Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrison Richard
Time out everyone. All of you who have analyzed this hand clearly have NO IDEA what you are doing and should probably quit playing poker now.
We need to know the answers to ALL of these questions before coming to any conclusions:
- What is your position?
- What are the positions of the limpers?
- What is the position of the weird mini-reraiser?
- How much is in the limpers' stacks
- How much is in the weird mini reraiser's stack
- How much is in your stack
- What is your image at the table?
- Is it no sweat to your roll if you lose your stack?
Depending on the answers to those questions, Makaveli and the villain may have played this hand perfectly reasonably. Or both may have played it incredibly bad.
It looks like Makaveli played this hand perfectly. He knew his hand was better than the villain's preflop range and he got his money in as a favorite. All-in rereraise was the right move because he only had $230 in his stack to start (quite short for a 2-5 game).
|
OP said he was in middle position, so there should be 2-3 limpers in front of him..UTG, UTG+1 and maybe UTG+2.
The position of the min re-raiser doesn't really matter at this point, position is eliminated once he decides to go all-in. However it does affect his decision on how he plays his hand after the flop, but the way it's written comes off as if villain is in cutoff or on the button.
He's pretty much given all the information he can about his stack which is $230...that's the effective stack unless someone is limping in with less than that, and I highly doubt it.
Image is important...but against a calling station / loose maniac / donkey, these people don't care what your image is.
You can dust off the cobwebs from your chips in order to raise, and they will still call.
Now regarding the short stack, this is why I don't play with less than a full buy-in. With only 46 blinds, I'm not raising over 10% of my stack with 9's, you're already at a commitment threshold and you're looking to get your money into the middle. However, if you're pushing preflop with 9's, in most cases, not all cases, but most, you're only getting called by hands that have you beat, or are at worst flipping with you...which was the case here.
With only 46 blinds, and raising over 10% of your stack, you're effectively cutting down your implied odds to even hit a set here, you're not maximizing your potential win if you hit and stack someone.
However, the guy got himself into trouble by playing the hand the way he did. I'm not one for racing preflop, I don't have to, I know how to play flops, turns and rivers profitably.
As far as big hands like Aces and Kings, with aces, I'm willing to race preflop with everything I own. But Kings, I cap it at 100 blinds.
Now I use the word "race" liberally here. It's not really a race, but when you allow people to see 5 cards, there is a better chance of them winning.
But the further I go down in the pocket pair category, the less willing I am to race pre with them. Queens and Jacks, max about 60 blinds pre. 10's for me don't even really come into the equation. Jacks suck, 10's suck even more.
What most recreational poker players don't even comprehend is the value of hands pre, on the flop, turn, then river.
Aces yeah they are a sweet hand, but you have to load them heavy up front trying to get as much money in the middle pre and on the flop, because like all pairs, if they have not improved on the flop, they begin to lose more and more value on the turn, and river.
I prefer to play deep stack games. When I play live, my choices are Binions or Golden Nugget, where the buy-in is uncapped...where you can play real "no limit."
Some lucky tourist sits down with $200, runs it into $600, and I can sit down and buy-in a $1$2 game and cover him, and there's roughly $5,000-$30,000 on the table.
That way I can punish people who like to play the "all-in" game.