Big draw... total donk move

So I've heard with this draw, I want to get my stack in on the flop, as even against AA, I'm a 60-40 favorite. I know I totally played this like a donk, but what's the correct line with this draw? What range would I have to put villain on to make this play?

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em, $ Hero (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

MP2 ($80.50)
MP3 =#A500AF(Shortstack Villain)/ ($17.33)
CO =#A500AF(Villain 2)/ ($97)
Button ($100.05)
SB ($72.68)
Hero ($100)
UTG ($30)
UTG+1 ($62.74)
MP1 ($118.10)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 8, 6. SB posts a blind of $0.50.
2 folds, MP2 calls $1, MP3 =#A500AF(Shortstack Villain)/ calls $1, CO =#A500AF(Villain 2)/ calls $1, 1 fold, SB (poster) completes, Hero checks.

Flop: ($5) 5, T, 7 (6 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $2, MP2 folds, Shortstack Villain raises to $5.37, Villain 2 raises to $15, SB folds, Hero raises to $97 (All-In), Shortstack Villain calls $10.96 (All-In), Villain 2 calls $81 (All-In).

Turn: ($216.33) K (4 players, 3 all-in)

River: ($216.33) 9 (4 players, 3 all-in)

Final Pot: $216.33

Results in white below:
Hero has 8c 6c (flush, king high).
Shortstack Villain has Td 5d (two pair, tens and fives).
Villain 2 has Tc Jc (flush, king high).
Outcome: Villain 2 wins $213.33. Hero wins $3.

I dunno if it's the right way to go but I like getting all in with these draws too. Just unfortunate the villian had a higher flush.

I'm not too enthousiastic about these draws anymore to be honest. Your chance to hit is 56%, little more than a cointoss. I prefer the draw Villain 2 had.. a pair and a flush draw with high cards. You can take stacks from lower flushes, plus you have a pair already, so extra outs for 2 pair/set. I like to just raise on this draw you had.. if you hit your straight, it's pretty safe to say you have the best hand.. if you hit your flush, and your opp pushes over the top, I contemplate a fold these days.. I mean, who without a flush is gonna push on a flush hit? So if he has it, it's likely better than mine if I have the low one.

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

Originally Posted by natdang

I know I totally played this like gabe

FYP

haha, i was just about to respond 'i play it the same'

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

haha, i was just about to respond 'i play it the same'

Heh, again the veteran advice dumbfounds me.. ok for sets and such, but why with a hand that leaves you only as a 56% favorite at best, and possibly worse (as here with overflush guy drawing too)?

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

haha, i was just about to respond 'i play it the same'

Heh, again the veteran advice dumbfounds me.. ok for sets and such, but why with a hand that leaves you only as a 56% favorite at best, and possibly worse (as here with overflush guy drawing too)?

the 'play it the same was as...' advice really only works against thinking players. the idea is that you have lots of folding equity when you have a draw because the other person has to be equally afraid of a set or two pair.

against bad players (calling stations, not maniacs) i dont play draws so strong because they are more likely to pay me off when i hit and less likely to fold to such a large raise.

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

haha, i was just about to respond 'i play it the same'

Heh, again the veteran advice dumbfounds me.. ok for sets and such, but why with a hand that leaves you only as a 56% favorite at best, and possibly worse (as here with overflush guy drawing too)?

I figure the amount of times someone will fold against you when you play it this hard will make up for the barely better odds given. Most time's you're up against a hand that will fold and not want to play for stacks. The other times when it does come to stacks you will win more often.

Maybe the big gunners have better reasoning though...

It depends, but if there was a raise preflop or lots of post flop action, then I ALWAYS push this w/ a 56% chance to win. First of all, 56% is great, and you are making money. Second, your not counting the times that the other guy folds here and you take down a sizable pot. You ask why vets give this advice, thats the reason. The alternative is to call the guy down and then fold when you hit air.

Now, if there is little action and a lot of limpers, calling down makes a little more sense. However, if you have a good chance to take down a pot right there and you believe you are ahead, always push!

