Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Could I Have Gotten Away From this Hand?

Last nite, at BSC, I had a hand that I can't stop thinking about.  I dunno if I played it badly or not.  Did I blow it or did I just get unlucky?  In one sense, I actually got a bit lucky that it didn't cost me more.  This is the not the first session I've had this trip that's worth blogging about, but it is really fresh in my mind and is really sticking with me, so I'll cover it first.

After my $200 buy-in had slowly dwindled to just under $100 left, I started coming back, winning a  few smallish to mid-size pots that put be back in the black.  I guess I had about $240-$250 in front of me, and was getting near the end of the session, hoping to get some more but more or less satisfied with leaving a bit ahead after being down earlier.

Sitting in Seat 9 (it is 9 handed), I was the small blind and had pocket Aces.  Four people limped in before me, so I made it $16.  At the risk of giving away my play, lately when I raise preflop, I use a standard raise of $8 (regardless of my hand) unless the table is radically different than "normal."  Then I add $2 for each limper before me.  So that's how I got to $16.
The table had been pretty tight, and a lot of preflop raises went uncalled.  One woman was complaining about not getting her raises called and actually started raising to only $4 or $5 to get action.

In other words, I thought there was a really good chance I'd take the pot down right there.  When I raised, I was more concerned with that than with getting a ton of callers.  However, the Big Blind called, the player under-the-gun called, and one person in late position called.  Gulp.  I didn't really want to play my Aces against three players.  I was surprised and not happy. 

According to the odds calculator at--where else?--Ante Up Magazine, you're only a 64% favorite to beat three players preflop with a couple of Aces.  Heads up you're a 85% favorite.

So the pot was over $60 and the flop came Queen high, two spades (the Queen was the non-spade).  I doubled checked and indeed one of my Aces was the spade.  I led out with a bet of $40, about 2/3's the pot.  Big blind folded but UTG put out a min raise to $80.   Hmm.

He was the newest player at the table, unfortunately, and the only one I didn't have a read on.  He had bought in for $300 and I hadn't noticed him in many hands at this point.  But he apparently had won a nice pot when I was away from the table using the restroom, as he now had at least $400 in front of him, so he had me well covered.  It was unfortunate that I hadn't seen that hand where he'd gotten those extra chips.  Just from the way he had handled himself when he got to the table, I had a feeling he wasn't a particularly experienced player, but that was more a gut feeling than anything else.

It folded back to me and I called.  I guess of all my decisions, this is the one I'm thinking about the most.  Should I have folded there?  Was he just luring me in with the min raise?  Should I have put him on the flush draw and shoved to make him fold or make him get his money in bad?  Should I have made a pot sized bet in the first place instead of the 2/3's bet?  I thought the most likely hand he had was a Queen...top pair.  Of course I could be behind to a set or a lucky two pair (the two spades were 10/6, so it would have been a bad call of my raise to have two pair--but a set of 6's or 10's was certainly a possibility).

With the pot close to $200 I decided to call.  At the time, the only other option I strongly considered was coming over the top, most likely a shove.  but I just called.

The next card was the 8 of clubs.  I wasn't worried about a crazy straight, but the flush was still out there and now I had no chance for my Ace of spades to make a four card flush.  I checked.

New guy bet out $50.  Fifty?  Into a pot that big?  When we'd both put $80 into the pot the previous street?  Now I was totally confused.  Was this guy a really, really good player setting a trap?  Or was he just a bad player?  For the size of the pot, it was an easy call, and I wasn't confident enough about my hand to shove.

The river was the 9 of spades.  Again, the straight didn't really concern me but of course I was concerned about the flush.  I checked.  BB tanked for awhile.  Then he asked to see my stack, to see how much I had behind.  Gulp.  Clearly he was going to put me all in.  For the size of the pot, I'd be getting nearly 4 to 1, so I was probably pot committed there.  I think I would have called if he had bet.  I couldn't dismiss the possibility he was overplaying top pair.  Not for 4 to 1. 

But after thinking about it for a few more moments, he checked  I was relieved, and assumed briefly if he had checked, my Aces were good.

Nope.  After I showed my rockets he flipped over Queen/Jack of spades for the flush.  He had flopped top pair with the flush draw, a very good hand.  He took down a nice pot that cost me $146.  I was in shock.  No, not from the flush, I certainly feared that.  I was shocked he hadn't made a value bet on the river.  I even said to the dealer, "Why didn't he bet there?"  I wasn't complaining, believe me.  Just surprised.  With no pair on the board, I guess he was concerned I had a bigger flush.  Yeah, I could have raised preflop with AK of spades.  Or a smaller suited Ace and raised pre trying to steal all the limpers' money.

