Are poker players in casinos worse than online players?

I can’t really figure out how much was in the pot at each step. The size of the pot and the size of each players’ stack is crucial to deciding how much to bet in NL. If there was an AK, a TT, and a hand that could bet into the TTK board, was there a raise or two before the flop?

You say there was “A raise and a call to me, too, $30 to go”. How many people were in this pot on the flop? Do you mean there was a bet and a raise … or a bet and call … or a bet and a raise and a call and then it was your turn?

The best I can figure right now is that on the turn there was somewhat over $100 in the pot, you had a stack of around $200, and the guy who went all-in on had about $250.

The second K hits the board and the first guy checks. I’m unclear whether he had bet the flop or checked and called a raise cold. Since he checked and folded here, it doesn’t really matter, although it does allow us to deduce a lot about his hand. What did he have?

So, the K hits and #2 bets $50 into a $100 pot. The only way anybody can call him is to have either the remaining K or TT. Any other hand is going to fold.

Now it’s your turn. You can be pretty sure the bettor has a K. You consider that he might have KK but you still can’t fold. If he does have KK, you are going to lose your stack anyway, so don’t waste time thinking about that. The guy who checked is either slow playing the other K or he is going to fold no matter what you do. The bet is $50, you consider a standard raise to $150, but that only leaves you with $50 to bet on the river, so you might as well just shove all-in right here and hope they both have a K.

You can’t suck the third player in by just calling. He either has a K or he going to fold. It is very unlikely the guy who bet the $50 is going to fold his Kings Full for another $150 when there is around $350 in the pot – that’s just not gonna happen in a $1/$2 game.

Here is how the hand went:

Deal

Position 1 posts SB, $1
Position 2 posts BB, $2
Position 3 (cards unknown) bets $6
Position 4 folds
Position 5 folds
Position 6 (A-K) calls
Position 7 folds
RickJay (10-10) calls
Position 9 folds
Position 1 folds SB
Position 2 folds BB

$21 in pot
Flop 10-10-K

Position 3 bets $30
Position 6 calls
RickJay calls

$111 in pot
Turn 10-10-K-K
Position 3 checks
Position 6 bets $50
RickJay calls
Position 3 folds

$211 in pot
River 10-10-K-K-3 (no flush possible)
Position 6 bets $202, all in
RickJay calls (from a stack of ~275)

RickJay wins, four tens; Position 6 loses, Kings full of tens
Pot $615, rake $6

So, the guy cold called a $30 bet on the flop with A-K after calling a 3xBB pre-flop raise in mid-position.

Simply calling pre-flop in mid-position might be defensible. The guy under the gun raised. If Seat 3 was reasonably tight, that indicates a fairly strong hand, though I’d think there’s argument for re-raising it to narrow down the range of hands and getting late position folk out of the pot.

Just calling on the flop is also questionable. Too many possible Tens out there for that, which would require hitting a 2 outer with one of the remaining Ks (which did happen, but counting on hitting a 2 outer is kind of dumb with his pot odds). I guess he could have honestly thought nobody had a Ten, but without raising pre-flop or on the flop, there’s no reason for him to believe that, either.

Good. That clarifies things. Was there a flush draw possible on the flop?

What do you think Position 3 had?

Why did he overbet the pot on the flop?

As someone who is quite bad at NL, I’ll play.

My hypothesis would be that Seat 3 had AA, QQ, or AQs without knowing more about the type of player. The flop over-bet is a continuation bet (if I understand the word correctly) hoping that the other players missed, or maybe a semi-bluff representing a T with some outs for a flush/straight draw (if S3 had AQ, for example). The other option is AT, but I’m not sure that gets a raise UTG pre-flop.

I think the big mistake for the AK player is not re-raising pre-flop. That gets most hands with a 10 out, right? Except Rick’s TT, I guess (do you call a re-raise pre-flop in late position with TT in 1-2 NL?). Although he’s (the AK) probably screwed anyways, in this particular case.

That’s what I’m curious about. Did he have K-? and thought he had it until he got called twice? Position 3 seems to have misplayed the flop pretty badly. Wonder how much of his play ‘corrupted’ the read of RickJay’s hand for Player 6? Although, still once Player 6 got called on the turn, why go all in on the river? Did he really think RickJay was fishing at that point and might have missed with the 3?

