Hero feels sick at the turn card..what to do here? help plz

300 NL - 2-5 blinds
Hero has 1000 behind, Villain has about 700 behind.

Hero has Ah-Qh in CO. Villain is MP1.

Reads: Villain is a black dude and gambles a little bit,Not a fish but not rock solid either.

UTG limps, Villain limps, MP3 limps, Hero raises to 15, button calls, SB calls, BB calls, UTG calls, Villain calls, MP3 calls.

Flop (90$): As-Qc-7c
Villain bets 75, Hero raises to 250, Villain thinks and think

Villain: You got a set ?? or 2 pair ?? what do you have...I have Ac...flashes the Ac. doesnt show other card. finally CALLS.

Turn(590): As-Qc-7c-3c
Villain goes all in for about 450, Hero ???????????????????????????

What should hero do ?

Hero should have raised more PF. Other than that, don't you think villian would have pushed over the flop with an Ace and the nut FD?

Since he showed Ac I call in an instant.

First, as a side note, I agree that hero should've raised more preflop. 3x BB is a defendable play if you are opening the betting, but with 2 limpers ahead of you, you're going to need to raise more to thin the field. (Ace-paint cards are actually fine in mutliway pots if they are suited; still I think raising more is the better play, you're looking for big pairs with AQ, not draws.)

Okay, the main question: does hero call or fold?

If I were to answer based SOLEY on betting patterns, I would tell you to fold. Villain leads out the flop, then calls a monster overbet at the pot. This seems like either a flush draw (among the gambling type, who can resist chasing it?) or a set. The only hand I can imagine that would call such a huge overbet (and not raise) would be a great draw or a great hand.

Right off the bat I would think 77 (not AA or QQ, he limped, and no reraise- woulda been a great place to reraise either of these two preflop) or Ax / Kx of clubs. By the turn, it looks like you're drawing to 4 outs (well 3, if he's got an ace lol) to boat up. Thus, felt it.

However, his comments and *wtf* showing of one of his cards make this hand more interesting. Now, he has no monster... only hand that is beating you on the flop is AA, and if has AA, then he played this incredibly stupid... or incredibly brilliant. Still, I wouldn't give anyone credit for limping aces, merely calling a raise into a huge multipot preflop, and then leading out with the nuts on the flop. If he did do these things, then his showing of the Ac and prolonged, dramatic thinking would be fantastic... he would've flopped the nuts but let on that he has a flush draw... he would still have a good enough hand (nut boat draw, nut flush draw) to push the turn. Methinks he didn't have aces though.

The more likely story is that this guy had A3o or A7 offsuit and showed you his Ac so that he could / would take the pot if a club came. Really, would you let on you were on a flush draw if really a club was your only hope? Think about home games w/ friends: people show their cards (to silent bystanders) all the time, but if they are on a flush draw or a bluff, they guard them nervously.

Honestly, I believe this guy expected to rake in a good ninety bucks on the flop, but then legitimately felt like shit when you blasted him. He convinced himself to play on in the desperate hope of correcting his flop "error" and making everything better. He most SURELY showed you the Ac as a deceptive tactic. He gained outs on the turn, and shit his pants- he was given hope! I'm thinking if he had two-pair (A7, A3) this would sweeten the deal (he has more outs). If he had A3o, then the 3c on the turn would make the guy shit his pants (basically the best card for him).

Call- I think you're ahead. Definitely a tough decision though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pokerlearner

Reads: Villain is a black dude

---

Something about this cracks me up lol.

I Call. I think hes more likely to push the flop with the FD and I doubt hed show the A of clubs if thats all he had.

I'm inclined to think that if this player is any good at all, they don't have a flush here. They would have to think that the only hand that gives them a river card is AK. so they need 5:1 on 250. There isn't enough equity unless you call an AI 100% of the time on the turn after the club comes out.

But, even if we let this go both ways, pokerstove can sort it out for us.

Board: As Qc 7c 3c
Dead:

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 59.091% 59.09% 00.00% 52 0.00 { Ac2c, Ac3d }
Hand 1: 40.909% 40.91% 00.00% 36 0.00 { AhQh }

You're getting like 2.5:1, you only need 1.5:1, so it's a call.

Hero folded. I let 2 "extraneous factors" affect my decision. I know you guys are going to blast me for my move but here is why i did what i did.