I was both upset and relieved at the same time  As grateful as I was I didn't get stacked, I just kept replaying the hand over and over in my mind, wondering if and where I went wrong.  

Anyway, when I cashed out, I ran into the dealer.  He finally answered my question.  He didn't think the guy was a very experienced player, that's why he didn't bet the river.  I guess so, the way he played the hand. I wished I'd seen his play more before the hand.  So, I assume because I still had over $100, he didn't want to risk another $100 on the hand where he didn't have the nuts and he was going to win a nice pot even without the risky value bet.

But the fact that he was an inexperienced player only makes me more upset that I didn't figure out a way to outplay him and take his money.
I would love to get feedback from my readers.


  1. huh? you can't outplay players holding better cards that won't fold, no matter how bad they are.

    1. Thanks for the comment matt.

      I actually think I could have gotten him to fold on the flop with a shove, based on how he chickened out on the river. But of course I'll never know.

  2. Why did you have to recheck your cards to find out if you had a spade? Why didn't you know that before the flop came down? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    With the retrospectoscope, you were a slight favorite on the flop, about 55/45, so from that perspective you should have been willing to get it all in. But of course you don't get to know that at the time.

    In my experience, very few $1/2 players will raise a flop with just a flush draw. They may bet, but not raise. That's especially true if it's a non-nut flush draw, and here you could be certain that he didn't have that. It's equally rare for a $1/2 player to raise a c-bet with total air, or with a pair that isn't top pair.

    So that leaves us with four possibilities:

    A) Top pair.

    B) Two pair.

    C) Set.

    D) A combo something or other--pair and flush draw, pair and straight draw, or combination flush and straight draw. Pair plus straight draw isn't possible here, so we can rule that out.

    The main reason a player with B or C would raise instead of slow-playing would be to protect against the flush and straight draws. If that's his objective, I'd expect more than a min-raise.

    With D, he should be happy to get all the chips in, so again I'd expect a larger raise.

    So I would lean toward him having just top pair, but without ruling out the other possibilities completely.

    Suppose we decide, however, that he'a about equally likely to have A or D. Then what should you do?

    You're a small favorite against a pair plus flush draw. You're roughly even money or maybe a slight dog to his best possible draw, which is something like 9s-Js. You're a big favorite against A. All of which means that you're a strong favorite against that entire range.

    In similar situations, when I have pushed all-in, I have certainly sometimes gotten a snap call from a set. But more often I have seen a fold. The min-raise was a probe, to see if you really had the overpair you were representing, versus A-K that missed.

    So all things considered, I think I would have shoved. In this case, he presumably would have called and you'd have lost more. But you would have gotten it in good and been unlucky. More importantly, if you're in that same situation 100 times, I think that a shove wins you the pot right there quite a bit more often than you get called drawing thin.

    But it's not an easy decision. Playing an ABC, low-variance style, only playing big pots when you have big hands (and one pair is not a big hand, period), is perfectly fine, and that would dictate a fold here.

    As you alluded to, a call on the flop is the worst option. It can't win you the pot. It can't give you more information. It doesn't resolve your positional disadvantage. It will nearly always leave you with an even more difficult decision on the next street. Only the last two aces on the turn give you a pretty easy decision. I try to play so as to avoid giving myself harder decisions later in the hand.

    1. Wow, what a great, long, thoughtful analysis, Grump. I'm honored. I very much appreciate the thought you put into this, and I have great respect for your insight, since you are so good at what you do. But I dare say, your comment is almost as long as some of my posts! :)

      Regarding the checking to see whether or not I had the Ace of spades. I admit I have to do that from time to time and in fact, on that hand I would have double checked just to be sure even if I was 100% sure I had it. I guess it's a leak, but you know, I've seen a lot better players than me do that from time to time. I've seen good players do that as a play too, to mislead the opponent. And remember that Phil Ivey hand, where he mucked the flush? If only he had peaked one time, it would have been a whole different story!

      I guess one of my thoughts is always that I really don't want to get stacked with only top pair (even with top kicker) or an overpair. Now if I had been 3-betted preflop, I would have had no problem shoving pre, but on the flop I'm not sure I want to risk my stack with just that hand.