That doesn’t make sense though. K-? over-bets the pot on two pair, gets cold-called, but the check-folds after turning the nuts? (ETA: OK, not the nuts, but a pretty good bet to at least split at that point)

I think something like AA, QQ, or AQs works better if we assume Player 3 is competent. Missed the flop, made a semi-bluff at it (a possible flush draw helps here), and got out when it was clear he was beat.

Yeah, the all-in was probably the third mistake (although the chips going in was inevitable at that point, IMO - most casual players won’t give up that hand even if it goes check, all-in).

You’re probably right. Any high pair (even the dreaded JJ) puts him in that spot. Still, with 18 cards out, he had to think one of those missing Ts might be out there.

Yeah, Ks full over Ts would be tough to lay down, but a check goes a long way in those spots.

  1. Edited: Actually, I believe the flop included the ten and king of clubs. No more clubs emerged, however,

  2. I suspect Position 3 had QQ or JJ or a club flush draw. It’s also possible he had connectors. We’ll never know. I have played about 7 hours against the guy and he wins, has never made a stupid mistake I’ve noticed before, and my perception of him is that he is just good enough to be too contemptuous of his opposition, but he had a bigger stack and maybe just overpaid for information. I really can’t say for sure, because

  3. I have no idea. I am assuming a $30 bet is too much in the context of being in early position AND having a K on the board. Since he could not have had a 10, I am really not sure what he had. I think a semibluff is the likely answer, with queens or jacks, given that he jumped out of the plane as soon as he was bet to.

BTW, guys, I find this sort of discussion immensely helpful and fascinating, as a newbie poker player who has the temperament for poker but lacks the experience so far.

Just wait for the broadcast and watch the hole camera… :wink:

With the KT of Clubs on the flop, it is enticing to think he may have QJ of clubs and flopped an open-ended straight flush draw. But you said he seems to be a decent player, so he didn’t raise QJs being first in under the gun.

A pretty loose/aggressive player may have raised AJs or AQs and flopped a flush draw with an inside straight draw and bet as a semi-bluff, hoping you would both fold but he had ways to win if he got called … but your guy doesn’t sound loose enough to have raised those hands under the gun.

The hands your guy will raise in his position are AA, KK, QQ, and AK. We know he didn’t have KK or AK. If he had QQ, he would have made a smaller bet on the flop, probably about $10, to see if he got any action and then given up, figuring if they called his preflop raise and then called on that board he was sure to be beat.

He had AA. He made a standard raise under the gun, hoping somebody would reraise so he could make a pretty big three bet and get heads up against a lesser hand with some dead money in the pot. The AK smooth-calling spoiled his plan, but he was still pretty happy with the flop. He overbet the pot because he (correctly) assessed the middle guy to be a weak, timid player (and perhaps you, too). He figured he had the best hand and he figured that the only way either of you were going to raise him was if you had a 10, at which point he would have been done with it, and if one of you had a King he was wanting to get paid off for a decent amount with his all too rare Aces.

Your preflop call after a raise and a call were fine. Calling with AK behind a tight under the gun raiser was fine. The way the hand played out was just one of those fluke situations; if you and the other guy had had any other hands besides TT and AK it wouldn’t have been memorable. If you see the guy again, try asking him about it – he’ll probably remember it.

I’m going to suggest two books to you. I don’t know how much of a reader you are, so if you’re not much for very dense, difficult, thought provoking reading, just get the first one. It is very basic, but you (and I don’t mean this to be a snark … really, I don’t … ok?) have a lack of some very basic, fundamental knowledge of poker. Your misuse of terms like “value bet” and “semi-bluff” and lack of understanding of how much is a proper bet and your lack of understanding of the use of pot odds in NL tell me so.

Your first book is Getting Started in Hold 'em. Please get and read this book. Do it for you, for me, for your bankroll, for your wife and children present or future. Read this book to ground yourself in the fundamentals. If you do this, you will be better than most of the other players at the $1/$2 tables. For a poker book, it is not difficult reading but it will make you think. Poker is a lot more fun when you know for an absolute fact that you are a winning player, not just one who sometimes gets lucky.

