Is this just getting too aggressive? I don't know what to do with 88/99/1010 at these 2/4 tables UTG/UTG+1/early middle position. Normally I fold 88, and raise 1010, here I limped and bullied them out anyway.
The second hand started as a "pseudo-steal" and then due to an idiot opponent went horrible wrong. Good plays or am I pushing these hands too hard? I hope these aren't too simple to post, but I feel like I am leaking money pounding the pot with these marginal hands.
PokerStars 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with,
.
1 fold, Hero calls, 3 folds, CO raises, 3 folds, Hero 3-bets, CO calls.
Flop: (7.50 SB),
,
(2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.
Turn: (4.75 BB)(2 players)
Hero bets, CO folds.
Final Pot: 5.75 BB
Results in white below:
No showdown. Hero wins 5.75 BB.
PokerStars 2/4 Hold'em (9 handed) converter
Preflop: Hero is MP2 with,
.
3 folds, Hero raises, 1 fold, CO calls, 2 folds, BB calls.
Flop: (6.50 SB),
,
(3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets, CO calls, BB folds.
Turn: (4.25 BB)(2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.
River: (6.25 BB)(2 players)
Hero bets, CO calls.
Final Pot: 8.25 BB
Results in white below:
Hero has 4d 4h (two pair, fours and threes).
CO has Ks 6s (two pair, sixes and threes).
Outcome: CO wins 8.25 BB.
Welcome to PokerForums.org
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Results 1 to 10 of 10
-
11-23-2005 #1
Did I overplay these two pocket pairs?
Originally Posted by Beavis68
Originally Posted by backdoor
-
11-23-2005 #2PokerForums God
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 8,204
First hand, I would have said "yea" but you won.
2nd hand, I kind of like, but I would have checked the river there. I don't like river bluffs, and that is what your bet is.
-
11-23-2005 #3
fold 44 preflop.
“There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about.” - John von Neumann
-
11-23-2005 #4PokerForums God
- Join Date
- Sep 2004
- Posts
- 8,204
I like it as long as it isnt a standard play.
Originally Posted by bonchkid
-
11-23-2005 #5Poker Professional
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Posts
- 1,670
for the first hand, i think it is okay since 2/4 has a lot of weakies and when they see the 3 broadways and diamonds they may fold an 8 or possibly a jack
second hand, the only thing that is bad is the river bet. ace high doesnt call here and thats all you beat
-
11-23-2005 #6Fish
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Posts
- 50
I would fold both of the hands pf to a raise.
But this is from a guy who don't feel 2/4
-
11-23-2005 #7Poker Professional
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Posts
- 1,670
oh, and dont open limp 88 preflop -- raise that up
-
11-24-2005 #8Poker Hustler
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Posts
- 1,161
1st hand was really tricky on your part, the limp raise as long as you don't do it often will set off alarm bells in pretty much everyones head, you probably got the guy to fold TT-QQ.
2nd hand, a ragged flop I don't mind taking a stab at the pot on the flop. Alot is dependant on the read here, he seems to be a calling station, in this case I would feel I was behind and probably give up on the river, especially since he could have been holding a 3.
-
11-24-2005 #9
I feel like when I fold 88/99 UTG I am being too weak, then when I raise it I feel like I am being a maniac, so I do the stupid thing and limp with them. 1010 and up I raise, 77 and below I fold, hence my posting of the hand. Now of course everything in poker is table dependent,but usually the 2-4 on stars plays pretty similar from table to table so this is my usual plan.
Originally Posted by bboy
Originally Posted by Beavis68
Originally Posted by backdoor
-
11-24-2005 #10Poker Professional
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Posts
- 1,670
funny i would raise 77+ UTG and not feel bad at all
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)


LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
,
.
,
,
(2 players)
(2 players)
,
.
,
,
(2 players)
(2 players)
Reply With Quote