1) I was up 450 for the night before the turn card. If i called and i was behind i ONLY had 3 outs (since 1 ace is in villains hand). If i was ahead, i still could get rivered (very unlikely but if a club falls..it didnt affect my decision though). If i folded, i was going to cash out immediately and leave after a 9 hour session ( i was going to leave one round earlier but felt to the trap of a "few more hands !!" . I didnt wanna just break even after a long 9 hour session. I know there is NO MATHS in my logic here and just emotion...but thats what i felt then.

2) Villain looked very relaxed and chatty. There were 2 other homies at the table and he was very chatty with them. I usually think that when a villain makes that bold bluff they are more likely to be quiet and stiff and not all chatty (ie not drawing attention to themselves)...

I folded. Villain mucked.

2 other players thought i made the right fold. My mentor (a floorman in the casino who happened to watch this entire hand) told me he was going to kick me if i called the turn. He said "i would bet my life on it that he had the flush".

Villain after a while told me he had Ac-Kc. But that doesnt make sense the way the hand was played though....maybe he just didnt want to put me on tilt. who the fuck knows!

anyways, this hand might haunt me for a few days...LOL. i am a noob to NL still so maybe i shouldnt beat myself on it that much....decision was 50-50 at best. maybe

[quote="Pelion"]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pokerlearner

Reads: Villain is a black dude

---

Something about this cracks me up lol.

that's one hell of a read you've got on him. How did he give it away?

I believe that he had AKcc..

Lol the villain is a black dude...that really help someone get a read. And there were two other homies at the table that he was chatty with. Wow Im glad you lost try to get out of your farm sometime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by izybx

Lol the villain is a black dude...that really help someone get a read. And there were two other homies at the table that he was chatty with. Wow Im glad you lost try to get out of your farm sometime.

---

So if he said "it's an old guy", "a mexican" or "a white guy" then it's ok but when he says "black guy" it's offensive or something?

why would the fact that someone was mexican, or white affect how you played this hand. It wouldn't. The only way you could think that that fact alone should affect your play is if you hold stereotypical views about people based on ethnicity. If this is not the case, then mexican, white, black, asian does not matter. actual reads do.

I am assuming that this was the point of Izbyx's post. That by including this irrelevant information, OP's hood and burning cross may be showing.

It's unnecessary and indicates that OP has a thing about black people -m perhaps he finds them intimidating? Doesn't make it racist but it's a pointer that something's going on.

And yes, if he'd said "he's a Mexican" that would have been the same kind of thing (old guy I can kinda understand as old people at poker tables have a bit of a rep).

My point is that he is just explaining the situation. You have to be really sensitive to read anything into it.

I am sorry that some of the FTR people took issue at a very innocuous statement. Yes maybe it was a very politically incorrect. I am not a racist but I do bring some preconcieved notions to the table regarding ethnicity/gender etc based on some observations about the players at our B&M. But they are not rigid and if proven wrong am fast to correct.

eg:

When an older woman reraises you be very wary of your own QQ-JJ even (doesnt apply that much to NL but more to the limit ladies at our B&M). Does that make me sexist ?

If a younger guy reraises all in to my QQ I am more likely to call than if an older man reraises me all in. There will be a lot more factors involved of course (as usual stack sizes, that particular player etc etc) but I am just generalizing. Does that mean i dont respect younger guys as much as older guys. not true.

as far as the statement black dude goes, most of the african american players at "our B&M" are not that good. There are some really good ones at 15-30 limit though but not at the no limit tables. I have played with this specific player before and he is more of a gambler based on my prior observation. I am sorry to see that so many people took offense to this statement.

these are just loose preconcieved notions based on general observations. If some of you think i am racist then you already made up your mind. Sorry you feel that way.

If I still have offended someone I apologise

A priori information is important. When it comes to age, I have well stratified and strong a priori information. When it comes to ethnicity, I have almost no a priori information because I have not personally noticed much of a difference (but just because I haven't noticed it doesn't mean it doesn't exist). I don't see a problem with you saying the guy was black. I personally didn't think that fact was relevant, but if you have a priori information on ethnicity based on your experience than it's not racist to include it.

But I think izybx's post was more motivated by the part about your opponent chatting with his "homies".

a few clarification (not to prove or disprove whether i am or am not a racist) but just to try to prove a point.

Forget about playing, I have a huge preconcieved notion about a good table selection when it comes to ethnicity/age.

