page 166, they use this hand to introduce "stack-to-pot concept"
10-handed $2-$5game that is fairly loose,esp. preflop. everyone has $500(100BB). it's folded to you, you raise to $15 with KK, button and big blind call.
pot is $47
you bet $45, button calls, big blind folds
you are not commited and you expect your opponent to have better than kings if he goes all-in so you check.
he bets $125 and you're screwed.
what they suggest (page 168):
you raise preflop to 6BB($30)
same callers again, same flop. pot is $92, you bet $90, same caller.
the pot is $272, you have $380 left.
"should you commit? yes. there's too much money in the pot to lay down an overpair against fairly loose opponents.
since your aggressive opponent likes to bet the tirn, you check. he bets $180. you check-raise all-in.
alternatively, you decide he won't bet the turn often enough to justify going for a checkraise. so you lead out with another bet
the hand became easier and more profitable to play"
why is it more profitable? because in the first example you put your opponent on a good hand and in the second you put him on a bad hand/bluff?
i don't get it
"..if he gets all-in you expect him to have a better hand than kings. so going all-in has a negative expectation, and you don't want to commit"
in both cases we go all-in on turn but somehow in the 2nd case it's "easier and more profitable". definetly easier but why is it profitable? ok maybe we can exclude QT from his range in the 2nd example but isn't it much more likely that he has QQ or AA? and if we expect him to call all-in raise with something better than kings we're not gaining extra money with this move but potentialy can lose all stack. how about good old "don't throw good money after bad money"?
here's the hand i played today:
Poker Stars $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em - 8 players
Hero (SB): $1.98
Pre Flop: ($0.03) Hero is SB with A A
1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $0.08, 1 fold, MP2 calls $0.08, 2 folds, Hero raises to $0.20, 1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.12, MP2 calls $0.12
Flop: ($0.62) 8 8 Q (3 players)
Hero bets $0.60, UTG+1 calls $0.60, MP2 folds
Turn: ($1.82) 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $1.18 all in, UTG+1 calls $1.18
River: ($4.18) 5 (2 players - 1 is all in)
obviously this was a very loose table. i re-raised preflop, putting 10% of my stack to the pot(commitment threshold) so definetly i was commited. raised the flop got 1 caller. few days ago i'd have checked turn and river or folded to any raise("don't throw good money after bad money") but since i was commited, i moved in. was it a bad play?
the general idea with a hand like this is that you are getting opponents with loose ranges to put exponentially more money in on early streets when you have a hand that has excellent equity but can suffer from reverse implied odds (and also make for tough decisions on later streets if inexperienced or new to NL).
even if you give your opponent the same turn commitment range in both examples, you are much better off long run by getting twice as much money in pf and flop. also, remember that you are simultaneously getting your opponent pot stuck as well.
so for example, if your opponent has a ten, across the range of possible turn cards you greatly prefer to get all the money in on the turn as opposed to having a big barrel left on the river - not just for the sake of your own hand's protection, but also for the sake of increasing the likelihood that your opponent will commit while he still thinks he's in good shape. remember we're talking about loosey goosey passive opponents here.
as for your hand, you don't say much about your opponent's stats or proclivities, but either way your play is fine. heck even if you give your opponent KK, QQ, and AQ and nothing else, you have more than enough equity to get it in postflop. and at microstakes his range is likely much wider than that, and your equity much greater.
i think my major leaks(apart from making something stupid occasionaly which is simply psychological aspect/lack of discipline) are paying too much for draws(and if i get something everyone folds). or making c-bets when my opponents are drawing only to find myself in the situation when they do have better hands. so i can get more profit if i get them pot-stucked so they won't easily fold busted draws(and buying cards will be -EV for them). however there's always bad luck:
Poker Stars $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em - 7 players
Hero (UTG): $2.26
Pre Flop: ($0.03) Hero is UTG with 5 6
Hero calls $0.02, 1 fold, MP calls $0.02, CO raises to $0.06, 1 fold, SB calls $0.05, BB calls $0.04, Hero calls $0.04, MP calls $0.04
Flop: ($0.30) 4 7 3 (5 players)
SB bets $0.12, BB folds, Hero calls $0.12, MP calls $0.12, CO folds
Turn: ($0.66) 4 (3 players)
SB bets $0.10, Hero raises to $0.40, MP calls $0.40, SB calls $0.30
River: ($1.86) A (3 players)
SB bets $0.40 all in, Hero calls $0.40, MP calls $0.40
Final Pot: $3.06
SB shows 7d Qd (a flush, Ace high)
Hero mucks 5d 6d
MP mucks 6c 5c
SB wins $2.91
i know limping in was gross and usually i play these hands only from the button. i was 94-to-6 favourite on the flop. ok most likely he didn't put me on that range(if he put me on any range lol) but still he had mid-pair with not-so-good kicker. how did he call preflop raise? and even on the turn his equity was only 22%.
MP was much more dangerous with flush-redraw on flop. but im not playing omaha now, right? online poker is so funny :)