      That said, I'm not sure I agree with you that he would have called my shove. In light of his action on the turn (a small bet for the size of the pot) and the river, where he presumably decided he didn't want to risk another $100 in case I had a bigger flush, I think he very likely would have folded to my shove. So I guess one of the things I need to work on for my game is to do a better job of putting percentages on the hands I think they could have. I mean, I thought about all the possibilities, but I wasn't able to come up with just how likely some of those hands were. Your ABCD analysis is just awesome, I need to learn how to make those kind of calculations during the play. As you say, even if I had lost more by shoving the flop, that exact play is what I want to make every time in that situation for the long term pay off.

      Considering the way I played the hand, I should consider myself lucky I didn't lose my stack anyway, which I likely would have if he had put me all in on the river.

      Thanks again. You know, with this kind of insight, you should consider doing your own blog!

  3. i feel like the play i spoke about the other day in my blog with the set of J was as bad as this guys not betting YOU on the river.

    it was nice of grump to make an analysis so long, shows the amount of thought that went into it.

  4. Tony, note the amount of detail that Rob gave--about the cards, the bets, the stacks, the opponent, the positions, and his thoughts. If you put that much work and thought into hand descriptions, you'd get more thoughtful comments than you do.

  5. Grump, there's only so much detail with which to describe a Video Black Jack hand...

    Rob, I agree with Matt Tag above. If this player was as bad as you think, it's likely that a flop shove is not going to get him off top pair/flush draw. Of course, as Grump alluded to, that may be a results-oriented analysis . . . In conclusion, I have no idea... Hope that helps.


    1. Yes, "I have no idea" helps a lot Pete. Puts you in the same place as me! :)

  6. Grump has an extended version of what I was about to sum up.

    Playing the hand with perfect information, shoving the turn is optimal to cutting down variance, but he picks up an inside straight draw to go with his pair + flush draw... He's drawing to a monster with approx. 34% equity on the turn.

    When it comes down to it, though, I [like Grump] prefer to shove and put him to a decision on the flop. I think you're getting a lot of KQ, AQ callers - in fact, far more than the QXss combo monsters + flopped sets. You also charge heavily for the draws and put the other player to a decision rather than losing control of the hand.

    On other comment: "... my $200 buy-in had slowly dwindled to just under $100 left..." What is going on here? As a semi-pro / pro (not quite sure on your background), you *NEED* to top off when you get that low. At no time during your session should you be sitting on a stack of less than ~80BBs (the argument could be made for waiting for the blinds to pass before topping off, but that's your choice). You've established yourself as a good player - and you should be maximizing on your skill edge. Don't eliminate your edge by playing one- or two- street poker (i.e. raise PF and shove flop or 3bet / shove PF). Take advantage of your skill edge and exploit others' weaknesses. Most players have a good idea how to play PF, but they certainly are weaker than you on the flop and beyond.

    1. Wow, PM, I appreciate your comments on my level of skill. I do not consider myself either a pro or even a semi-pro. I'm a recreational player who does a blog. Perhaps you haven't been reading the blog long enough to know that until 2012, I was almost strictly a 2/4 limit player.

      That said, even if I was a great player, I'm not sure if 80 bb's is where I'd draw the line. Really? I've seen grinders who are really good let it go well below that. I'm usually ok with a bit less than 50 BB's ($100 in a 1/2 game) and then if I get much below that, I add on. But it depends on how I'm feeling and how much longer I am likely to play. Sometimes I let it go shorter and just play a short stack strategy. I am still experimenting with all this. But I do appreciate your comments.

  7. FWIW, the shove holds a bit of fold equity. You want him folding his hand, even though you're slight favorite. He's getting very good odds to call, as a 45% dog, given the juice already in the pot.

    As an aside, I'm likely never folding this hand if I'm the villain. I'm trying to get it in right then & there. He should have bet more on the turn and auto shoved river.

    1. I kind of agree about him. I think although I know I got lucky on the river (him not betting, not the card), I felt his play indicated that I should have been able to outplay him, that's kind of what frustrating. If I was up against a player like Grump there, I never would have had a chance But him? As I said, you might not have folded the hand, but I think he would have if I had been aggressive.

      But that's hindsight, and also speculation.

    2. A guy who doesn't value bet or shove on the river with a Queen-high flush on an unpaired board is not going to be calling off his whole stack with a draw.

