Playing a Marginal Hand

Recently, the number of members of the poker forum on my website passed the 100 mark. I thought this was a wonderful milestone, and I'm very proud of my forum, the quality of the questions and hands that are posted there, and the well-thought-out responses. And I try to respond to most of them with my own thoughts and analysis.



In this column, I want to discuss a hand that was posted there. It is a type of hand that comes up frequently, and one in which many players lose money without realizing that they are playing badly. My thanks to "Alex Italics" for posting it. I am going to present it differently than he did, so that I can make my own analytical points.

The posted hand: A moderately loose-aggressive player (especially post-flop) raises from under the gun. The player on the button cold-calls, and the small blind folds. Our hero (whom we will call "Hero") is in the big blind with the A 9 and decides to call.



The flop of 9 8 3 gives Hero top pair, and he decides to bet. The preflop raiser ("Snidely") raises, and the button folds. Hero calls. The turn is the 3, which Hero decides could not have helped the preflop raiser.



He considers three options: check-raising, checking and calling all the way, and betting out. If he bets out, he will bet the river if called, or check-call the river if raised.



He decides to check-raise, playing Snidely for likely having overcards, perhaps with a flush draw, as well. Hero believes Snidely also could have a pair lower than nines, and still bet this way. In any event, he is certain that Snidely will bet the turn if checked to. Now, however, after Hero check-raises, Snidely reraises, and Hero faces a dilemma. Should he simply fold, since he has shown great strength and keeps getting raised? Should he call because his top pair, top kicker still might be ahead of the loose-aggressive Snidely, and if not, he still has outs?



Notice that at this point, the pot has grown to 10 big bets (plus the small blind), and he has to call only one bet to keep playing. Of course, he will have to call another bet if he does not improve and wishes to see if he wins. Hero has five outs against K-K, Q-Q, J-J, and 10-10, but only two against A-A or 8-8, and none against 9-9.



According to the post on my forum, this decision was the source of some disagreement among players at the table, with one side wanting to fold and the other wanting to stay in the hand. They discussed outs, likely hands, and not wanting to be bullied by a loose-aggressive player, especially for a large pot.



Analysis: That certainly is a difficult situation, but one in which Hero never should have found himself. Hero violated a basic principle early on, which is: You do not want to play marginal hands from out of position, especially against difficult players. Following this principle, Hero would have folded this hand for one more bet in the big blind and never had any difficult decisions to make. That would not have made a very interesting column, but it would have saved Hero a great deal of money in the long run. To continue on the flop, Hero needs to hit an ace or a 9. If he hits an ace, he has no idea of how to play or whether it is good. If he hits a 9, as he did, he still has problems playing, and problems folding, as well. If his opponent has something he likes, Hero will find himself in situations like the one he faces in the hand under discussion, having invested several bets and still no idea of how to continue.



If Hero had read my Card Player column "Playing the Blinds in Limit Hold'em – Part IV, Against a Non-Steal Raise," he would have seen, under the subhead "An Early-Position Player Raises and One Player Calls," the simple sentence: "Never play a bad ace." This column is available at www.CardPlayer.com.



But let's accept the fact for the purposes of discussion that Hero called. Now, how should he play? I like the idea of betting out, which he did. Because his hand is vulnerable to many overcards, he wishes to eliminate the third player, not draw him in. The best way to do that is to bet and hope the (expected) raise from the loose-aggressive player helps knock out the third player. Had the two players been reversed and a preflop caller been between Hero and the raiser, he should check-raise to try to eliminate the third guy.



So, he bets and gets raised. What now? Hero called, which is what most players would do, but is that the best play? Let's look at the three options. He could fold, figuring that the raiser had a big pair for his preflop raise, and his post-flop raise, as well. It would be nice if he could trust the raise that much, but unfortunately, a large number of players (and most loose-aggressive ones) raise here with both big pairs and overcards. He could call, as he did, and wait for the turn, leading out if it looks benign and perhaps checking if it looks scary. Unfortunately, pretty much every card between 9 and ace, plus every heart, looks scary, which is too many. What about reraising? This play announces strength, and represents that his bet on the flop was done with a quality hand for the situation. It puts his opponent on notice that he has considerable strength and is unlikely to fold.



I like this play because it correctly represents Hero's hand and does not give him a problem on the turn (he will always lead out if called on the flop). And it has another advantage against most players. Because it shows a great deal of strength (Hero would make this three-bet with an overpair, 9-8, or a set, in addition to the hand he holds), most opponents will not make frivolous raises against it. Hero actually holds a fairly minimal hand for the three-bet, so he should be able to fold easily if he gets raised again. Thus, by showing strength and an unwillingness to fold, he actually can fold if he meets continued resistance.



Moving on to the turn in the actual hand as played, I prefer betting to check-raising. Again, it prevents a free card if his opponent is trying for one (apparently unlikely with this particular opponent), and serves notice that Hero really has a hand worth betting.



Finally, I will try to answer the question as posed in the forum, which is: How should Hero proceed if he check-raises the turn and Snidely reraises? I call this a "heart attack" problem, because the only way I could ever be in this situation is if the actual player had a heart attack when it was his turn to act and I was called in to finish the hand. I would fold. I have represented a hand that's far better than the one I have, and the opponent keeps raising me. If I was sure that I had five outs, of course I would play, but that is the best possible case. When I have a decent call only if all things are favorable, I fold.



Conclusion: All of us have a difficult time playing in marginal situations. It is hard to always make a correct decision, and poker is a game in which making correct decisions is how we make money.



You will make better decisions more often if you avoid the most difficult situations entirely. And these situations arise when you are playing a marginal hand from out of position against an aggressive, unpredictable opponent. This is another reason why you need to play tight in early positions and lay down marginal hands in the blinds to non-steal raises. If you can avoid having to make these awkward decisions, you will play a better, more confident game, as well, and will have more money at the end of the year.



Barry offers poker lessons tailored to the specific strengths and weaknesses of the individual student. Please visit his web site at http://www.barrytanenbaum.com/ or e-mail him at [email protected].