The danger of slowplaying preflop
Beldin the Sorcerer
200 - 2010-03-07 03:26:02 (ET)
Table: 15 (Real Money) Seat #7 is the dealer
Seat 1 - GETEMUHWHSKY (20,180 in chips)
Seat 2 - AMAZINCURTIS (14,841 in chips)
Seat 3 - CAROLINATUNA (6,108 in chips)
Seat 4 - DLYNCH1979 (15,706 in chips)
Seat 5 - DONKBLAST111 (7,485 in chips)
Seat 6 - FLASHB (1,230 in chips)
Seat 7 - THE_SORCERER (3,586 in chips)
Seat 8 - RODDRAE (4,042 in chips)
Seat 9 - JULTEX (19,354 in chips)
RODDRAE - Posts small blind 100
JULTEX - Posts big blind 200
*** POCKET CARDS ***
Dealt to THE_SORCERER [4h 4d]
GETEMUHWHSKY - Folds
AMAZINCURTIS - Folds
CAROLINATUNA - Raises 500 to 500
DLYNCH1979 - Folds
DONKBLAST111 - Folds
FLASHB - Folds
THE_SORCERER - Calls 500
RODDRAE - Folds
JULTEX - Calls 300
*** FLOP *** [4c Qs 7c]
JULTEX - Bets 400
CAROLINATUNA - Raises 1,600 to 1,600
THE_SORCERER - All-In(Raise) 3,086 to 3,086
JULTEX - Calls 2,686
CAROLINATUNA - All-In(Raise) 4,008 to 5,608
JULTEX - Calls 2,522
*** TURN *** [4c Qs 7c] [Js]
*** RIVER *** [4c Qs 7c Js] [Qc]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
CAROLINATUNA - Shows [As Ac] (Two Pair, aces and queens)
THE_SORCERER - Shows [4h 4d] (Full house, fours full of queens)
JULTEX - Shows [Kh Ks] (Two Pair, kings and queens)
CAROLINATUNA Collects 5,044 from side pot-1
THE_SORCERER Collects 10,858 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total Pot(15,902:10,858,5,044)
Board [4c Qs 7c Js Qc]
Seat 1: GETEMUHWHSKY Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 2: AMAZINCURTIS Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 3: CAROLINATUNA won Total (5,044) All-In HI:(5,044) with Two Pair, aces
and queens [As Ac - P:As,P:Ac,B:Qs,B:Qc,B:Js]
Seat 4: DLYNCH1979 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 5: DONKBLAST111 Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 6: FLASHB Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 7: THE_SORCERER (dealer) won Total (10,858) All-In HI:(10,858) with
Full house, fours full of queens [4h 4d - P:4h,P:4d,B:4c,B:Qs,B:Qc]
Seat 8: RODDRAE (small blind) Folded on the POCKET CARDS
Seat 9: JULTEX (big blind) HI:lost with Two Pair, kings and queens [Kh Ks -
P:Ks,P:Kh,B:Qs,B:Qc,B:Js]
chandler
Lessee. Slow playing KK out of BB with 2 opponents seems pretty idiotic,
but he was prolly destined to lose the max even if he played it straight.
You call 500 hundred off a 3500 stack with 44. You call with position,
but your stack is only giving you the best case opportunity of 7 times
your call with the blinds behind you with possible reraises. I'm thinking
I might fold or much more rarely jam here as I want to have the
opportunity to get paid off bigger when I hit. If idiot had not slow
played Kings you would have been out 500, about 15% of your stack. Do you
think you have enough chips to set mine here? Just curious. It worked
out pretty well as you got to triple up, but that couldn't have been
predictable.
Chandler
----�
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
Follow
Calls off 1/7 of his stack with a 44 with 2 people to act behind him, gets
super lucky on the flop and somehow manages to get paid and they're the
morons... Right...
Had Beldin been holding the AA here, the guy with the 44 would be the
retard because "Shithead, I don't raise here with anything besides a big
pocket pair and he's 4 to 1 against winning! He should muck his hand!"
It would be comical if it weren't so tired. Beldin calls with max implied
odds of 7 to 1 when it's 7.5 to 1 against, he is at best a coinflip and
probably a huge dog with his tiny pair (heh), and he might even lose his
500 chip investment when someone behind comes over the top. A magnificent
play, by a magnificent player.