      Are you sure there wasn't a breast or a vagina somewhere in your story?

    3. Thanks, Lightning.

      I can assure you no female body parts were harmed in the telling of ths story.

  8. What a great poker post. Love grumps response too. Now someday you'll have to explain it all to me!!!!! no slanty slits or boobage... What a professional.

    1. Thanks, LM. So I guess you like poker posts better than you do stories about well endowed shiksas where you and your hubby figure into the story, huh?

      Be happy to explain it to you any time.

    2. I loved your post btw where me and my hubby were mentioned. So there!

  9. Hi Rob, that was a great post about the depth of a poker hand. I am looking at the hand in a bit of a different way perhaps. In my experiences, when a guy has already min raised (not sure if it was a check raise) you on the flop you are very unlikely to lose him for the bet you had left. I gladly call off the rest of my chips there after committing $100 or so already and being faced with a bet of $150ish more. If he had been looking to minimize his loses I don't see how he would ever put the min raise in. In most cases, that raise is to induce a fold from you, but the thought of playing for stacks isn't going to faze him either.

    Your opponent then makes a weird blocking bet on the turn that was actually quite creative. Most players with a naked flush draw in this spot would just check, so it is interesting to see the $50 quarter pot bet. This is a variant in that he did have a solid hand with pair and a draw, but was likely thinking he was behind, otherwise the bet is bigger. He likely did this to stop you from putting your stack in the middle. If he had checked to you here, what was your move? I would have gone ahead and shoved over top of his turn bet, assuming I hadn't already shoved over top of his flop bet.

    I can't explain his river move, but I think it was a poorly executed attempt to induce a bet from you. Perhaps he thought that you would not put him on the flush if he checked and would then bet your 2 pair hands and your smaller flush hands. I really doubt that he was afraid you might have a higher flush. Players don't put in $145 then get scared when they hit. He just tried to get overly creative and he ended up costing himself some money.

    Thanks for the post Rob, it definitely got me thinking with my morning coffee.

    1. Thanks for the comment and some great insight, M. However, I have point out that I was first to act. I did say I was the small blind and the Villain was UTG. So he wasn't trying to induce a check raise from me on the river. The only way to get more money from me would be bet there; that's why I assume he was worried about a bigger flush.

      OR......he may just have gotten timid and decided the pot as is was "big enough" and if he bet and lost there, he'd never have forgiven himself.

      But I do like your thoughts. Always great to post a hand and get different views. Proves the answer to almost any poker decision is....."it depends."

    2. Hey Rob, sorry that I didn't go to the trouble of confirming what position was which. I stand by my plan to shove the flop when he min-raises. As for his river check, its simply bad poker to play that aggressively on the flop and then slow down like that on turn and river. I really can't believe he blew it that badly. I would say you saved money in this situation, but maybe just maybe he would have laid down his hand on the flop to your aggression. Thanks again for the post.

    3. Thanks again. Yeah, I think he foldss to my flop shove, but who knows?

  10. Hey Rob,

    Great detail in the original post.
    Grump did a great job of laying out the details so I won't repeat them here.
    However, I'm going to disagree with those think calling the min-raise on the flop is the worst option.

    Let's look at the options:

    Shove/Raise: I think shoving or raising only gets called by a better hand. (Or in this case a pair + flush draw....coin flips aren't the reason we play poker.)He's a newbie but he's not stupid. This isn't 2005.

    Fold: I think folding is out of the question. Newbie's usually have trouble valuing their hand. More experienced players will often raise to knock you off your continuation bet. Frankly, folding in this situation is simply too weak. Absent a solid read or tell, you're giving up too much equity to fold AA here.

    Call: We're getting 4.5:1 to call the $40. I think we're clearly ahead enough times to have a call make sense.

    Of these options, I think the Call makes the most sense. Unless we improve on the Turn, we'll check and see what he does. (You could also bet the Turn if your read is a draw when you call the $40.) He's a newbie and they tend to make mistakes anyway.

    He bets $40 on the Turn. With newbies, bet sizing is almost always a reliable tell. Big bets mean big hands, weak bets mean weak hands. Against an experienced player I'd be more concerned, against a newbie this almost always means weakness.

    I'm raising or shoving the Turn. I hope he makes a call (but doesn't "insta call")

    Again, just my $0.02!

