Bad Beat Story.. FML!!

[blackjacktilt]

Well, I'm reading about everyones poker experiences and opinions so I guess I should share a little story with all of you to show you how bad people can be...
The game is $2/$5 NL / Intercontinental casino in PR.
I have the button with 2 limpers and I peek at pocket 3's.
I raise to $17, SB and BB fold, both limpers call.
Flop: Ace, 3, 7 (unsuited).
First limper checks, second (guy to my right in cutoff) bets $35, I raise to $105.
First limper folds and mumbles something under his breath.
Hero in cut off calls.
Turn: 7!!
Hero bets $200 and I move all in which had him covered.
He places the remainder of his chips in which was $355.
He proudly flips over A,K suited and asks if I have A,Q....
I say no, sorry bro you are crushed.
River: YOU GUESSED IT AN ACE!!
The first limper says Oh my god, I folded A,Q!!!!
This lucky MF'er hit a 3 outer (probably less) for a pot of $1378.
The hero looks at me and says, I'm sorry man, you've been pushing everyone around so I thought I had you...
I look at him and say, I've been playing this game long enough to know luck will kick me in the teeth once in a while.
The truth is the game was so soft I was reading everyone like a book, folding monsters and tricking everyone with solid aggressive play.
This one guy who I had have re-buy (3) times laughed and slapped the table when the ace hit, it was comical.
I asked him if he was going to re-load.... Nothing but silence... :laugh:
I had a little over $200 left, played for the remaining 3 hours (they close at 4am) and left with just over $500.

 

[Sucker]

Well, I'm reading about everyones poker experiences and opinions so I guess I should share a little story with all of you to show you how bad people can be...

You flopped a set; turned a FH. Why does that make you such a "bad" player? It appears to ME that you played the hand OK.

Besides; it was a 4-outer that he hit, not a 3. Ho-hum. That's poker for you.

 

[Sharky]

...
I say no, sorry bro you are crushed...

hey man, that was your mistake...counting those chickens...YOU CHANGED THE FLOW OF THE CARDS!!!:flame::whip::whip:

 

[blackjacktilt]

You flopped a set; turned a FH. Why does that make you such a "bad" player? It appears to ME that you played the hand OK.

Besides; it was a 4-outer that he hit, not a 3. Ho-hum. That's poker for you.

It was a 3 outer since the other limper stated he had an ace.
And I meant the bad play of others. Some just can't lay down top pair.

 

[blackjacktilt]

hey man, that was your mistake...counting those chickens...YOU CHANGED THE FLOW OF THE CARDS!!!:flame::whip::whip:

:laugh:

 

[sabre]

Your preflop raise is strange. So is your turn shove. Flop play is fine

 

[Sucker]

It was a 3 outer since the other limper stated he had an ace.
And I meant the bad play of others. Some just can't lay down top pair.

As far as correct poker lingo goes, it was a 4-outer. You have to go by the information at hand rather than "would've-should've-could've".

But that's not the point. The guy had A-K suited and limped in. This is a very good play when you have someone behind you who's been trying to run over the table. He flopped top pair, top kicker. All he had to do was ask himself what YOUR range was at this point (Hopefully, you DO understand the term "range"). There were MANY more likely holdings that a hyper-aggressive player like you could have,for him to have YOU crushed rather than the other way around; and for you to play the hand the exact same way you did. Your opponent played his hand PERFECTLY and would have been a fool to lay it down. All he had to do was sit back & let YOU bet it. After all, he didn't want to take the chance that YOU might lay down top pair.

This is one major weakness in most players who try to play a la Gus Hansen; they don't seem to understand that when they play this style, their opponents are going to (correctly) call them more often than they will a more conservative player.

 

[moo321]

Your preflop raise is strange. So is your turn shove. Flop play is fine

Yeah, the preflop raise is a bit weird. I don't see anything wrong with the turn shove, though. Pot-size shove into a guy showing obvious strength with an underfull house?

 

[blackjacktilt]

preflop

Yeah, the preflop raise is a bit weird. I don't see anything wrong with the turn shove, though. Pot-size shove into a guy showing obvious strength with an underfull house?

If I were in the U.S. playing a $2/$5 NL game, I would have raised 4-5 BB's after seeing two limpers. I might have also just folded, depends on who is there.This game was being played like a $1/$2 NL game.
Min buy in was $100, and max was $500. It's a game meant for tourists.
If any of you venture to PR, I highly recommend investing in this game at the Intercontinental.
And about the shove, after the flop, I knew he had anywhere from A,J - A,K.
I've seen him limp out of position a few times with hands like this, including 9,9, K,J etc. And not just against me.
I went with my read, highly confident that I was ahead and was correct until the river. The point of the story is short term luck my friends. But I'm open to advice on my play. I know I'm not the greatest, far from it.

 

[blackjacktilt]

As far as correct poker lingo goes, it was a 4-outer. You have to go by the information at hand rather than "would've-should've-could've".

