So I read Championship NL and PL Hold'em and PPLP as my intro to poker books. It seems to me that Cloutier adopts a 'play to the flop' mentality, in that if he doesn't get a strong piece of the flop, then you have to check/fold. I believe he even says that if you get bet into with 2nd pair, it's an easy fold, drop the hand, etc. He makes the claim in the book that if you're 'betting for information,' then you're already behind.

Hellmuth seems to be more aggressive. Even with 2nd pair, he bets out on the flop, and will even re-raise with that hand. Throughout the book, he endorses 'betting for information' to see where you're at.

I guess I'm wondering what approach u use more often. I think I lean more toward Cloutier's method, figuring if I don't have a good read, or a good hand on the flop, I won't make a move. I think this leads me to fold possible winning hands, especially with 2nd pair, when I'm facing someone who adopts the more aggressive style.


Also, how do you all play 2nd pair, in general? Especially if you bet out the flop either in EP or acting last and opponent merely calls.

Say you're against an unknown or 2 limpers, and in the BB, you catch 2nd pair, holding JT and the flop comes ATx rainbow. You bet 3/4 of the pot and villain flat calls. What's your turn play if it's a blank?



Oh. . and would somone please confirm that K4 and K5 suited are really not playable hands, especially against a 5BB PF raise, since those hands have sucked out twice against me today. :mad:

I tend to change up during play. I usually start out with Cloutier's stratagy till I've shown a couple decent hands and have a little money to play with. Here I'm trying more to get a feel for the other people at the table and give an image that I'm a tight/aggressive player. That way when I start to loosen up, they (hopefully) won't expect it. I prefer this type of change up when I've put the others at the table on some skill so they have the ability to assign hands to me. Then I may start betting second pair depending on my oppenents, what kind of read I get and whether I need more information about the hand. If reraised, however, I usually just call...

In your example, I would check on the blank and have to give serious thought to folding if he bets into me. Again, that depends on what kind of play I've seen from him in the earlier hands. It would also depend on the bet. I know if I've been bet into on a flop like that, and checked to on the turn, I usually come across with a 2-3BB bet to represent the aces, even if I don't have them. Again, that's if I'm holding second pair in second position, as opposed to your first position example.

While we're on this type of playing, I would like to add another question to the group to get some opinions. When I'm sitting on second or third pair and I want to bet for information, I never try to come across with a 1bb bet. I usually make it 2-5, depending on the blinds and my stack. My hope here is to represent more then I'm holding and hopefully get more folds. If reraised then I usually (because of the size of my initial bet) fold, giving credit for top pair or even two pair.

I personally wouldn't play those cards with that kind of PF betting going on, even in last position.

Trons

I haven't read Phil's book, but I really liked TJ Championsish book and I play this way, not exactly but based on his thoughts and principles.

Now for 2nd pair, I may bet it on the flop in the hope of winning the pot right there. If there's a call it depends of how likely this pot may go to the showdown, if it is likely, I may check but if you think that you'll have to pay again on the turn or river then I would bet again instead of calling and if again I'm called I will check/fold and if I'm raised I'll fold (depending of the raise, but let say the other guy knows how to play and make me pay for the next card). Anyway I would not invest too much money in this hand and I'm more likely to bet if the pot is unraised than raised.

K9s to k2s are all bad hands, you may be beaten one time with this but overall you'll be a winner not to play them and to play against someone who play them.

Look at Gus Hanson play, he plays anything... and he play it so well...

Both of their approaches are very simple, and there are things to be learned from both.

However, neither lays out a perfect strategy. TJs book advocates a SUPER tight strategy that is not realistic, but is a good starting point for beginner.

Harrington's books will open up the real world of pro tournament play to you (in my opinion) but don't forget the valueable lessons from Phil and TJ.

i think that when you have theese kinds of hands you need to analyse the flop and decide how likely your oponents are to have hit the flop.

e.g. if there has been a raise from EP and 3 calls before you call on the button with JTs, and the flop comes 7 T A rainbow you are unlikely to be ahead.

if the same pre flop action occurs and you call with 78s and flop comes 2 7 9 this is less likely to hit someone who is playing 2 high cards.

harrington explains this well in his book giving some good hand examples etc

Even post-flop you bet based on the blinds? I thought post-flop betting was usually determined by the pot or the size of the stacks you're up against (especially tourney play.)