    1. I think that's just plain dead wrong. Rob's hand is almost certain not going to improve on the turn, so calling and seeing the turn does no good things and two very, very bad things: First, if he is on a combo kind of draw, it lets him get there without charging him more. Second, it puts more of Rob's money into the pot that might turn into dead money if he then decides to fold the turn.

      You have to make the decision on the flop as to whether you think you are way ahead (e.g., of villain's top pair), way behind (e.g., if he got lucky and flopped 2 pair or a set), or about even money (the combo draw thing). Whatever you decide, that conclusion is probably not going to change on the turn, unless you think he's on a draw and a draw-finishing card comes. But more often that not, that won't happen, and you'll be stuck in the same dilemma as on the flop.

      If you're way behind, you don't want to put ANY more money in. If you're way ahead, you want to get it all in if he is willing to join you. If you're in a roughly 50/50 situation, you're also fine getting it all in--it doesn't matter in the long run whether you do or don't.

      So if the number of hands he can have that you're beating exceeds the number of hands he can have to which you're losing, you should favor getting as much money in as possible. For the reasons I explained previously, I would discount the possibility of him having a currently better hand. (I should have also mentioned that 2 pair is unlikely because he probably would have folded 2/3 possible ones; most players won't stick with Q-6 or 6-10 after a pre-flop raise, so his only realistic 2-pair hand is Q-10.)

      Most of the time in poker there is room for more than one good way to play a hand. But this is a situation where I would be emphatic that calling is clearly, unequivocally the worst option on the flop. It just gets you sucked deeper into a potentially bad situation with no more information, and facing an even more complicated decision on the turn. I haven't worked the math, but it might also get you pot-committed, so that you really can't get away from the hand later. In which case, you might as well shove on the flop and get whatever fold equity you can.

    2. Great point/counterpoint, Wynngolfhatguy & Grump. Thanks very much! I will let you two battle it out, you're both so much better at this than I am. Just shows how subjective poker is. You both make sense to me.

      I'm upset tho that Grump's response didn't show up on the blog sooner. I was SURE I had approved the comment last nite at the poker table. Damn. I was shocked to see that it hadn't gotten posted when I checked this morning. Sorry.

    3. Hi Grump,
      Sorry, I didn’t see your response until now.
      I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. It doesn’t sound like I will change your mind, but here goes:

      I’m working on the premise that a Flop shove will fold out all the hands we are beating except a combo draw. I think you would agree but you never really said so. (I don’t want to put words in your mouth) If a hand like KQ or AQ will call frequently, shoving the Flop makes more sense.
      Disclaimer over

      If our opponent calls the Flop Shove that leaves combo draws and hands that are beating us on the Flop. Any way you slice it, our opponent is not making a mathematical error to call us. (A combo draw is getting the current Pot overlay as PM described)

      If you plan to Shove the flop, wouldn’t shoving a non-Broadway, non-spade Turn, be a better lower variance line? Importantly, we would be trying to deny our opponent the proper odds to draw for a combo draw on the Turn. (I actually thought Rob was a bit deeper. A call and Turn shove our opponent would be laid 2.3:1 to call a Turn shove. Based upon stacks, our opponent would not be making an error by calling a Turn shove either. However, it is harder to call when you’re only 30% to win on the River.)

      Granted Broadway and Spade Turn cards are a LOT of cards to dodge. It’s definitely not easy to play out of position.

      I think the crux of your argument is that you have enough fold equity to fold out combo draws. While this is somewhat read dependent, I don’t know that I agree. A player has already shown interest in the Pot, he’d be getting nearly 2:1 on a 1:1 shot…..I think most opponents are calling this spot.

      I find it ironic that your own comments support the line I described above:
      Rakewell said:
      “Whatever you decide, that conclusion is probably not going to change on the turn, unless you think he's on a draw and a draw-finishing card comes. But more often that not, that won't happen, and you'll be stuck in the same dilemma as on the flop.”

    4. Now I'm convinced. I should have treated those Aces as pocket Kings and just folded them preflop. :)

      Thanks again for the thoughtful ccomments, W.

    5. I understand your point, @Wynngolfhatguy. You're taking the lowest variance decision, which is let a card peel and get away from it if it is not to your liking. However, that method presents many problems; the first of which is that you give him a pretty wide range of hands. You're not going to be happy with a paired board because that may mean his combo draw tripped up. You're not going to be especially happy with a 3 flush board. I think you'll be folding out a lot of your winners when he continues on the turn, given that we fear half of the deck. I don't know whether the bottom 2 cards that Rob didn't give us were coordinated, so perhaps villain is on a lower flush draw + straight(?) as well? If that is the case, add up to another 6 cards were we won't be happy (open ended straight). Potentially, there are up to 21 outs that we're going to hate. I would think that folding our hand is preferable to putting more money in the middle, in that case.

