Texas Holdem Poker Players. Question...
 

2-5 no limit game I was at tonight.

I raise to $30 in middle position with 99, nothing but limpers when it comes to me. There is one idiot at the table who hasn't come in for less the $30 preflop with cock soup. Never showed a decent hand besides pocket kings once. So it comes to him, he goes $60. I know he has fuck all and when it comes to me a move all in for $200 thinking he can't call with his crap I know he's holding. Well to make a long story short I was wrong, this fucking idiot calls me and turns over Q-10 of hearts and spikes a 10. Now let me ask you, would you pay $200 to play Q-10 aka the gay waiter?

Fucking I'm spinning right now. :mad: I called him a fucking goof and left the table.

I'm really starting to think that poker is over run with fucking clowns and I should try to find a cheaper hobby, I keep getting grabbed by these donks. I make good plays and most time have the best hand but alot of times end up going WTF just happened here?

You can't beat lucky. :2 cents:

He got lucky.. maybe he has the money to burn.

Hell no wouldnt have called I hate those damn queens.:)

Hugs,
Jen

people get lucky too fucking much online. He made a donkey call, but donkeys get paid online almost without fail. When I'm all in against a lower pair pre-flop I'm holding my fucking breath, because I swear about half the time they spike a set on the river.

With all-inn you never know where you will end up...

I decided to stop playing poker for a few months. You just can't win. Too much luck involved in this game

I'm so glad I never got into gambling.

The terminology alone makes you sound gay. I'm thoroughly convinced the gays came up with Texas Hold'em lingo.

Gay waiter is Q3 :error

All-in with 99 is crazy as well :)

coinflip - but 99 is the winner in the long run...

i would never go all in though not even against the worst fish. just wait for a better hand.

what this comes down to is ..bankroll..or what your willing to lose.

if your bankroll is let say $500 bucks..then maybe you wouldnt call with q10...
then again if your bankroll is $50,000 then you probably will.

what im saying is people really make calls like that based on what there willing to lose.

so..depending on what my bankroll was would determine if i was going to call or not.

in fact, bankroll shouldn't come into question when you are playing a cash game (which I think it was). it shouldn't influence the way you play at the table.

however, your bankroll dictates which stakes you should play on. the general rule is you shouldn't bring over then 10% of your bankroll at the time.

True is that idiots like this 1 must be played with pantience.You have to beat them when you got some nice hand - I can hardly tell that wayne gretzky is that THE right hand.
So I am sorry to tell but I think you can blame just yourself - even I know how hard is to stand the clowns like this

In theory, going all in with 9-9 against a strong caller isn't the best postition to be in. Specifically, there are way too many hands out there that can beat you, even if they aren't current paired up. There are 20 overcards in the deck, and if he is holding any 1 of them, he has 3 direct outs already. If he is holding 2 of them, he has 6 direct outs to start. Then look at things like straights, flushes, and a whole bunch of other stuff. Essentially, preflop he had probably a better hand than you (very close) and even post flop he still had about a 30% chance that one of his cards would come up, and he only needed one or the other (not both) to do it.

(6 out of 45 = 13% chance that any card that comes up is the one he wants, rounded up to 15 to allow for things like straights and flushes, etc. 15% over two cards = 30%).

That you got into that position preflop means that he had a pretty good chance for hitting one of those two cards ( 5 x 15% or 75%) and even a little extra chance with 5 cards to fill in a straight or a flush.

(Also, for your info, you have a 2 in 48 chance of seeing another 9, or about 4% x 5 cards gives you only about a 20% chance to improve your hand from where you start)

If I read it correctly, you likely should have called him at 60 and seen the flop - any over cards would have seriously limited your desire to stay in the pot at that point.

Why would you go all in with pocket nines? Just because you thought he would not call? Bad move. You beat yourself.

Mitch

This is more or less along the lines of what how I see it too... I mean you've just got a pair of 9s, it doesn't really matter what he had, just what he thought you had, and it looks like he made the right call. Overcards vs. low pair is a classic coin toss, and in this situation it doesn't really matter if he had QT or AK, same odds to you.

It really gets on my nerves when so-called poker experts get all mad saying they "should have" won and they "played right"... If statements like that were true all the time, what the hell would be the point of playing poker to start with?

Online poker is full of bad-beats, I can tell you some stories...

Did you go all-in $200 pre-flop and he called you with Q-10? And was his Q-10 suited?

You played it ok but there are alot of people who would call, maybe not with Q-10 but there are 5 over cards that can beat you, and he had 2 of them and landed one, not including a possible straight or flush draw if he was suited.

