OT: hold'em question

[jaeenox]

Is there a category beyond tight\weak and slowplay?

At about the same time Howard Lederer was jumping out of his chair and grabbing his chest when the third 8 hit the river during the WPT on NBC, myself and 7 other players were doing the same on PokerStars. I witnessed a player check 4 consecutive bets with a nut flush! Can anyone explain\justify the following:

Player 2 (of 9) in BB: check #1--player checks with AKd. Theories differ: either you are a raiser or one who traps in the BB (or pre-flop) as a matter of taste, so not a BIG deal that he checks. (I do believe that Sklansky calls this "a crime against nature" with AKs, however.

Flop: Qd 7d 2d

P2BB: check #2 Understandable--any bet probably forces anyone without 2 diamonds or even someone with low diamonds to fold. Good play!

Turn: x

P2BB: check #3 Hmmm ... ok he is first to act so maybe he THINKS the other players will THINK he was trapping on the flop if he bets big here. Still most people would bet at this point. Questionable play!?

River: x

P2BB: check #4 WTF. Either he doesn't understand the rules of poker for a flush or is a genius waiting for the 4 other checkers to go all-in? Everyone at the table checks and he turns up his nut flush and collects the sb 15, the bb 30, and 120 from the flop callers--playing a nut flush into a 135 chip hand.
Dubious play??

What do you think? Was he waiting for a check\raise possibility or were all of us at the table missing something? Even if someone with say QT placed a value bet on the river hoping to pick up the pot with the Q's, they would not call him when he raised back over the top. One of the players asked him if knew what a flush was but he did not respond in any way.

Is the payoff for an all-in check raise trap so appealing that you do not play the nuts?

[Chappy]

Slow playing it for a round or two but come on now......... How'd this fellow fair the rest of the game?

[primelord]

Not raising pre-flop is a huge mistake here. AKs plays very well multi handed so with everyone already in the pot this is a very easy value raise. Get your money in the pot while you can.

I think the check on the flop was fine. Although in a NL tournament I would have probably just made a small bet. And then when the blank hit on the turn probably checked. This gives the impression that I had a 4 flush draw that still hasn't hit.

Not betting on the river was mistake. At the very least you may get a few calls from Ace high just hoping you were trying to steal a pot that didn't hit anyone.

[sabotai]

Should have raised pre-flop, should have betted off the turn. Totally misplayed (And I know about misplaying hands cause I do it all the time. :D )

[Dutch]

Here's a question for you. I am new to playing hold 'em. As a matter of fact, I played it for the first time this last weekend at a co-workers house and came in 2nd out of 15 people. I have played a lot of other poker games in the past, but never straight hold 'em.

Anyway,

After all the cards are on the table, I have a straight flush. I was betting high ($5) after the flop (when I established my straight flush right off the bat) and after the 4th card was put up. Then, suggesting I was bluffing, after the 5th card, I check. Another player at my table laughs heartily (and it's now just me and him) and bets a large sum (10 times what was seen to that point...$50). I guess he was assuming I would fold, but instead I called him (not raised as I began to feel guilty) and showed my straight flushed. He didn't look too happy with me. I figured it was just embarrassing, but was it that he thought I was being unethical in my play by luring him in for an embarrassing loss? I really didn't know he was going to bet me such a large about, as I was a rookie at the game.

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.

[Chubby]

Here's a question for you. I am new to playing hold 'em. As a matter of fact, I played it for the first time this last weekend at a co-workers house and came in 2nd out of 15 people. I have played a lot of other poker games in the past, but never straight hold 'em.

Anyway,

After all the cards are on the table, I have a straight flush. I was betting high ($5) after the flop (when I established my straight flush right off the bat) and after the 4th card was put up. Then, suggesting I was bluffing, after the 5th card, I check. Another player at my table laughs heartily (and it's now just me and him) and bets a large sum (10 times what was seen to that point...$50). I guess he was assuming I would fold, but instead I called him (not raised as I began to feel guilty) and showed my straight flushed. He didn't look too happy with me. I figured it was just embarrassing, but was it that he thought I was being unethical in my play by luring him in for an embarrassing loss? I really didn't know he was going to bet me such a large about, as I was a rookie at the game.

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.


fair play by you, you slowplayed him. sucks to be him.

did he show his cards? i'm curious to know if he had anything or if it was a bluff.

[kcchief19]

The only check I really have a problem with is the last check. Granted, a pre-flop raise would have been a smart call because he might have chased everyone out since there were obviously weak hands all around, and letting the hand go on risks turning a strong hand into a losing hand if someone with a weak hand sticks around and pairs up.

After the flop, he's got to know he's unbeatable. A check raise would be a great play here. Sounds like the problem was that no one else raised. That is a clue that everyone has nothing. To me, raising on the flop or turn when you're unbeatable is a case of playing your cards and not the table. If you raise, you're going to chase people out, but if you can make someone else think they have the cards, then you string that fish along for a while longer. The fact that apparently everyone checked on the flop and turn was just bad luck. Even if he had raised, sounds like there is a chance that the board was so weak that it might have chased people away.

If you're unbeatable as in this case and the board didn't pair to give someone a full house possibility, I don't see any problem bluffing and giving somebody a chance to catch a pair of cowboys and think they can win. After the river, though, I think you have to raise -- I wouldn't go all in, just enough that you hope someone will call you.

I think his mistake was the opposite of what most people do -- most people, including myself, get an unbeatable hand and then bet the house to try and win the hand as soon as possible. These guy tried to bait everybody in, but when it didn't work he didn't try to prime the pump.

[kcchief19]

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.Absolutely a fair play -- great play.

