluff catcher.
V needs folds from you 43% of the time to exploit with ATC. That means you need to defend 57% with this bluff catcher to prevent that. Because the call here is -EV and you are correct to fold, you are conceding that bluff equity.
By the river it was too late for you to to regain the initiative by 3-betting, because there were no more chips behind.
That's the conundrum we face in NLHE when we don't seize the betting initiative, and why betting is so important. Correct folding based upon pot odds must concede bluff equity.
Comments
As played, no. However, I don't understand what you were trying to do with this hand here. You played very passively pre-flop then hit top pair top kicker and still played it passively on 2 streets, only to have to fold in the end. How strong does a hand have to be before you play it positively? No disrespect intended but I'm curious. The way you played the hand left you having no idea where you were and simply guessing. That's not going to translate to winning poker in the long run.
Say you played it more traditionally out of the gates. You are facing an UTG open with AKo. This is a super-strong starting hand but one that also is going to flop 1 pair or give you over-cards on most flops. I am not interested in turning this hand into a speculative one and opening the door for others to come into the pot. I want this hand heads-up in position so I'd 3-bet here and isolate the initial opener (or force a fold and take the nearly 5BB out there uncontested).
Facing your 3-bet, he can fold, call or 4-bet. A fold is fine by you and a 4-bet has you 5-bet shoving. If you get a call, you have the initiative and with TPTK on this board, you are betting. That would have ended this hand on the flop in all likelihood.
Play your strong hands strong, especially in position. By doing so, you put yourself in position to take down pots at all stages of the hand and not need to simply have the best hand at showdown to win.
Think you should have raised the flop aggressively (may be 4X his bet?). That may have triggered a fold right away, since his hand was completely speculative at that point. If you get a lot of resistance then you have to reassess the real strength of your own hand. Agree with 1warlock though, you've got to play this hand harder than you did. If anything that helps you find out how much push back you're getting.
+1 excellent analysis
Recommended training:
Set game to deal AK from all positions. Open raise or 3 bet every time for 50 hands.
Ak plays well heads up but not as well multi-way. Isolate and play in position.
I agree with the above analysis. AKo needs to be played aggressively preflop. You need to take the betting initiative with that hand, and indeed with lots of other hands.
Another takeaway from this hand is it demonstrates the power of backdoor flush draws. V's hand improved to a nut flush draw on the turn and gave him a barrelling opportunity. It was hard for you to see that flush coming.
V's river bet was 194 into 257. You need 194/451 = 43% equity to break even on this call. But what were you beating here? Hardly anything. Does V barrel with TT into this runout? With QQ? With KQ? You have a bluff catcher.
V needs folds from you 43% of the time to exploit with ATC. That means you need to defend 57% with this bluff catcher to prevent that. Because the call here is -EV and you are correct to fold, you are conceding that bluff equity.
By the river it was too late for you to to regain the initiative by 3-betting, because there were no more chips behind.
That's the conundrum we face in NLHE when we don't seize the betting initiative, and why betting is so important. Correct folding based upon pot odds must concede bluff equity.