      In summary, I'm just trying to level back to what you were talking about: ranges. If we have him precisely on QJss (or whatever the flush draw was), then fine. However, we need to be able to expand his range to more than just QJss, and include all hands that match pair the bottom ends of the board, straight+flush draws, etc. Perhaps even wonky two-pair hands and certainly sets. For the reasons described above, (and I can really only speculate for Grump but absolutely speak for me) Grump & I believe this to be a shove / fold decision. Add in the fact that it would absolutely wrong for villain to fold in this spot (given the overlay) and Rob thinks that he would, a shove is the optimal choice here.

    6. I actually did reveal all the cards, PM, Red Queen. 10 & 6 spades on the flop. 8 of clubs on the turn and then the 9 of spades on the river.

      My feeling that he would have folded on the flop if I shoved was based on his actions on the turn and especially on the river, where he asked how much I had and then didn't value bet. At the time he min raised me on the flop, I wasn't sure at all that he would fold if I shoved. When he failed to value bet the river, I assumed he only had top pair, but was quite unpleasantly surprised.

      If I thought at the time he would have laid down such a good drawing hand, I would have shoved.

    7. PM,
      I agree that if our opponent will stack off with a one pair hand like KQ or AQ frequently or fold a combo draw getting 2:1 on a 1:1 shot, then shoving the flop is certainly (more) correct.
      Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening in most NL games today. (Honestly, I think this is crux of our disagreement.)

      Because of the above, this really skews our outcome to the negative on a Flop Shove.
      Hypothetically, here’s how I’d think about the distribution AFTER our flop shove: (You probably disagree with this)
      2% naked bluff folds
      8% Worse hand calls
      10% Combo draw folds
      45% Combo draw calls
      35% Calls and we are dominated

      My opinion is formulated on allowing my opponent to make the most mistakes. (Not necessarily lowest variance) Given his range, he’s probably not going to make a mistake on a flop shove.

      Going further, we’re getting 4.5:1 to call the $40. We’re clearly ahead often enough to make that call.
      This is the reason I advocate a Call on the flop.

      I don’t necessarily advocate a Turn shove….only that if you were planning to shove the Flop, shoving a non-scare Turn card is a better line.

      On to the Turn:
      I agree that we have to fear many cards (Spades and Broadway cards) on the Turn. That said, many of the cards that freeze us will also freeze our opponent.
      For example if an Ace peels the Turn, we still can’t bet because KJ just got there. However, if our opponent only has one pair he can’t bet either.
      In other words an equal number of “bad” Turn cards for us, look equally bad to your opponent if they don’t improve his hand.

      I had a VERY similar hand a few years ago and have given a lot of thought to this situation.

      Again, I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. It’s great to have an intelligent discussion about it.
      Thanks to all responses and Rob for posting the hand.

    8. Thanks again, WGH. I believe I know have enough material, what with my original post and all the commentary by you guys, to produce my first poker strategy book!

  11. i think golfhats analysis is one of the best ive ever seen, wish he was analysing all the hands ive wondered about.

    1. Thanks Tony!
      The more I think about it, a Shove on the Flop is probably the WORST option given our opponent's hand range. Your bet has no expectation.
      OK folding is worse but not much....

      The objective of poker is to get opponents to put money in when mathematically behind. Not for them to correctly fold.

    2. Getting him to fold this spot is a profitable move. He's in an essential coin flip with a $60+ overlay. If you can get him to fold to the shove you're making a TON of money long term. It would be incorrect for him to fold this hand.

    3. PM,
      Given that you know his cards you're correct. I submit given his ENTIRE hand range you are not.

      We have to think about as if we're IN the hand; not that we already know the results.

    4. Thanks guys. Love this kind of back and forth.

      But all this disagreement goes to show....poker is hard.

  12. I think that you could sell the rights to this post and its comments as a mini-seres - very interesting... :) Against most players that I have seen, I think that even if you would have shoved the flop, you would have received a call because your opponent had top pair and a flush draw (my experience)... Have a good one!

    1. Thanks Coach. If I could just get a few more comments, I could have my first book.