Giving Up

No, I’m not giving up poker. Quite the opposite. What I am learning to give up however, are two things during the game of poker, made hands, and bluffs.

I wrote the above 2 months ago as an opener for an article I had in mind, then forgot all about it. Not too long ago though, there was this hand I was involved in that reminded me of why I wanted to write about this again.

This happened in a live game at the Poker Empire. I was holding ATs in late position on the cut-off. Mid position raised to 4x BB, and I decided to be a bit more aggressive and 3-bet him to 12xBB. All limpers folded and we see a flop of AQ8. This was a dream flop for me as Q8 were of the same suit as my hole cards, so I had a pair of aces and a flush draw. Original raiser checks to me, and I bet slightly less than 2/3rds the pot, and he calls. Turn comes a K which makes my nut flush. He checks again, and I again bet 2/3rds of the pot which he calls. At this point, I read him for a pair of Qs on the flop, making two pair on the turn with a KQ holding, or he could have been holding an ace like AJ or smaller. The river then comes another K and he suddenly makes a bet of 2/5th the pot. This was in-line with my read of KQ, but I found it hard to lay down my hand. I had incredible value to call, and my hand beats almost another other possible hand he could have been holding except AK, which was extremely unlikely. I made the call, and he flips over KQ to take down the pot.

This could have been labeled as a cooler, and I would usually just write it off as something that could not be avoided. Not now though. Playing based on reads is a very important skill in poker. Without hand reading, you would only be playing your own hands. And since you would only be making a hand about 30% of the time, and making a better hand than your opponent even less, you would actually be losing more money than you’d be making if you only played your own hands.

In this particular scenario, I could have saved myself some money by folding my flush to a more than probable full house. Losing as little as you can when you’re behind, while winning the most that you can while you’re in front is the key to profitable poker.

Another thing I am working on giving up is bluffs. There are times when double or triple barrel bluffs are profitable, and those times are rare. Have you ever been in a situation where you keep firing, but your opponent just won’t fold? These are times you should look back to see if your bluffs made sense. When ever you try to make a bluff, your opponent should feel that he cannot beat your hand and fold. If you can’t make your opponent believe that, your bluffs are bound to be non-profitable. Pick your spots to bluff, and don’t just push money in the pot and hope that your opponent will fold.

Till next time, may you always give up when you should!

Avoid Building Pots…

With small holdings. I was tilting again 3 days ago (and I thought I’d kicked the habit) and this friend told me, “stop building big pots with your small hands”, or something to that effect, and that phrase registered with me like it hadn’t before.

We need to first define what is meant by a small hand/holding. Based on personal experience, this would mean a pair or smaller. This includes over-pairs, though they are obviously stronger. When a pot gets to a certain size in relation to the effective size of the stacks in play, the hands you showdown with should improve relatively. Effective stack is a term usually used to refer to the smallest, most relevant, stack of a player remaining in the hand. For example, if UTG raises with a stack of 2k behind, and action folds to button with a 1k stack, who calls and everyone else folds, the effective stack involved would be 1k.

This was a hand I played a week ago in a live cash game. The game has been going on for about 2 hours and I have been raising aggressively on the button, showing down some mediocre hands. The button came around to me again, and I got AsKs, with a live straddle in effect. There were a couple of limpers before action was on me, and I made a raise to 6xBB. The blinds folded, UTG (straddle) calls, and the first limper folds while the second limper calls. UTG is a hyper-maniac who plays and raises any two cards from any position, second limper is a solid TAG who generally plays online more than live games (coincidentally the same friend who told me told me to avoid building big pots with small hands).

My stack size was roughly 200BB, while UTG had 250BB and TAG had 170BB. The flop comes Ad9d7c, and action was checked to me. I made my standard continuation bet of 3/4ths the pot, and UTG folds while TAG calls. An 8s comes on the turn, and TAG bets 1/2 the pot, about 30BB. At this point, the remaining effective stacks were about 110BB, should I choose to call that 30BB bet. With his general style of play, he would not have bet into me with a mere pair, but would probably have check-called. Thus the only likely hands he would have been holding considering the flop call would be A8, 98 or JT. All three hands have me beat badly; my AK hand would technically only be able to beat a bluff. I shoved all-in and he calls. He shows 98 to take down the pot.