I maybe wouldn't have gone all-in when he raised to $60, I would have called to see the flop :2 cents:

200$ is nothing

Well said.

Mitch

I agree :upsidedow

LOL no he did not make the right call you are playing results oriented...this guy wasn't thinking about what the OP had...he's a gambler..that's it.
Against a MP raisers range *which is going to be a bit wider than an early position raisers range* he's playing a hand that is more than likely seriously dominated.

What does dominated mean. He's playing Q10 vs a range of hands. Now when most people raise, their range depending upon position will usually involve two big cards or a pair. So that range would include AK-A10, KQs, A's-10's. In that range is Q's, 10's, AQ, A10, KQs and maybe KQ. These hands all dominate Q10.

I would rather 3-bet someone here with a medium suited connector like 98, 87, because your cards are most likely live.

Now against a raise, and then a 4 bet all-in that range gets tightened up. *Now I think pushing with 9's is teh suck and will explain that later* But against that 4 bet push, the range gets tightened up to usually big pairs 10's+ and AKs against that range Q10s *I gave villain the credit for doing this with a suited hand* only has 26% equity in this pot...that is fucking horrible to make that call.

Now onto pushing with 9's. This isn't a tournament, where you're having to get your money all-in in coinflip situations, this is a cash game, where you have all the time in the world...literally.

You raised, he 3-bet you, at most call then try to spike your set. With someone like this, I would probably check raise on an 8 high board, but once any broadway card hits which will be over 72% of the time, you can safely muck your 9's.

That's my poker lesson for the day.

LOL @ people who look for "classic coin toss" situations in cash games.

Get Mike and Vince out of your head, and replace it with some logic.

its a stage of game thing too, what was his stack, your stack?

Early in game, med, third phase or shoot out?

Me, would play his hand early and on shoot out, but not med -3rd phase

Why would you call a 9-9 vs a strong raiser? *le sigh*

Why would you play a 9-9 vs a strong raiser? *le sigh*

here is best chart i found:


http://www.texasholdem.com/images/pr...ghandchart.jpg

I think you need a statistics review ;)

You don't add the %'s together :2 cents:

bullshit. In poker your goal is to get your chips in with the best hand PERIOD. If that means chucking them in there with 99 against someone you know is a donkey who raises with anything, then that's what you do. You can try sitting there developing a leather ass waiting for AA or KK, but that's not winning poker because those hands will get busted too. Online, they'll get busted non-stop. 99 is a favorite over Q-10, PERIOD. It's called trapping.

Q-10 isn't a gay waiter, Q-3 is a gay waiter.

If you knew the guy was a donkey that would call with crap you could have waited for a better spot.

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).

I agree with you. What I was trying to get at (although I don't really know how to word it well) is that I can see why the raiser would raise and what he was thinking, and also why "I should have won" is a silly thing to say after the fact.

99 is a very very small favorite over Q-10 suited. If you know someone is a horrible player then you push big edges against them, you don't gamble with small ones.

The original poster lost his cool and pushed with 99 not because he thought it was a monster hand, but because he was sick of seeing the donkey raise with crap and make people fold...so he thought he'd push him off the hand.

Alot of people seem to forget you can only make good players fold.

quoted for troof

One time I saw a quarterback throw a pass into triple coverage that his receiver caught for a touchdown.
After the play the other team's quarterback walked to the sideline and called him a fucking donkey and then stormed off the field.

I mean WTF was he thinking throwing the pass into triple coverage? He was at least a 4 to 1 underdog to make the touchdown. Fucking idiots.

:helpme

He had fold equity and about an 80% chance of having the best hand even in the event of a donkey call. He did the right thing. You build your stack by punishing bad players, not by waiting until you have a straight flush to make a bet.

I'm not saying 99 is infallible, I'm saying that online the better hand gets busted a fuck of a lot more than it does at the Bellagio.

FALSE, as long as your roll won't hurt if you lose.

ANY TIME you pass up an edge you are losing money and making a poor long-term decision.

That said, your statement is closer to true in many cases in a tournament situation, where your stack is effectively your roll.

Agreed.... but weird quote below:

This is a perception thing. The online better hand get busted just as much as the B&M hand.

You see way more hands online in an hour than you see at the Bellagio, so you notice the underdog wins more often because of the idiots who can't lose a hand without keyboard commando bitching :D.

No it's not. Absolute Poker got busted cheating, and I'm pretty damn convinced it's a widespread and wholesale phenomenon throughout online poker sites, especially since the 'ban' on poker. Now the oversight is much, MUCH less strenuous.

Why do I still play? I'm too fucking lazy to get dressed and go to the casino lol... I also don't think the tournaments have nearly as many house players and cheats.