With respect to this particular hand, you ran into a higher flush. It happens. Next hand.

i play it the same except i check/raise the flop

Even given your flush draws being dead you still had +EV in this pot. You had 6 live outs for the str8 and 2 live outs for the pure nuts. You would almost make the call even if all the cards we're face up.

leading is better than check raising

Originally Posted by gabe

leading is better than check raising

plz explain.

I'd check raise because it makes it look like i have a made hand, hence giving me more fold equity from my push, plus adding to the dead money without so much committing villains to the pot.

Originally Posted by dpe8598

It depends, but if there was a raise preflop or lots of post flop action, then I ALWAYS push this w/ a 56% chance to win. First of all, 56% is great, and you are making money. Second, your not counting the times that the other guy folds here and you take down a sizable pot. You ask why vets give this advice, thats the reason. The alternative is to call the guy down and then fold when you hit air.

The thing is, at 10NL and 20NL, I actually figured this strategy out myself when I noticed the >50% to win, and ofcourse tried it.. but quickly had to stop. Since they often tend to call, I am suddenly hitting a lot of variance (ie downswings) that are inherent to little over cointoss odds like 56%.. so basically I got to a point where I asked myself "why on earth am I pushing this?.. Half the time I'm losing my whole stack, and if I play more cautiously, this is rare and I get about the same profit."

Btw 56% isn't so great imho.. it's barely break-even considering the rake.


But yeah, gabe saying it's only against the thinking players settles this for me.

First off Jack, this post refers to a 100 dollar game. Above you made general statements about strategy, if you are making them specific to lower limits, be specific. I wasn't more specific because I was replying to this post.

I can understand that strategy at the super low limits is much different. Just be specific about your response. I guarantee that at the 100 dollar limit he is making money by raising big here because he is taking down a high percentage of pots right there.

56% is great. If you can get your money in as a 56% favorite a million times, you'll be a rich man.

Originally Posted by Renton

I'd check raise because it makes it look like i have a made hand, hence giving me more fold equity from my push, plus adding to the dead money without so much committing villains to the pot.

i dont think check raising in an unraised pot looks liked a good made hand.

also, do you bet out of the blinds with anything? staying consistent with draws/pairs/sets/air is usually a good idea.

if I make anything from the blinds in a limped pot I generally opt to check raise. This probably isn't good, but if its consistency that matters then I have that. I play limped sets, top pairs, and draws generally the same.

I don't have anything useful to add here as there is already some good advice above my post, however when I saw your Avatar I had to post mine.

How Bout Them Gators!!!!

ok

check raises arent as good because you are out of position and your hand is mediocre. the spots you get left in on the turn usually suck, unless you have a set. is my top pair middish kicker good? my draw missed, but should i still bet? these questions aren't so important when the pot is smaller (by betting out), but when the pot is 20bb and you have a draw that missed, decisions can be tough.

maybe this is a personal preference type thing, though.

C/R is OK, but my personal preference is to bet out, especially if I'm trying to take down the pot right there. I want the guy to feel smart for folding. I bet out and he says, "this guy has something, maybe not something great, but it is smart for me to fold". When you C/R you can certainly take it down, but I just feel like he is saying, "I've already committed this much and I'm pretty sure I have some outs. It only cost me 1/3 the pot (or so) to see another card, I'm gonna do it!"

Just my line of thinking.

Originally Posted by gabe

ok

check raises arent as good because you are out of position and your hand is mediocre. the spots you get left in on the turn usually suck, unless you have a set. is my top pair middish kicker good? my draw missed, but should i still bet? these questions aren't so important when the pot is smaller (by betting out), but when the pot is 20bb and you have a draw that missed, decisions can be tough.

maybe this is a personal preference type thing, though.

I think this good intuition.

It reminds me of something of my own game - which is of a totally different calibre ofcourse, but a same sentiment - in which I thought it was a good idea to "maintain strength" after I check/raise on the flop (or simply bet over the pot), no matter if it was air/TPLK/draw/pp with overcard or an actually decent made hand like 2 pair/set/straight.. and then suddenly you've reached the river, half your stack is in the middle, your opponent raises your river bet all-in.. then you look at the 3469T board, then at your JT top pair and wonder.. "how the hell did I get here?"