Oh, and raising to 500 with AA is not a slow play. He played his aces as
fast as he could, how could he know some douche was going to call with 44
and no odds, then back his dumb ass into a set on the flop?
Follow :)
_____________________________________________________________________�
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
raven1
The danger being that some donk playing rags will hit the flop, while
avoiding an A or K..
chandler
Not to get in the way of a 3 Stooges slap fest... I believe he was
referring to the KK in the "danger of slow playing" subject. I simply
replied, because that is one of the things I started to think about when I
began playing around with my game about a month ago. What do I require in
a hand where I'll almost certainly need to hit my set to take down?
Getting the implied odds of 7.5 to one is not nearly enough, for me
anyway. There are going to be the rare instances where you are the one
getting stacked set over set. Like if an A or K came on the flop in this
hand. Or with other made hands. There are also going to be more times
when you aren't going to get paid off after you hit. I need to be pretty
darned sure I'm going to get paid off to even call for 10 to 1. The
possibility of getting paid off 20 or more to 1 is more comfortable...
but pay no attention to me. I'm just playing around. I slow played AA
the other day just to see what would happen.
Chandler
-------�
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
Follow
> Not to get in the way of a 3 Stooges slap fest... I believe he was
> referring to the KK in the "danger of slow playing" subject. I simply
> replied, because that is one of the things I started to think about when I
> began playing around with my game about a month ago. What do I require in
> a hand where I'll almost certainly need to hit my set to take down?
> Getting the implied odds of 7.5 to one is not nearly enough, for me
> anyway. There are going to be the rare instances where you are the one
> getting stacked set over set. Like if an A or K came on the flop in this
> hand. Or with other made hands. There are also going to be more times
> when you aren't going to get paid off after you hit. I need to be pretty
> darned sure I'm going to get paid off to even call for 10 to 1. The
> possibility of getting paid off 20 or more to 1 is more comfortable...
> but pay no attention to me. I'm just playing around. I slow played AA
> the other day just to see what would happen.
>
> Chandler
The KK is a non-issue though. It's not like the KK would have changed
anything by raising anywhere in this hand, at least not for him. He might
have pushed the big donkey out of the hand and lost his stack to the AA
guy alone, but nothing would have been different.
Actually, I was going to make mention of the KK being the only one who
played slow and how stupid the title of this post is in relation to the
HH, but I decided against it because it should be terribly obvious. I've
folded in spots like this too, with more callers in front, but because of
the people behind me that could possibly take me out of the hand. Just
last night I think I folded a 55 to a raise when there were 2 to act
behind and 3-4 callers in front. The consideration there being that of
the players behind, there was one who was going all in more than his share
and I didn't want to play for my stack with a 55. I also didn't advocate
that he should play if he has 7.5 implieds, I only mentioned that he
didn't even have that and made the play a losing one.
These sorts of considerations never enter into the mind of a player like
Beldin. Either that or he will claim to have had an iron clad read on his
opponents which made him sure of his play.
But anyway, I'll just go on being my stupid self and stay out of poker
discussions if "three stooges slap fest" is going to be used to describe
my wacky "antics" by people I hardly know.
Follow :)
______________________________________________________________________�
gtech1
_______________________________________________________________________�
chandler
Participate in RGP! Meet interesting new people... and be insulted by
them;-) No offense was intended to anyone. The tit for tat insults get
tedious for me. I usually by pass the threads where that is going on. It
doesn't interest me, but go on. It seems to interest most here... and
yes KK loses max no matter what.
Chandler
-------�
Beldin the Sorcerer
"chandler" <a5a...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:uasc67x...@recgroups.com...
I predicted he'd call too.
I didn't predict he'd go all the way, but I figured I'd get at least
something more on the flop if I hit.
It worked out great, but I was getting better than 8.5-1 implied odds, I
felt sure.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"Follow" <lamema...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5t0d67x...@recgroups.com...
Follow the shithead, ladies and gentlemen!
If I had the AA there I'da fully priced the 44 out.
My raise would have been at least 800
Then it's a clear fold no matter what.