If you’re really interested in learning to play NL and willing to really strain your brain to do so, or if you just enjoy challenging reading, also get No Limit Hold 'em: Theory and Practice. This is not an easy book. It assumes the reader to have knowledge of aspects of poker that you do not currently have. It is a book the good players have literally worn the covers off of and bought a second and third copy to keep rereading it. Even if don’t intend to go full blast learning poker, it would be great for you to at least skim through this book to get a small glimpse of just how much you (and 99.999% of the rest of the world … this really isn’t a personal attack … really … ok?) don’t know about poker.

Of course, there are a lot of other good poker books these days, but these two are where to start. They will only cost you two flop bets and I absolutely positively 100% iron clad or double your money back guarantee you will be glad you bought them. You are about to discover that most of those guys at the tables who say “The book says …” have never actually read the book. Don’t let them know that you know that – just say something like “I never read the book, I just spend all my time practicing getting lucky.”

One more thing. This is important. Do this right now. Get a little notebook or a sheet of paper or start a computer file or something of the sort and write down how much you bought in, how long you played, the table limit, and how much you won or lost. Do this every time you play. Don’t skip a session because it was only dumb luck that he drew out on your Aces Full or because you busted out in only 15 minutes. Write down honest numbers for every time you play. If, after several months you are a winning player, you will be sure of it, but if you are losing, well, it’s better that you know that, too. It is very easy to delude oneself about this through selective memory. Write it down.

Whew … I got on a roll there. Have fun. :slight_smile:

One more thing. Don’t teach at the table. Don’t do anything that might cause your opponents to play better. You’ll see it happening all the time. It’s damned silly, ain’t it? Don’t be one of those guys.

Dear god, in the quads hand…your flop call is horrendous…you absolutely must raise there.

That said, and more importantly, it’s pretty much impossible to give intelligent advice unless we know the effective stack sizes. When doing hand histories, make sure to give the stack sizes for all the major players in the hand.

Really? I disagree completely (but like I said, I’m bad at NL). Why not slow-call and hope that worse hands come along? Especially since even if quad Kings hits he wins a jackpot.

Raising on the flop would be horrible. The only way they can call is to have a King. By smooth-calling, you give the opponents with an Ace or a straight or flush draw to think they made a winning hand which will pay off your big bet.

On the turn, it becomes obvious to everyone that it is going to take at least a full house to win. You want to make it too expensive now for someone with one or two outs for a straight flush to see the river.

Good lord no.

When we have the best hand - not even the nuts, just the best hand - we want to get as much value from our hands as possible. The first big lesson people learn in NL hold ‘em is to not pay off other peoples’ monster hands. The second big lesson - and by far the most important to improving your win rate - is learning how to get maximum value from your big hands. This is rarely possible when you slow play.

Sure, you can have a monster hand, and your opponents won’t have anything - slow play, fast play, it won’t matter; you weren’t making anything from the hand anyway.

Or there are some times when we have the board so crushed, we -have- to slowplay in the hopes that someone catches up to something, anything…For example, we have AQ, and the board comes out AAQ rainbow. It’s almost impossible for anyone to have anything. Even pocket Kings will probably only call one bet on the flop, if that.

But when your opponents do have something, that’s when we -have- to take 'em for max value town.

Let’s look at the action: The pre-flop raiser raised from UTG. If he’s a reasonable player at a reasonable table, his range should be fairly tight: JJ+/AK/AQ, -maybe- AJ. Obviously if we have a history of villain being super laggy/spewy, that’s different (and we would play the hand completely differently), but the only reads we have from Hero here is that the UTG player is a ‘winning player’. A winning player ain’t raising 92o from UTG.

Next, we have a MP call - but not a raise. This is interesting, and quite a strong action, because the MP not only has to consider that the UTG raise may well be QQ+, he has the rest of the table behind him yet to act. Since he didn’t raise, we can probably dismiss AA and KK. If the table overall was fairly passive (not a lot of 3-betting), he *might *have pocket pairs going down to 7s or 8s and could just be playing to set mine - but it’s hard to tell because we don’t know the UTG’s stack size! (which goes back to why it’s so important to know stack sizes for the major players in the hand). But in a vacuum, we put MP on JJ+, AK/AQ, -maybe- mid-pocket pairs, and we slightly discount AA and KK.