Great table: 3-4 black dudes, 1-2 older ladies.
Horrible table: 6 young asian, 2 white kids (high variance game)

Please note that that horrible table is only because of my game. It might be a perfect table for someone else's playing style.

as for izybx objection about my statement "him chatting with his "homies"". That part was necessary to get my read that he didnt appear stiff or quiet about the time i was contemplating a call on the turn. He was chatting/joking with 2 other guys sitting next to him. Even my mentor the floorman mentioned to me later (he is a huge winning player at a different casino but doesnt play at the casino he works in and I trust his advice/decision making skills), that he could "bet his life on it that the guy had the flush". and he added, and even if by a remote chance he didnt have the flush, you cant call that bet hoping you are ahead. He said that if it were up to him he would have moved in on the flop after that big ptsb. anyyas, he also mentioned "he was way too chatty and not nervous at all...he seemed to have gotten there on the turn".

FWIW,

I am neither white nor black, neither mexican nor asian (well if by asian you mean oriental).

Let me guess. Half Sri Lankan, half Pakistani?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pokerlearner

my mentor the floorman... said that if it were up to him he would have moved in on the flop after that big ptsb.

---

your mentor suggested pushing into a $165 pot on the flop when opp has roughly 600 behind?? that seems like it allows your opponent to make the correct play way too often.

I have to agree that age and ethnicity does effect the general read you have on someone...at my casino's limit game most 'minorities' do follow some general stereotype in how they play.

As for flashing the Ac, did anyone catch the Jennifer Tilly/Phil Laak episode of The Circuit? Laak goes on at length about what (I think) he called 'the flip' - showing the As to induce a call when he hits.

Wow that's a ridiculous statement to blast that guy for saying "chatting with the homies" and as for people connecting that automatically with black people, well if you're black and doing that you're LOOKING for a reason to call someone a racist. White people can't have homies too? Asians, Mexicans? Jeez....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by izybx

And there were two other homies at the table that he was chatty with. Wow Im glad you lost try to get out of your farm sometime.

---

wow what a stupid thing to say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nutsinho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by izybx

And there were two other homies at the table that he was chatty with. Wow Im glad you lost try to get out of your farm sometime.

---

wow what a stupid thing to say

---

I think he was really offended by the comment. My initial thought when I read this post is how ridiculous it was to include his race. But he said he meant nothing by it so I think it should be passed by.

Its a call. Simple as that.

The guy flashes his Ac so you know for sure one of his cards. Usually when someone askes your hand and puts you on one (in this case "You got a set? 2 pair?") then these are the hands he is worried will beat him. If 2 pair is beating him on the flop I would suggest he is holding Ace-Rag. I doubt he has AK or AJ as he limped preflop.

He knows that you know he has an Ac and when the third club falls he pushes all in to represent the flush. Everything at the poker table is a lie. If he had made the nut flush then why move all in? Surely if he was going to milk his hand for full value he would have bet half his stack or possibly smaller to infer weakness.

There was no raise pre flop so I reckon he is holding A3. The turn made him two pair with four to a flush and so he pushes in the hope you will fold to his representation of the flush.

The only question you have to ask is: is he going to hit his flush?

He does not have the flush. You are in front at the turn. Surely this makes the decision easier?

i'm going with the black read and calling. This is either an obvious call or a brilliant move by villain, and based on the read I'm calling.


Now come on! Can you people (you know who you are) quit burying your politically correct head in the fucking sand with your pink asses exposed and show some common sense!?!? Of course race is relevant. It always was and always will be. Everybody does and ought to make preliminary judgments about people based on their race/religion/gender/age/weight/anything else evailable... you're only racist/sexist/whatever if your preconceived views are so strong they can't be rebutted by a reasonable quantity of evidence to the contrary. If I see a young asian I'm assuming nit until there's evidence to the contrary... call me racist if you will


That said, you've been playing for 9 hours. Don't you have a better read on this guy than he's black? I'm all for using blackness as a read for the first 3 orbits but you should have a more specific read by now!


You acknowledge this already, but if you're going to play with emotional baggage after a long session, don't play such long sessions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by salsa4ever

That said, you've been playing for 9 hours. Don't you have a better read on this guy than he's black? I'm all for using blackness as a read for the first 3 orbits but you should have a more specific read by now!

---

From OP: "gambles a little bit,Not a fish but not rock solid either. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by salsa4ever

If I see a young asian I'm assuming nit until there's evidence to the contrary...

---

Really? Almost all of the young asians at my casino are Laggs or maniacs...perhaps a race + region kind of thing.