After opening up Feb. with a nice winning streak, the middle of the month had cooled considerably for me. It seems like I have played a high concentration of card dead hours lately and maybe that's partly because these sessions have sandwiched a bout of the flu. After being out of action for about a week, I got back to it at The Venetian the other day only to hit the cold deck once more. In truth though, I could have laid down my queens full of fives and saved $250 in that hand and here is why.
I was playing a little 1-2 NL. The table was pretty tight, but we did have on catalyst who raised most hands. I had picked up a few pots and and my stack was at about $450. I would look down at pocket Q's in the small blind. A couple of players would limp into the pot and the player in the cutoff would raise to $20. I instantly knew that I was up against a big hand. I was thinking Aces or Kings, but I also thought, let me see the flop. (LA Tony has seen me lay down the big pairs on the flop when I think they are no good). So, I call and another player who is perpetually short stacked and an apocalypticly bad player also called.
The flop came K-Q-5. My initial reaction is oh great, I flopped my set, let the fireworks begin. I checked and still had this ominous feeling about the hand. The donk would bet out and the initial raiser who was older than old man river (and just as tight) called. I flat called and the turn brought another 5. Now I have a Q's full and there is only one hand that can beat me.
I check and the donk bets. The old man goes all in for another $250 or so. I have everyone covered. I knew I was calling and I felt I might be losing. I had put old man river on Aces or Kings preflop, so I was only really 50-50 to win the hand based on my initial read. If I would have taken more time to make my decision, I think I might have been able to fold for this simple reason: The player who actual did push all-in in this spot would not likely have done so with just pocket Aces. Therefore, he had to have the kings. The deductive reasoning was so clear and so obvious. I rushed my decision, because I was blinded by the strength of my hand.
Pretty much every poker player (including myself) will tell you that my hand was a cooler and the only thing that a player can do in my spot is lose his chips. I knew in my gut though that my hand was no good and I should have let it go and saved the $250. If any other player at the table had bet the exact same way, I would have called, lost and felt fine about it. However, this player was the tightest at the table and I had played with him for long enough to have been able to see that he could only have had the nuts in that spot.
Chris Ferguson, to Andy Bloch, during the final match of the NBC Heads Up
Poker Championship:
I hate you math guys.
6 hours ago




2 comments:
He didn't have the nuts; he had the second nuts. And on the turn there wasn't one hand that could have you beat; there were two. (I think you're leaving out 5-5.)
Nitpicking aside, I well might have gone busto in that spot, too. Hard to know if I would have managed to make the big laydown without actually being there.
Ah Rakewell, I knew you were going to leave this comment before you did. :)
I knew that as soon as I typed that he had the nuts, someone (ahem, Poker Grump) would point out that technicality.
And technically you are correct. But in reality, I deduced that no one had the pocket fives, just as I deduced that my opponent had the pocket kings. I knew given the betting in front of me that the only hand out there to beat me was the cowboys, thus they were the "virtual" nuts. Better? :)
Post a Comment