Posted Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:00 pm GMT by Tadzio
Here's a hand for the opinions of the LAGs that frequent the boards. Situation is a cheap SnG. Blinds are 25/50 at this level. The LAG player (you) are sitting in Seat 9, so you have position as long as you want it and you happen to have the chip lead by a goodly margin. Before the betting on this hand starts, you have ~3500, Seat 6 has ~2000 and Seat 7 has ~2500. (chip stacks are rounded for simplicity)
Dealt to Seat 9: 5  3
Pre-Flop Action
Seat 1: Posts SB
Seat 2: Posts BB
Seat 3: Fold
Seat 5: Call
Seat 6: Raises 50 to 100
Seat 7: Re-Raises 100 to 200
Seat 9: Call
Seat 1: Fold
Seat 2: Fold
Seat 5: Fold
Seat 6: Re-Raises 200 to 400.
Seat 7: Call
Seat 9: Call.
Can you justify Seat 9's play? Would you ever make a play like this and how would you play it post-flop? Did the play of the other players make Seat 9's play reasonable despite the low-quality hand?
SPOILER: don't be results oriented. This is for the curious that've already rendered judgement on the play and wanna know how things turned out. It's also for sharing what I think is funny back-n-forth between myself and the LAG player.
I was in Seat 7 with TT.
Flop 5c 3c Qs.
Seat 6: Check
Seat 7: Bet 700
Seat 9: Raise 700 to 1400
Seat 6: Re-Raise 200 to 1600 and is all-in.
Seat 7: "Darn Queens..."
Seat 7: Fold
Seat 9: Calls.
Seat 6: Shows AQ off suit.
Seat 9: Shows 53 suited.
Seat 7: "No way!.... donkitude."
Turn 7s
River 9d.
Seat 9 wins.
Seat 9: "It's my experience that people that call others donks are usually the donks."
Seat 7: "Did you just call me a donk? I~rony!"
Seat 9: "Shut your mouth up donkey!"
Seat 7: "alright, Mr. 53 soooooted"
The End?
Epilogue: I ended up donking out in 4th when I pushed OOP on the flop with TPGK vs an overpair held by Seat 2. So it goes.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:22 pm GMT by aaronw
I am not that laggish (unless I am in that type of mood. lol), but his play is unjustifiable in my opinion. However, if the stacks are deep (like 150+ BBs deep) then the pay MIGHT be jusifiable. If he is good post flop and thinks he can outplay you, it wouldn't be a terrible call (if the stacks are deep). Bottom line- with these chip stacks, that is a horrible play by him. I am not THAT experienced of a player. Anyone else agree with what I said here?
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:15 am GMT by mooseontheloose
Hey Aaron, just noticed you're also from Ottawa 
Anyway, he must've been drooling when that flop came down. But anyway, I have seen these calls from LAG type players at times (Gus Hansen does this sort of thing a lot...maybe people just try and mimic him). I was once told by a LAG friend of mine, who happens to be a pretty good player, that he prefers calling raises with suited connectors or suited gap cards rather than face cards unless it's AA. His reason, for calling a preflop raise that he can afford to make, is for the end payoff. Look at that flop, there is NO way the AQ guy is going to figure he's beat and he's not laying it down. The LAG player got exactly what he wanted, a very hidden hand that cleaned his opponent out.
Am I saying I'd do this? No. Am I saying his move was correct? No. But, some people love to make calls like this in the off-chance that they do hit the flop because they'll often get paid off much better than if they go in with AK, AA, etc. and hit the flop. It's reckless and as mentioned, quite stupid, but I hear this argument from time to time and I guess a few people out there actually play that way.
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:45 am GMT by craggoo
I can understand his call from a logical perspective. If one person is playing a pocket pair (which indeed someone was), and another person is just playing 2 high cards (right again), then not only does he have possible straight/flush draws but he has 2 live cards. It doesnt really justify him calling those 2 min raises but its some insight into what he might have been thinking.
On a sidenote, the min raise and min re-raise definintely dont represent very strong hands in my opinion. If the AQ wanted to force out the 3rd "donk" player a much bigger raise, say to 300 or 400 would be in order I think. If he calls this bet theres nothing you can do except congratulate him for being a donk!
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:55 am GMT by Jauron
Not a big fan of 3,5 as one gappers go, I usually start with 4,6. But this is the type of hand I like late in a multi way pot where a bunch of mini raises are taking place. I know I'm crushed preflop, but give me the right flop and I know I'll bust at least one player.