I agree about the "maintaining strength" being a problem... I often find myself with TPGK, at the river, like wtf? What am I doing?

About the flop play though, I think that maybe if I had raised strong, but not all in, perhaps I might have had MORE fold equity? I feel that sometimes, the chance to play for stacks appeals to the gambler in villain, whereas a strong raise lets him know I mean business. For all I know, he thought I was stealing the pot? I can't see him believing he had the nuts or even the best draw here.

Originally Posted by Renton

if I make anything from the blinds in a limped pot I generally opt to check raise. This probably isn't good, but if its consistency that matters then I have that. I play limped sets, top pairs, and draws generally the same.

see bold-faced font

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

OP- I would definately lead stronger on the flop, maybe for $4 or so, but other then that, this is fine. If villain2's range is so small given his 3-bet on the flop though (like he has a set here every time), then you should fold.

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

dood.

How about some positive commentary? How about some constructive criticism?

How about saying something other than "thats just a bad play" or "that just sucks," and instead actually analyzing the problem and coming up with a solution as to what makes it bad?

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

dood.

How about some positive commentary? How about some constructive criticism?

How about saying something other than "thats just a bad play" or "that just sucks," and instead actually analyzing the problem and coming up with a solution as to what makes it bad?

I did give my advice on the hand.

A straight isn't possible on this board because there are no straight possibilities. There are only straight draw possibilities.

Getting it allin in a limped pot with 2 pair in such a small pot and so much money behind in relation to the pot just seems (and is) really bad. I thought that was pretty self-explanitory. If the guy was a huge donk and would stack off with less (unlikely), I'd definately reconsider and withdrawl what I said.

Seems like basic stuff, no?

Also, Renton, bdawg is my friend so um.......

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

dood.

How about some positive commentary? How about some constructive criticism?

How about saying something other than "thats just a bad play" or "that just sucks," and instead actually analyzing the problem and coming up with a solution as to what makes it bad?

I did give my advice on the hand.

A straight isn't possible on this board because there are no straight possibilities. There are only straight draw possibilities.

Getting it allin in a limped pot with 2 pair in such a small pot and so much money behind in relation to the pot just seems (and is) really bad. I thought that was pretty self-explanitory. If the guy was a huge donk and would stack off with less (unlikely), I'd definately reconsider and withdrawl what I said.

Seems like basic stuff, no?

Sorry, I just have a huge pet peeve with posts that basically say "x play is really bad." Or "omg what were you thinking?", when they could be oodles more helpful in saying "x play is really bad, let me explain xxxx" or "omg what were you thinking? didn't you see that xxxxx etc.?".

Sorry, I just have a huge pet peeve with posts that basically say "x play is really bad." Or "omg what were you thinking?", when they could be oodles more helpful in saying "x play is really bad, let me explain xxxx" or "omg what were you thinking? didn't you see that xxxxx etc.?".

I find that I'm often very detailed in tricky spots or in situations where I think a certain play isn't obvious and requires a lot of analysis. I'll just leave it at that. And I really don't get what your beef is, your post came after I gave specific thoughts on this hand...

Originally Posted by Lukie

Sorry, I just have a huge pet peeve with posts that basically say "x play is really bad." Or "omg what were you thinking?", when they could be oodles more helpful in saying "x play is really bad, let me explain xxxx" or "omg what were you thinking? didn't you see that xxxxx etc.?".

I find that I'm often very detailed in tricky spots or in situations where I think a certain play isn't obvious and requires a lot of analysis. I'll just leave it at that. And I really don't get what your beef is, your post came after I gave specific thoughts on this hand...

I was referring also to the post about the check raise being bad (see bold). There's no beef here. I am not one of those people who likes to stir up drama about/with people I have never seen the face of

all i did was quote your own post

Originally Posted by Lukie

all i did was quote your own post

we're cool

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

Lukie, you fish. I was talking about in general.

Originally Posted by Renton

Originally Posted by Lukie

all i did was quote your own post

we're cool

ditto

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Standard. Just make sure you are capable of playing sets/2-pair/straights, etc. this way.

dood, a straight isn't possible and getting it allin with 2p here just sucks...

Lukie, you fish. I was talking about in general.

no u werent