And hero has pocket 10s. Now, pocket 10s are a good hand, but as we’ve seen, we may well be behind the UTG’s raising and MP’s calling range. Which means really that we’re probably playing our hand to set-mine, because it’s unlikely that we’ll both a) get a flop, turn and river of 9-high, and b) still be good with our pocket 10s by the river.

And again, this goes back to why it’s so important to pay attention to stack sizes. The odds of hitting a set are only about 1-in-7, and plus sometimes we don’t make much on the hand even when we do hit our set (we hit our set, villain has nothing and folds to our first bet). So a good rule of thumb with pocket pairs: don’t call raises with 'em unless you can expect to make at least 10x the raise size. If you want to be conservative you can even go 15x. (Also btw, the general rule of thumb for suited connectors is 20-25x, and 30-35x for suited gappers). If the pre-flop raiser raised to $6, we want him to have at least $70-100 behind to profitably set-mine.

I’m not saying Hero should fold here - the UTG and MP both appear to be deep enough, and appear to have reasonably strong hands that can pay us off when we hit, so the pre-flop call is fine. But it’s something to be aware of.

Flop ($21): 10 club 10x King club.

That’s a really wet board - in other words, there are a LOT of hands that can continue on: obviously any 10, but also any King, flush draws, straight draws, etc. So when the pre-flop raiser c-bets this board into two people, he almost certainly has a hand: AA, AK, etc. I guess QQ is -possible-, betting to ‘see where he’s at’, which is horrible, but it happens.

But what’s interesting is the size of the UTG flop bet: He goes BOMBS AWAY, betting more than the size of the pot. He’s betting, but he’s betting so much that he doesn’t -really- want the hand to go on much longer. That screams exactly one hand to me: AA, worried about getting sucked out on.

And yet the MP STILL CALLS, even though Hero is still behind him yet to act!

I can not stress enough how strong that is.

The key here is the MP call. We know from the preflop and flop that MP a) should have a fairly big hand, and b) he can’t have a 10. Which means the mostly likely part of MP’s range here is either a massive draw, a big King (AK is a HUGE part of his range at this point given the pre-flop call instead of raise), pocket Aces, or if we’re really really lucky, pocket Kings.

Do you think any of those hands are folding to a standard raise on the flop?
Obviously if we shipped for $280+, he might find a fold with AK, but he’s never folding to a standard raise. The UTG might find a fold with AA given a call and raise back to him, but he might also call one street.

The problem with slow playing here: look at all the turn cards that kill your action. If the turn is the four of clubs, putting the flush draw out there - how much money are you getting from AK? Remember, he can’t have AK of clubs, because the King of clubs is on the board. Do you think you’re getting his stack on the river?

If MP has a flush or straight draw, and the turn and river brick out, how much will you get from him? He might call a small bet on the turn, but he’s unlikely to bluff the river if he misses, since HERO’s hand looks so strong (calls preflop, calls flop).

We have to build the pot up now, on the flop, while we can still get action - once the pot gets bigger it gets harder for people to fold, and in fact, often it’s incorrect to fold given pot odds and stack sizes. More importantly, if we just call, our hand is essentially face up as a 10, which makes it harder to get value from a hand like AK unless -specifically- another King hits. If we raise, it might look like we’re on a draw.

As it happened, Hero got lucky, because the turn brought one of only two cards that improved Villains’ hand enough to entice a river shove: A third king. Even an Ace on the turn doesn’t do much, because Villain would still be behind pocket Aces or any ten!

And that’s why smooth-calling is so horrible - the only time they put more money in the pot on the turn or river is if they hit, which is a minority of the time. Secondly, as I noted above we can put MP pretty squarely on at least a King when he over-calls the big flop bet from the preflop raiser!

And that’s just terribad advice. Why in the world do we want to make it ‘too expensive’ for a straight flush to see a river? We don’t want the draws to fold, we want to get *value *from the draws.