> It would be comical if it weren't so tired. Beldin calls with max implied
> odds of 7 to 1 when it's 7.5 to 1 against, he is at best a coinflip and
> probably a huge dog with his tiny pair (heh), and he might even lose his
> 500 chip investment when someone behind comes over the top.
Wow!
Follow the shithead!
I figured the guy behind has to call with most hands, given the pot odds if
I call, and he does.
Follow's too stupid to do the math, so I will right now
Cost's him 300, he's getting 4-1 express odds, clear call.
KNOWING he's going to call if I do, I'm getting 2-1 on my money immediately
with 6-1 implied odds behind PLUS what I can get out of the blind on the
flop.
Since I managed to get 12-1 implied odds, 14-1 effective on the call given
the preflop pot, Follow's statement is idiotic.
A magnificent
> play, by a magnificent player.
>
> Oh, and raising to 500 with AA is not a slow play. He played his aces as
> fast as he could, how could he know some douche was going to call with 44
> and no odds, then back his dumb ass into a set on the flop?
Anyone BESIDES me point out that the slowplay was KK?
If he reraises, he at least keeps guys like me from calling correctly....
Let's see.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"chandler" <a5a...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>
> Not to get in the way of a 3 Stooges slap fest... I believe he was
> referring to the KK in the "danger of slow playing" subject.
Hey, someone is smarter than Follow.
Yeah, it's not hard, but you got it in one, and shithead needed help finding
his ass AND the point.
Usually the point is shoved right up his ass, but I digress.
I simply
> replied, because that is one of the things I started to think about when I
> began playing around with my game about a month ago. What do I require in
> a hand where I'll almost certainly need to hit my set to take down?
> Getting the implied odds of 7.5 to one is not nearly enough, for me
> anyway. There are going to be the rare instances where you are the one
> getting stacked set over set. Like if an A or K came on the flop in this
> hand. Or with other made hands. There are also going to be more times
> when you aren't going to get paid off after you hit. I need to be pretty
> darned sure I'm going to get paid off to even call for 10 to 1. The
> possibility of getting paid off 20 or more to 1 is more comfortable...
> but pay no attention to me. I'm just playing around. I slow played AA
> the other day just to see what would happen.
I limp with aces.
But I fold them if there's serious post flop action in a multiway pot.
Beldin the Sorcerer
> On Mar 7 2010 2:35 PM, chandler wrote:
>
>> Not to get in the way of a 3 Stooges slap fest... I believe he was
>> referring to the KK in the "danger of slow playing" subject. I simply
>> replied, because that is one of the things I started to think about when
>> I
>> began playing around with my game about a month ago. What do I require
>> in
>> a hand where I'll almost certainly need to hit my set to take down?
>> Getting the implied odds of 7.5 to one is not nearly enough, for me
>> anyway. There are going to be the rare instances where you are the one
>> getting stacked set over set. Like if an A or K came on the flop in this
>> hand. Or with other made hands. There are also going to be more times
>> when you aren't going to get paid off after you hit. I need to be pretty
>> darned sure I'm going to get paid off to even call for 10 to 1. The
>> possibility of getting paid off 20 or more to 1 is more comfortable...
>> but pay no attention to me. I'm just playing around. I slow played AA
>> the other day just to see what would happen.
>>
>> Chandler
>
> The KK is a non-issue though.
Wrong, shithead.
It's not like the KK would have changed
> anything by raising anywhere in this hand, at least not for him.
Wrong twice, shithead.
You're a real idiot.
By calling, he lets me play cheap.
If UTG has QQ, the hand plays the same, and now he's obviously an idiot for
letting me see the flop.
Follow, do you turn your brain on in the morning or not?
He might
> have pushed the big donkey out of the hand and lost his stack to the AA
> guy alone, but nothing would have been different.
Yeah, folks! Follow the shithead!
Let's give our guest idiot a big hand!
It won't always be AA, moron.
