A Poker Correspondence - Part I: A friend, indeed

I have a friend, Marc, who is still relatively inexperienced when it comes to playing poker. However, he is very eager to learn, and in a short period of time he has been able to become rather successful at the middle limits. While this may for the most part be because of the very weak opposition in his home country, it is nonetheless a good achievement on his part.

Every once in a while, Marc sends some hands or situations for me to analyze. With his kind permission, I have reproduced our exchange of ideas. My thoughts/comments are in italics.

Hand No. 1 ($20-$40 limit hold'em):

I get pocket queens in the small blind, there is one limper (a relatively tight player), and I raise. The big blind calls, as does the limper. The flop comes J 9 6. I bet my overpair, the big blind raises, and the limper cold-calls. I decide to just call. When a red 3 comes on the turn, I check, the big blind checks, and the limper bets. I put him on a jack and raise him. The big blind folds, and the limper calls. The river is the 2. I bet, and the limper calls and shows me a set of nines. Actually – as he told me later – he respected my raise so much that he was afraid to play back at me even with a hand that strong. I guess my fault was that I hadn't really paid attention to the fact that he had cold-called on the flop after a bet and a raise. I would be glad to hear your thoughts.

Well, I guess you played it well. You did what you had to do, and based on your description of the situation, I might have put him on a jack, as well, or a pair plus a flush draw, maybe. Also, your image seems to be good, because he respected/feared you so much that he didn't reraise you on the turn – a very weak play on his part. Even though you lost, you did what you had to do to defend your vulnerable overpair against the most likely hands (pair of jacks, pair of nines, and straight or flush draw). In fact, you played the hand EXACTLY as I would have.

Hand No. 2:

Meanwhile, it is 11-handed now that a couple of live ones have entered the game. As a result, play has changed from loose-passive to loose-aggressive. But in this hand, there are four limpers to me, and I'm in the cutoff seat with A-J suited. I raise and everybody calls, including the button and the blinds. Eight people see the flop of A-5-5 rainbow. The small blind, a very, very loose and bad player, comes out betting. There are two callers to me, and I raise. My reasoning is that I want to know whether or not he's got that 5, which is not an unlikely card for him to hold. (I have seen him play a 6-2 offsuit from early position once.) He three-bets, one loose player in the middle calls, and I call, too, hoping to catch another ace. Now, when the turn brings a 7, the small blind bets again and gets called by the loose player, and I muck. The river is another 7, and the small blind wins the pot with A-Q versus A-9. Any thoughts?

Hmm. When the main motive for your raise is to see what the other player holds, his response should be fairly reliable. In this case, you raised to gain information, yet the information you got was wrong. All in all, I can understand your play, though. With so many players in the pot and so much money in the middle, your flop raise was probably right; after all, you cannot let gutshot-straight draws, small pocket pairs, and backdoor flushes outdraw you for free. Also, raising helps to clear the field, making it easier for you to see who is holding what, and how the hand will probably develop. But then, with all of this money in the middle and the small blind being the weak player you describe, I cannot see why you would fold on the turn. Remember, weak players who flop trips are often much more likely to go for the check-raise (either on the flop or on the turn) than bet out. Of course, they are wrong in doing this, but the fact remains that quite often these types of player will NOT come out betting when they flop trips. All in all, I would say that there is a fair amount of doubt as to whether the small blind DOES indeed have the 5, and folding the current best hand (or even a hand that could BECOME the best hand or that has the potential for a split pot) is a catastrophe. I think you should have called on the turn, and possibly on the river, as well. One just cannot afford to fold a possible winner in this type of situation.

Hand No. 3:

I get pocket jacks in early position and raise. One loose caller and the big blind call. The flop is A 6 3. The big blind checks, I bet, and both the middle-position player and the big blind call. When an offsuit deuce comes on the turn, everybody checks. The river is the 10, putting a possible flush on the board. The big blind checks, I check, the middle-position player bets, the big blind folds, and it is now up to me. Even though this player is very loose in his starting-hand selection, he is fairly experienced and isn't out of line very often. Somehow, I don't believe him, and I call. He shows me the K 7 for a flush. I think that apart from the flush, I should have given him credit for at least an ace. I called because I had the feeling that he stole a pot from me earlier, and I didn't want to let him succeed a second time.

Well, I think you made the correct decision to pay off. The pot is fairly big, and the person who's last to act finally bets after having been checked to twice. An ace seems unlikely (he probably would have bet the turn), and a flush is not very likely, as this would mean that he played his flush draw awfully passively in a shorthanded pot like this. A bet with just a 10 or even a total bluff seems just as likely as either one of these hands, and for this reason (if you make the wrong decision by calling, it will cost you a bet; if you make the wrong decision by folding, it will cost you the pot), I think your call was correct. Having said that, I think I probably would have bet the turn to protect my jacks in the far from unlikely case that none of my opponents holds an ace.

Some Final Words

In Part II of this column, I will analyze three more of Marc's hands.