I’m with you on everything except:

On the flop, you have too much. I say it is better to slow play here, hoping one of the other guys hits something on the turn. Good players with straight or flush draws are very leery of raises when the board is paired and are unlikely to be willing to play a big pot when they may be drawing dead.

On the turn, it is obvious that a straight or flush made on the river will still not be enough to win; it will take a straight flush. By going all-in here, you make it too expensive for the one or two out SF draw to “correctly” call because he isn’t getting the right odds, but you actually hope he does call … because he isn’t getting the right odds. I see this as a clear application of the Fundamental Theorem of Poker; you are causing him to play his hand in a different way than he would play if he could see your cards. You want him to draw, but you must not leave enough in your stack to give him the correct implied odds to do so.

I’d be happy to go all-in and get called every time against a two-outer. If I don’t raise and he makes his hand for free I’m going to lose my stack anyway, and if I don’t raise and he misses his hand he isn’t going to give me his stack.

Part of it is that you can’t rely on the other person losing their mind and betting their entire stack into you at the end, and we want to play for stacks with a hand this strong. (Aside, what did #6 expect you to call with and lose? A bare T? Was he trying to make you fold a chop? Still, I wonder if, GTO, shoving on his part is better than check/calling? I mean, “You just can’t worry about quads.”)

Another part of it is that RickJay raising on the flop actually looks bluffier (and therefore less scary) than simply overcalling an overpot bet and call. IOW, you might get a call (or another raise!) more often from a thinking player, if you raise that flop, than you will get another bet from that player on the turn or river. Of course, if there are that many thinking players at the table (at 1/2!) and the table is so conservative that you only get 2 calls from a UTG 3x, with neither coming from the blinds, it might be time for a table change. The BB was getting over 5-1 on her call, and getting to close the action. While you know and I know that position matters more than that, I’ve read that bet is often irresistible to low stakes live players. That it’s not getting called may indicate that they have a clue, and if they have a clue, that’s two fewer bad players to get the money from –> table change.

Still, as it was related to us, when the action gets to RickJay, the pot has $81 in it (pre-rake), it’s $30 to him, he can close the action, and the effective stacks are $252. (The amount of Player 6’s remaining stack, since RickJay covers, and we don’t know anything about UTG’s stack.) Simply calling will put 111 in the pot, with effective stacks of 252, a ratio of about 2.3 to 1. We should be able to get our stack in by the river anyway, especially if either UTG or #6 overbets the pot again. If neither of them do, we’ll either need a PSB at some point, or hope that 3/4 pot bets get called at turn and river.

My thought is that, at 1/2, without some pre-existing dynamic between you guys that would make them doubt your raise, they aren’t calling a flop raise with just a K. And there just aren’t that many other combos that can call: KK (3 combos), QJcc, maybe? a very stubborn AA (say 1/6 of the time, or 1 combo). Most of their range will fold to a raise, we want them to stay in, so keep their range broad and just call. If we were deeper, it might be different, as we couldn’t get our stacks in on only two streets. I’m definitely raising the turn though, as I don’t see #6 calling a pot-sized bet (PSB) on the river. (Or betting again on the river, but I would’ve been wrong there.) Besides, I thought the typical LLSNL line with a monster was: Call/call/call/jam, and we’d like to not look like that if we want a somewhat Level 1 villain to pay us off. Accordingly, find a raise at some point; I just disagree that it has to be on the flop.

(Edit: I’ve just read DragonAsh’s excellent post spelling out why we should raise the flop. I disagree, but I think they’re great points he/she brings up. IMHO, while a call of this bet should tell people that RickJay has a T, a raise at this level will definitely tell them he does. Again, with cleverer players and usually, higher levels of play, the reverse is true. I agree that we need to get money in the pot before action killing cards come, and I’m familiar with Sklansky’s example in NLHETAP of why we should shove, even though it won’t get called that often, I just don’t think these villains will call enough to make it worthwhile, even if they have AK. If you think they will call with a K, raise away.)