The only time I feel guilty is when I go all-in with the weaker hand and suck somebody out. I don't feel that guilty, since luck is part of the game. :)

[Dutch]

Cool, thanks Chubby and KCchief, that makes me feel better, and ready to play some more! :)

[Radii]

he thought I was being unethical in my play by luring him in for an embarrassing loss? I really didn't know he was going to bet me such a large about, as I was a rookie at the game.

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.

When you have the nuts(the best possible hand, as a straight flush almost certainly is), your job is to play in such a way to extract the most possible money from your opponents as you possibly can.

I have read in poker books about places and people who feel that a check-raise is "unethical" ... I think these people don't know what they're talking about in general...

I can understand feeling a little guilty about suckering all of someone's money out of them if they're a good friend of yours, but really, if you are playing with friends like that you shouldn't be playing no limit :)

I play occasionally in a no limit game with friends. If I can, at any time, I will take all their money, and they will take mine. The only difference is that with friends, if I win $250 on the night, I'll probably offer to take them out for dessert after the game... but I'm still going to try to take their money!

[primelord]

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.

That is a completely fair play. For that matter you should have pushed the rest of your money in over the top. After you have played a few more times and have a couple of sets or straights rivered by a flush that had no business being there you will stop feeling guilty about taking all your friends money when you can.

I can understand if you are playing in a friendly game not wanting to upset anyone by embarrasing them or taking all their money, but it sounds like you were playing a no limit tournament. Since the point of the game is to finish with all the chips if you have the best hand and another guy is willing to go all in with you then you have to put all your chips in the middle.

[QuikSand]

Is the payoff for an all-in check raise trap so appealing that you do not play the nuts?

As with almost everything else in poker, the best answer here is probably "sometimes."

I, too, would ordinarily make a bet at some point here -- but remember that this is (obviously) no limit poker. When you're playing no limit, the ordinary rules that apply to limit poker are no longer in play. (Like Sklansky's comment) You do not always want to bet early with a big drawing hand, and you do not always want to bet it when you make your draw, since there is big potential in a slowplay opportunity like this one.

Of course, this example is an extreme case... but let's think it through. If every single player who called the blinds also checked every single round, even on the last round, even in late position... you have to assume that not only was everyone intimidated by the flush possibility, but that in all likelihood nobody held even a good pairing. In most cases, a player with even just the second highest pair in the board would at least put up a token bet in this circumstance. The fact that nobody bet at all is a pretty strong indicator that nobody had anything at all... meaning that our pal with the nut flush wasn't going to make any money anyway (there would be folding en masse to any bet). So, while it nominally seems like he missed out on a real opportunity here by checking four times, in all likelihood he made as much with this hand, against this table of opponents as he could have. Remember, you not only need good cards, you need willing customers -- and here it doesn't look like he had any. That might be off by a shade or two - he might have gotten callers on a small bet or two along the way... but playing no limit, what good does that really do you?

I'd say that his play was unorthodox, probably too timid, but that in effect he didn't lose much (or maybe anything at all) as evidenced by the rest of the table's comparable timidity.

[QuikSand]

So what's the call? Fair play by me or uneccessary trickery? I'm not a real card player, so I don't know.

Good play, don't look back, don't apologize. It's difficult to be outplayed, and many people respond poorly to it. Don't worry about it as a matter of ethics. Unless you broke a rule of the game or house, you played that well and got paid accordingly.

[Vegas Vic]

Outstanding play, Dutch. There's nothing at all unethical about tricking your opponent -- it's part of the game. The object is to win as large of a pot as possible.

Unethical play would be things such as colluding with another player(s), betting out of turn to gauge the reaction of the other players, etc.

[primelord]

Since we are on the topic of poker ethics, let me float a situation by you guys. Lets say you are sitting at a card table and the guy next to you is doing a very poor job of hiding his hole cards. You aren't trying to look, but a good deal of the time you can't help but see what he is holding. Do you tell the man? Or do you just chalk it up to good fortune for you and use the information to your advantage?

This question was raised on the 2+2 forums recently and it sparked an interesting debate. There is no question that it is up to the player to protect his hole cards. However I think it is still unethical to not inform him of the issue. I am not concerned with the advantage you gain over the person who's cards you have seen. Again it is his job to protect his cards and if he can't do that then too bad. However it does also give you an advantage over the entire table. And at that point I think it becomes unethical. I wouldn't go as far as to say it is cheating, but no one person should have an advantage over the rest of the table just because they happened to sit in the chair next to the drunk guy who can't hide his cards.

What do you guys think?

[rkmsuf]

Since we are on the topic of poker ethics, let me float a situation by you guys. Lets say you are sitting at a card table and the guy next to you is doing a very poor job of hiding his hole cards. You aren't trying to look, but a good deal of the time you can't help but see what he is holding. Do you tell the man? Or do you just chalk it up to good fortune for you and use the information to your advantage?

This question was raised on the 2+2 forums recently and it sparked an interesting debate. There is no question that it is up to the player to protect his hole cards. However I think it is still unethical to not inform him of the issue. I am not concerned with the advantage you gain over the person who's cards you have seen. Again it is his job to protect his cards and if he can't do that then too bad. However it does also give you an advantage over the entire table. And at that point I think it becomes unethical. I wouldn't go as far as to say it is cheating, but no one person should have an advantage over the rest of the table just because they happened to sit in the chair next to the drunk guy who can't hide his cards.

What do you guys think?

If this was golf you'd just own up, take a two shot penalty and move on.

When it's cards I'd say the odds of someone informing the card flasher has got to be somewhere in the 10 % range...

I don't think you owe anyone anything unless you are going out of your way to peek. If he's flashing them in front of you so be it...