I PLAYED THIS HAND PERFECTLY THREAD

mexineil · #16 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 16:54

Wait, wait, are you telling me he's going to call my 92BB all in preflop with 20% of all starting hands? Around 44 hands? Do you want to list 44 preflop starting hands that you would call a 92BB all in with?

Doc · #17 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 17:05

no, but given he has raised, we can probably rule out the bottom 50% or so.

44 hands isn't that hard to come up with in any case. 13 pairs and 6 ways to get each one is 78 for starters - minus the 6 you have tied up with your monster J9.

If he is going to call a significant re-raise he'll have you beaten. That would apply just as much with a 10BB raise as with your all-in. So your extra 82BB doesn't achieve anything in terms of getting him to fold - it just costs you much more when he does.

mexineil · #18 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 17:07

44 different hands, not 44 ways of getting hands. Nevermind, I think you missed the point a long time ago anyway.

mrmuzeman · #19 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 17:32

Such a crap discussion, whether or not to go all in on J9 in a cash game, can we just keep this thread for what its intended for - to appreciate some sweet poker plays!

**Jezza** · #20 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 19:36

Lol oh dear,

Mod, I would genuinely be interested to know how you would have played that hand. It is true (as muse said to me) that had he called at the end it would have been a post for the donkey thread and not this one. Do you think the bluff was too risky/dangerous? As it was we were playing shorthanded and he was trying to run over the game. The majority of the time he raised preflop he would fire a continuation bet both on the flop and turn regardless of if he it. This is why I decided to represent the flush with a CR instead of a bet as I knew he would bet again regardless. Of course when he called I still had outs and the 4th diamond was a perfect scare card, the classic "well if i wasnt beaten on the turn then THAT card definately beat me" thinking in his head.

Now someone else post a hand up or I will be forced to post another myself in the donkey thread

Jez

moDtheGod · #21 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 21:58

Well two things.

a) J9 is Neil's favourite hand. Much like Q7o is to me, so yeh the Doctor missed Neil's point.

b) I didn't say I could have played it better.

I didn't say it wasn't a "sweet play" to take a pot down with nothing.

However, PERFECT is tough to define. He might have been able to extract an extra few pence/pounds, that's all. In fixed limit, I can concede you can play a hand 100% perfectly but in big bet, it's very difficult to extract every last drip of value - and the title clearly says hands you played "perfectly"...

moDtheGod · #22 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:00

By the way, Neil's original post had a positive wind-up EV of about 1000000000000.00

GETT1NLOTS · #23 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:09

Originally Posted by mexineil

Playing it perfectly would have been to go all in preflop.

Oh dear.

mexineil · #24 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:12

Originally Posted by GETT1NLOTS

Oh dear.

Please read up on this.

GETT1NLOTS · #25 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:31

Just did.

My comment still stands.

Doc · #26 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:31

don't waste your breath big-man - the fool won't listen.

Thought he might be interested in the following hand I was involved in tonight where someone raised with J9o

http://www.punters-paradise.com/foru...8907#post18907

christianu · #27 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:36

DOC this is shameless advertising

Doc · #28 (**permalink**) 07-12-2005, 22:44

sorry Chris

I would have posted it here - but you don't have the card graphics that I do

think it looks better when you see that shite hand in all its glory!

**Jezza** · #29 (**permalink**) 08-12-2005, 16:33

Originally Posted by moDtheGod

However, PERFECT is tough to define. He might have been able to extract an extra few pence/pounds, that's all. In fixed limit, I can concede you can play a hand 100% perfectly but in big bet, it's very difficult to extract every last drip of value - and the title clearly says hands you played "perfectly"...

This is a very good point actually. I read a long discussion on this between some of the worlds best players recently. The general consensus was it is practically impossible to play NL hold em perfectly for anything over about 1 hand (and even 1 hand is rare). I suppose the thread title in this sense is misleading but in reality it just means hands in which you owned your opponent

Jez

aliensyndm · #30 (**permalink**) 08-12-2005, 16:37

You're playing heads up for cash. Your opponent goes all in. You have pocket aces, you call.
That is perfect 100 %. Your choice is either call or fold. You cannot be behind, at worst you will be 50% if you opponent also has pocket aces.
Who wins the pot is irrelevant as from a playing point of view you've played it correctly 100%