Better reads would be helpful in trying to determine each player’s possible range. While the “classic” UTG open for FR NHLE is JJ+, AKs, I’ve seen much wider FR opening ranges: it just depends on how loose the opener is, and how much she feels she can run over the table. Which you should have somewhat of a handle on, as part of your overall player reads.

I think UTG’s range could have had more PPs than AA, but it’s irrelevant, as you weren’t getting anything more from him after you both called that flop overbet. As with everyone else, I think your pf call was fine. You’re probably done with the hand if a T doesn’t flop, though you had position on the other players and sufficient chips if you wanted to get clever, (Which is usually a bad idea at 1/2.)

I’d add The Theory of Poker to Turble’s list. No disrespect to Turble intended, but it’s the one you should read first, as it sets up literally everything else. I thought the various Harrington on Hold 'Em books had already been mentioned. They’re a great way to learn TAG (Tight Aggressive) 101, circa 2006. Finally, Professional No Limit Hold 'Em is supposedly a good text—I still need to read it—particularly for its concept of SPR.

Sorry for the wall o text.

We do not ‘bet for information’. We often get information as a side-result based on what opponents do in response to our bet, but that’s not why we bet.

Hogwash. Which would you rather have happen: Bet $450 and get called 35% of the time, or bet $150 and get called 95% of the time?

More importantly - OUR HAND IS IRRELEVANT. We do NOT bet based on the absolute strength of our hand, we bet based on the relative strength of the range we put our opponent on, and what we think he thinks about the strength of our hand.

If we have top set on a uber-dry board with no straights and no flushes and we think villain probably only has one pair, then we bet small to get called…or, depending on the player, we could over-bet jam to make it look like -we- missed one of the draws. There are times when it works in our favor to make what looks like a very polarizing bet on the river…but it depends entirely on our opponent and what range we put him on, not the absolute strength of our hand.

If we have the nuts, but based on the action we think it likely villain has the second nuts and is likely to call, or is a calling station that will call with any part of the board, then bombing away is absolutely correct.

Villain’s river shove in the quads hand is 100% correct IF a) he put Hero on a 10, and b) thought that Hero was never folding. From his point of view, his shove was essentially risk free, since even if he gets called by a King it’s a chop (I doubt he was trying to get Hero to fold a chop…) and with Kings over Tens, he simply can not be worried about the ONE specific hand combination of pocket 10s that he loses to. Which is why…

… is wrong, because he didn’t ‘fall in love with the best hand’, he shoved the river for value. What was he supposed to do, bet/fold the river with top full house? It’s an absolute disaster if we bet small on the river when Hero would have called a bigger bet with a 10.

Not saying the river shove wasn’t a mistake - we can argue as to whether, based on the action, Hero was likely to call a pot-sized bet shove on the river with just a 10 when Villain clearly has a King - but ‘falling in love with the hand’ isn’t the mistake.

Turble, that’s all excellent advice. No snark taken. I seek wisdom. Only fools believe they understand things they are new at. I am not a fool.

I had already ordered Sklansky, but now I’ll start Ed Miller’s book first.

You will be happy to hear I’m ahead of you on the log. I started it after the first live session, in fact, an Excel spreadsheet that lays out stake and win/loss, game location, limits and type, expenses (mileage, food, tips, etc.) and notes I take on the game, players, and memorable hands.

Tried some limit Hold 'Em tonight in Brantford on my may home from a job (so no mileage, hooray.) For whatever reason, Brantford spreads only limit games, though they go up a lot higher than 2/5. I played 2/5 Limit for a couple of hours, finishing up $53, at which point I was tired and wanted to go home. A very different game, obviously, and I probably won’t play it much because the Brantford casino is dreary, but hey, it’s a low stakes game and I think it’ll expand my skill to try other games in other rooms.

I don’t understand what you’re saying here, although it strikes me as a case of ‘a little knowledge is a dangerous thing’, because I think you’re mis-applying a couple of concepts.

We bet for two reasons, and two reasons only. When you ‘go all in’ on the turn (not saying it’s correct or in-correct) what are you trying to accomplish?

‘Not leaving enough in your stack to give him the correct implied odds to do so’… Huh? Please elaborate because I have no idea what you’re trying to say here.