By flat calling there, he ALWAYS gives me the right implied odds to see the
flop, ESPECIALLY if he goes to the wall on any non-ace flop
>
> Actually, I was going to make mention of the KK being the only one who
> played slow and how stupid the title of this post is in relation to the
> HH, but I decided against it because it should be terribly obvious. I've
> folded in spots like this too, with more callers in front, but because of
> the people behind me that could possibly take me out of the hand. Just
> last night I think I folded a 55 to a raise when there were 2 to act
> behind and 3-4 callers in front. The consideration there being that of
> the players behind, there was one who was going all in more than his share
> and I didn't want to play for my stack with a 55. I also didn't advocate
> that he should play if he has 7.5 implieds, I only mentioned that he
> didn't even have that and made the play a losing one.
Wow, folks!
Follow the incredible retard!
I get paid 14-1 on my call, and shithead seriously claims I didn't have
7.5-1 implied odds.
Where'd the rest of the chips come from, shithead? The Pot Odds fairy?
>
> These sorts of considerations never enter into the mind of a player like
> Beldin. Either that or he will claim to have had an iron clad read on his
> opponents which made him sure of his play.
No, fuckhead, I had the math on my side where the BB calls with almost any
two cards.
There are few hands he should raise with, and that's the price of the hand.
He raises correctly, he makes sure he doesn't go broke like that.
It's why you HAVE to raise correctly there.
>
> But anyway, I'll just go on being my stupid self and stay out of poker
> discussions if "three stooges slap fest" is going to be used to describe
> my wacky "antics" by people I hardly know.
Oh, stop pouting, idiot boy.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"chandler" <a5a...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
If he actually puts the guy on AA, his call would be correct IFF he FOLDS
without a king.
I've made that call in a tournament once.
Heads up, I get limp-reraised the min when I pot it with KK. And I looked at
the stacks, put him on AA, and flat called.
Flopped the K and manipulated him into putting me on AK and check raising
me, then I reraised and he shoved.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"gtech1" <duanepr...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:t8ud67x...@recgroups.com...
> Of course he doesn't have enough chips to set mine.
I get 8-1 as soon as the BB calls. And he always will.
I'll get more from him often enough to continue.
AA didn't raise enough, KK didn't reraise, as a result they priced me in
easily and lost the max.
Yes, it IS that simple
Beldin the Sorcerer
"raven1" <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:40r7p55udv44mlksh...@4ax.com...
Follow
> > Oh, and raising to 500 with AA is not a slow play. He played his aces as
> > fast as he could, how could he know some douche was going to call with 44
> > and no odds, then back his dumb ass into a set on the flop?
>
> Anyone BESIDES me point out that the slowplay was KK?
> If he reraises, he at least keeps guys like me from calling correctly....
>
> Let's see.
Exactly the reply I expected, hell I even called it. So, this post was
called the "danger" of slowplaying, implying that because of the slowplay,
KK flirted with danger and got his just desserts.
So tell me what happens if KK doesn't slowplay, please. By my estimation,
he raises behind you (to a large enough amount to get you out anyway), and
either gets called or shoved on by the AA. You fold, he calls for the
other guy's stack because I'm sure you don't advocate folding the KK here.
He loses the same stack and the guy with AA instead of the donkey with 44
gets his money.
What sort of "danger" got him in the end, Beldonkey? He was just destined
to lose those chips, sometimes that happens. The only one in danger of
anything in this hand was you. You were in danger of KK raising from
behind you (which I agree he should have done) and made you fold your 500
chips feeling like a god damn idiot.
Follow :)
________________________________________________________________________�
raven1
<beld...@verizon.net> wrote:
So it's OK for pocket 4's, but not for pocket 7's. Right...
Beldin the Sorcerer
> On Mar 8 2010 6:42 AM, Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
>
>> > Oh, and raising to 500 with AA is not a slow play. He played his aces
>> > as
>> > fast as he could, how could he know some douche was going to call with
>> > 44
>> > and no odds, then back his dumb ass into a set on the flop?
>>
>> Anyone BESIDES me point out that the slowplay was KK?
>> If he reraises, he at least keeps guys like me from calling correctly....
>>
>> Let's see.
>
> Exactly the reply I expected, hell I even called it. So, this post was
> called the "danger" of slowplaying, implying that because of the slowplay,
> KK flirted with danger and got his just desserts.
>
> So tell me what happens if KK doesn't slowplay, please. By my estimation,
> he raises behind you (to a large enough amount to get you out anyway), and
> either gets called or shoved on by the AA.
Did you read any of the other posts in this thread, moron?