Sorry, Trons. . I'm not picking on you, I appreciate your responses, but if you check the blank after betting out the flop, then that would look weak and induce a bet that I don't think you could justify calling.

I guess that's really the meat of my question. After making a stab on the flop, when someone just calls, now what? A check on the turn looks weak and begs to be bet into, a bet might be throwing money away if the player actually has a hand. I'm just saying the flat call on the flop doesn't provide any information at all, and may complicate the hand (a weakness in Phil's approach?)


Thanks for responses, all. I'm a newbie and just really trying to work out some of these 'iffy' situations i get myself into.

I have this same problem JN1. Whenever I make a semibluff out of positoin with 2nd pair and get called I tend to not back down and keep hammering at the pot. This usually results in a quick exit from the tournament and is something I'm trying to stop doing!

nothing wrong with stopping after you get called, especially if the board is not draw heavy.

If there are some straight and flush draws out, I will bet about the same size I did on the flop - no more than 1/2 pot.

Actually, post flop I only pay attention to the min bet (BB) and make sure I go up compared to that (obviously you can't go down, but a lot of guys will min bet all they way to the river. If I'm in 10-15 blinds and I want to bet for information then I'm going 50-150 (Which i guess is a little more then the 2-5 I mentioned earlier. I was jst kind of pulling numbers out of my ass at that point ).


Don't worry about thinking you're picking on me. I've been picked on by a lot better and came away from it ok . Honestly, this is the way I play. I didn't think it was right but to be honest, I don't think I've ever really thought my way through that particular situation.

I know I have been in situations where I've had 2nd pair but thought my opponent had bottom or was drawing. When I bet on the flop and I get a real hesitant call, then I'll be more tempted to check on the turn to see if they bet into me or if I can get the free card. If they bet into me but it's a weak bet then I'm going to call and see the river. I may already be beat at this point but if I'm asked to call a 30-50 bet into a 300+ pot, then I'll probably do it with second pair.

This is also a situation I would do if I've tried to induce bluffs in the past and showed down some decent hands with them. That makes my check on the river look more like "Alright, you want to call, how big are they?". Granted with second pair mine are kind of shriveled, but they're there and if he does come with a big bet representing TP, then I hope I have a really good read on him.

I would also like to add that I'm also really new and by posting what I would do, I'm hoping some of these others will correct my play so I can learn also. When I'm playing, I also try to remember, althought it's difficult to do most of the time, that if you're up against a weak player, they will probably act strong when weak and weak when strong. By acting weak here, even though we're not really strong, the other player my think we're trying to induce the bluff and check on the turn for the free card also. That's what I do if checked on the turn and I'm holding a drawing hand I believe the other guy will call any bet I make.

Trons

Edited for content

Just a few thoughts from reading this thread.....

1) You cannot base your post flop betting on the blinds. The only factor that matters here is pot size. Example.....Blinds were 25/50.....pot has 500 in it. You have second pair and there is a possible flush draw out there. Whats your bet? You ca'nt give the flush draw pot odds, so you need to make at least a 1/2 to 3/4 pot bet here....the blind strategy wont tell you the right size bet.

2) If you bet out on the flop, and are called, and next card is blank....you need to ask yourself this question. If you check and villain bets, will you call? If answer is yes then you should definately lead again. Not betting shows weakness and gives you zero information on opponents hand. Placing the right sized bet gives tons of information at the exact same cost. If you put him on the flush draw and he ignores the pot odds and calls you, I think its safe to assume he has you beat already. The lead bet gives you the shot of winning the pot right then and there. I have often found myself making the mistake of check/calling to the river only to lose more money than if i had made a stiff bet up front and folded to resistance.

Just my 2 cents...of course I had pocket aces and trip 6's busted by trip K's two times last night @ SNG's....so what the hell do i know.