Haven't looked at the results but if you or anyone else on the table holds a real hand you need to make a big bet and take down a bunch of dead money. If you hit something like TPTK, play it very carefully.
Also understand what LAG can mean. It doesn't always mean idiot, it just means a player is willing to get involved with a suspect hand given the right situation, because the payoff can be huge or if they are up against someone who is making "smart folds" they can push them off hands. People are quick to label LAG's donks, but the good ones understand some basic things and are usually good flop players.
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:05 am GMT by Tadzio
| craggoo wrote: |
On a sidenote, the min raise and min re-raise definintely dont represent very strong hands in my opinion. |
Neither of the re-raises were minimum, but I hear ya.
| Quote: | | People are quick to label LAG's donks, but the good ones understand some basic things and are usually good flop players. |
Yeah, that's why I was asking the experienced LAGs on this forum if these are the right conditions for such a play. I play fairly LAG, myself, occassionally, but 53 suited with 3 raises PF seems just a bit too loose. More experienced players might be able to explain why it isn't necessarily.
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:40 am GMT by Loonbat
1 raise, yes. He has the stack and position. To a raise and reraise these rags must end up in the muck.
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:29 am GMT by aaronw
Not sure if anyone has realized this or not, but the stack sizes are very small relative to the blinds. (all are less than 75BB) These stack sizes are not optimal for playing in the manner that this player did.
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 1:01 pm GMT by Tadzio
(I'm just gonna ramble a bit)
Hm... Well, if you run the numbers, 53 suited has odds to call if his two opponents stay in the hand and if neither of them has a pocket pair and if they share one or both their cards (eg. AK+AQ). That's a lot of ifs... and even with all the ifs you're only breaking even (~35% chance to win if you make it to a showdown) unless you can get more money in the pot when you're ahead, and avoiding folding when your pair of 3s happen to be the best hand but you can't know for sure, etc... but it's an example of when the call would be easy to justify.
But how much leeway should you grant yourself based on implied odds? There's about an 28% chance that 53 suited will flop something you can have some confidence with. 4 card flush, inside or open ended straight draw, two-pair, or a better made hand.... Remove the draws from flopped hands you can rely on for consistant profit and you only have about a 7.5% chance of flopping something worth playing past the flop (two pair, trips, made flush, made straight, etc). And that's much worse than the 35% chance to win under ideal conditions. Our pot odds-- implied and real-- would have to be 13x what we pay PF to justify the call.
So, if the LAG player featured in the original post was confident he could stack one of his opponents if his hand hit the flop hard, his first call of 200 could potentially generate the 2600 profit he'd need to justify the call. His second call of 200 required him to generate 5200 in profits when he hit (in order to satisfy the 13x investment reqs.), which was impossible because of stack sizes.
Still there remain a few ways he could justify the second call. 1) He could assume ideal conditions (his opponents share a common card and neither has a pocket pair) and he won't fold the best hand even if it's a pair of threes. 2) He could consider his previous call dead-money, and re-calculate his odds based on the current pot of 1175 and the required profit of 2600 when he hits. The first possible justification requires specific conditions that cannot be verified nor ensured, so thinking this way is probably a huge leak. The second justification is flawed, because his original call of 200 has to factor into his expected return... it's technically dead-money, but as far as calculating expected return (net profit), it must be considered part of his investment.
Of course, we could also consider the money he stands to win by showing down 53 suited. People may consider lowering their standards for hands when playing against him in the future, allowing him to pick up larger than typical pots when he gets big hands in the future. Giving people reasons to give you action is an important part of the game, afterall.
/ramblage
Posted Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:22 pm GMT by TheSalche
this player is not a lag, this is a loose passive player (the ideal opponent)
LAG = loose aggressive, he called bets, hence he is not aggressive
this play should not be done by anybody who can think
seat 6 should have raised more if he was going to play ace queen that aggressively preflop, and in my opinion, you should not have reraised with 10s when stacks are that deep
Posted Tue Aug 15, 2006 5:06 pm GMT by MrDarling
check out this hand just happened in my table :
http://www.pokerhand.org/?457045
same deal.
Posted Tue Aug 15, 2006 6:19 pm GMT by tame_deuces
Looks absolutely horrible to me. Call - raise - re-raise - and then call with 53s with 4 players (blinds included) with open action behind you is just pure blatant crappy spewage.
|
|