You fold, he calls for the
> other guy's stack because I'm sure you don't advocate folding the KK here.
> He loses the same stack and the guy with AA instead of the donkey with 44
> gets his money.
And if the other guy had KK or AK or QQ or JJ or AQs....?
By flat calling he makes my play correct. Now he IS going to flat call with
a HUGE range of hands given that he's getting 4-1 express odds because AA
played so badly.
Follow, here's a goddamned idea. I realize it's damn near impossible, but
for a week, try and think two or three moves ahead when you play
Can you manage that?
>
> What sort of "danger" got him in the end, Beldonkey? He was just destined
> to lose those chips, sometimes that happens.
Follow the shithead, ladies and gentlemen!
Not reraising KK there is the height of stupidity.
I could be calling with Ax and the other guy could have a big pair. Now
there's 5 cards that can flop to beat him.
Both of us could have underpairs, and he'll lose to a set and by calling he
gave us the implied odds to try for one.
The initial raiser isn't always AA, you goddamned retard.
The only one in danger of
> anything in this hand was you. You were in danger of KK raising from
> behind you (which I agree he should have done) and made you fold your 500
> chips feeling like a god damn idiot.
Follow, you incredible shithead, he should reraise with AA KK QQ AK (maybe)
He should CALL getting 4-1 with almost any hand
The overwhelming expectation is that he's going to call there
Beldin the Sorcerer
Do you know what the term "implied odds" means?
Do you understand the difference between 15% of your stack and 80%?
Follow
You see, when you tell a story and give a moral to the story, generally,
it's expected that the story, no matter how implausible, supports said
moral. When you give a moral to the story, then demonstrate (as in this
case) that the guy was fucked regardless of what he did, your warning to
not slowplay your kings preflop loses its impact entirely.
If KK failed to make a proper raise, you were the only one in the pot, and
you floated behind him like an unflushed turd, hit your set and stacked
him, I could see how your moral would make sense. That didn't happen
though, this guy was fucked no matter what he did, so your moral doesn't
fit.
Little Red Riding Hood talked to The Big Bad Wolf and told him all about
Grandma's house. Then global thermonuclear war broke out, turning Little
Red Riding Hood (and The Big Bad Wolf) into nothing more than a very small
pile of dust. So the moral is; never talk to strangers.
See how stupid that is?
The unfortunate thing about this is that you will spend another 3 days
arguing this point, even though I imagine even you're not stupid enough
not to get it. Everyone else gets it.
Follow :)
________________________________________________________________________�
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
Beldin the Sorcerer
His slowplay cost him his stack.
He COULD have minraised back and seen AA shove.
MAYBE he can fold then if he has a hell of a read.
His post flop call says he's going to the wall with the hand.
IF you're doing that, you want your reverse implied odds to be as close to
zero as possible.
For the love of god, shithead, think a little.
I got story characters in a tent in a rainstorm, trying to dry off.
Show some consideration.
>
> Little Red Riding Hood talked to The Big Bad Wolf and told him all about
> Grandma's house. Then global thermonuclear war broke out, turning Little
> Red Riding Hood (and The Big Bad Wolf) into nothing more than a very small
> pile of dust. So the moral is; never talk to strangers.
No.
Little Red Riding hood hid from the man with the axe, but she let the guy
with the funny hair sit near her, and he ate her when she slept.
Maybe the guy with the axe might have killed her, but she sure as hell
invited her killer in to see her instead.
>
> See how stupid that is?
>
> The unfortunate thing about this is that you will spend another 3 days
> arguing this point, even though I imagine even you're not stupid enough
> not to get it. Everyone else gets it.
No, follow, everyone gets you're an idiot.
Anyone doing the math at all knows I'm completely right and you're just a
shithead.
gtech1
dozen articles explaining why you didn't have enough chips to call. But
it wouldn't matter, would it?
_____________________________________________________________________�
Beldin the Sorcerer
> LOL. I could explain it myself, or I could link you to probably half a
> dozen articles explaining why you didn't have enough chips to call. But
> it wouldn't matter, would it?
I've already documented I had enough chips to call.
You can find guys who want MORE than enough chips to call.
I had the correct implied odds there. There is no question at all.
I called 500, I won almost 7000