But that's not the point. The guy had A-K suited and limped in. This is a very good play when you have someone behind you who's been trying to run over the table. He flopped top pair, top kicker. All he had to do was ask himself what YOUR range was at this point (Hopefully, you DO understand the term "range"). There were MANY more likely holdings that a hyper-aggressive player like you could have,for him to have YOU crushed rather than the other way around; and for you to play the hand the exact same way you did. Your opponent played his hand PERFECTLY and would have been a fool to lay it down. All he had to do was sit back & let YOU bet it. After all, he didn't want to take the chance that YOU might lay down top pair.

This is one major weakness in most players who try to play a la Gus Hansen; they don't seem to understand that when they play this style, their opponents are going to (correctly) call them more often than they will a more conservative player.

I wasn't trying to run the table over, I had to be more aggressive than I usually am due to the vast amount of limping and weak plays being presented. I'm not a perfect player, far from it and still have alot to learn.
And yes, I know what the poker term "range" means. If that was an attempt at an insult, try again.

 

[blackjacktilt]

As far as correct poker lingo goes, it was a 4-outer. You have to go by the information at hand rather than "would've-should've-could've".

But that's not the point. The guy had A-K suited and limped in. This is a very good play when you have someone behind you who's been trying to run over the table. He flopped top pair, top kicker. All he had to do was ask himself what YOUR range was at this point (Hopefully, you DO understand the term "range"). There were MANY more likely holdings that a hyper-aggressive player like you could have,for him to have YOU crushed rather than the other way around; and for you to play the hand the exact same way you did. Your opponent played his hand PERFECTLY and would have been a fool to lay it down. All he had to do was sit back & let YOU bet it. After all, he didn't want to take the chance that YOU might lay down top pair.

This is one major weakness in most players who try to play a la Gus Hansen; they don't seem to understand that when they play this style, their opponents are going to (correctly) call them more often than they will a more conservative player.

Ok, so I've read this a few times and now understand what you're telling me.
Thanks, it's much appreciated.

 

[Sucker]

My whole point was that IMO, BOTH of you played the hand pretty much correctly. Problem is, you got nailed by a 51:1 shot. Sh*t happens.

And no, there was no insult intended at all. I know of some rather good poker players that don't fully understand the term "range", even though they can INSTINCTIVELY weigh their chances quite well.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

My whole point was that IMO, BOTH of you played the hand pretty much correctly. Problem is, you got nailed by a 51:1 shot. Sh*t happens.

And no, there was no insult intended at all. I know of some rather good poker players that don't fully understand the term "range", even though they can INSTINCTIVELY weigh their chances quite well.

Reminds me of the time at a Omaha H-L game that my hidden aces-full lost to a straight flush. And a player not in the hand told me that I was a lousy player! Sorry, but you've got to show me a straight flush, even more so in Omaha where even experienced players will counterfeit a hand when they're tired.

Omaha is a tricky game, a satisfying extra level of strategy but in some ways it's a lot easier. I like it. The game is always limit, and the variance is lowered by the split pot. But being there's less penalty for paying to see the flop, the difference between a good player and a bad player is blurred.

 

[moo321]

Reminds me of the time at a Omaha H-L game that my hidden aces-full lost to a straight flush. And a player not in the hand told me that I was a lousy player! Sorry, but you've got to show me a straight flush, even more so in Omaha where even experienced players will counterfeit a hand when they're tired.

Omaha is a tricky game, a satisfying extra level of strategy but in some ways it's a lot easier. I like it. The game is always limit, and the variance is lowered by the split pot. But being there's less penalty for paying to see the flop, the difference between a good player and a bad player is blurred.

Live Hi-Lo games are quite good for a skilled player because you'll get lots of scoops. As long as you're getting lots of loose calls for half the pot or less, it's a great game.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Live Hi-Lo games are quite good for a skilled player because you'll get lots of scoops. As long as you're getting lots of loose calls for half the pot or less, it's a great game.

Yes, that's the added skill, making the low-chasers pay when you have your high hand, and then there is no low.

But on the other hand, those low-chasers will catch some highs too. :flame: You really want a nut straight or flush in that game.

 

[zengrifter]

Omaha is a tricky game, a satisfying extra level of strategy but in some ways it's a lot easier. I like it. The game is always limit.

Omaha is never no-limit? zg

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Omaha is never no-limit? zg

I've never seen it or any H/L game dealt NL. How would that even work? But it usually has a kill pot, which you'll almost always get after a scoop.

That's Omaha H/L... straight Omaha is a real game too but I don't know if its ever dealt.

 

[Sucker]

I just pulled up PokerStars onto my screen. As of this moment, there are 55 real-money NL Omaha HL games being spread. And there are also several hundred free-money games as such.

 

[moo321]

Omaha is never no-limit? zg

Monkey is talking about Hi-lo. It's usually played in a limit format, although I have seen it online for pot limit.

High only is usually played pot-limit, sometimes limit (particularly in a mixed game) and very rarely as No-Limit.

 

[Machinist]

I charge

I always charge my brother and his wife to listen to their bad beat stories at poker....
1 dolllar is the usual.....boring...the ending is always the same!!!!:whip::whip:
I dont know what i should charge to read about them though....

Machinist