While my hand had decent showdown equity, I believe calling the turn bet would be a bad play. With a hyper-aggressive player like UTG, AK would generally have been good enough to play for a large pot, but when you’re up against a solid TAG, and he’s betting into you after your initial aggression, chances are good that you’re behind. While raising all-in maximizes fold equity there, the effective stacks weren’t deep enough to force a fold from a hand as strong as two pair. In fact, considering my aggressive image on the button, effective stacks would have to be massive to force a fold from two pair. Thus, raising all-in was also a bad play. The only available move should be to fold.

With this in mind, folding over pairs like Aces or Kings becomes easier (but not by much, at least for me!). I used to like to think that when I get Aces or Kings, I just want to get all my money in regardless of the flop turn or river, because I should statistically win 70-80% of the time. These hands are only superior preflop, and if all the money goes in preflop, you should win or lose with no regrets. After the flop however, the hands have to be re-evaluated for equity, taking into consideration your position, your opponent’s position, effective stacks, pot size etc.

Till next time, may you always showdown in big pots with massive made hands!

On and Off

Just finished a very mixed session of poker. Mixed in that I played both online and offline, both using the same strategies (at least initially for the offline play) and ended up with extremely different results, the strategy used being BSS. I made a significant loss in the live games, while enjoying a significant profit in the online counterpart.

Lesson learnt (that I realized much earlier, but apparently needed a refresher); Online poker and live poker are extremely, and I mean extremely different. Maybe it’s just because of my personality; a little hot tempered, and very impatient. These are two traits that are very bad for a poker player, simply because they are the exact formula for tilt. Suck-outs and bad play make me lose my temper, the latter being targeted at myself. Bad hands or flops, slow dealing and lengthy hands make me impatient. And together, both make me lose due to tilt plays.

My live game losses were only due to two major hands, both of which could be avoided. I was not getting any hands for about 3 orbits, and finally caught KJo, but was in early position. The BSS dictates that this hand should be folded, but I had gotten impatient after getting no hands, and decided to limp to see the flop. As usual, another 5 limpers called behind and the blinds checked. The flop came KQ6, two clubs, and small blind checks. Big blind over-bets the pot and action was on me. I frequently play with Big Blind, who’s a regular in the live games I play, and he has a tendency to play draws very strongly. I decide to raise with my Kings, and 3 bet him for 3.5 times his raise. Everyone else folded, and Big Blind says he’s all in.

I made several significant mistakes here. First of all, I failed to observe his stack, the remnant of which was smaller than my raise if he called. Secondly, his position as Big Blind gives me almost no information on his hand, him having checked, and thus could be holding almost any two cards, including K6 or Q6, both of which have me crushed. I then compounded both errors by thinking I was committed to the pot by calling the all-in, forgetting that in previous encounters, he hardly ever moves all in with a weak hand. I lost 3/4ths of my stack to Q6.

The second loss was when I had AQs in middle position. I raised and the guy to my immediate left raised 3x my initial raise. He’s generally a loose player, playing almost any two suited cards from any position but only aggressive when he does have a hand. I should have folded the AQs, being out of position and likely dominated, but once again, I have had very few hands, and the earlier bad play I made was making me impatient to win a big pot. I called. The flop came 554, two diamonds, which gave me 2 overs and a flush draw. I decided to play this slowly to gain more information, and checked. He bet half the pot, and I decided to 3 bet him to see if he had a pair or was simply betting with AK. He went all-in, and I snap-called, a huge mistake. The pot was barely giving me 1 to 1 odds, and I was 50/50 at best against a pair under Q, and a huge underdog with any other higher pair that he would make that move with. He had Jacks, which held up to take my entire stack.

Rebuilt my stack somewhat later on when I loosened up and played more hands, but made money on good plays and reads. The last hand of the day was an extreme cooler hand where I had straddled, and the guy on my left double straddled. I caught Kings, but the guy on my left had Aces and I lost a large pot (though not as large as it could have been).

Heading home feeling very frustrated, but aware of my mistakes, I decided to continue grinding it out online. I profited 4 buy-ins in 2 hours, playing 21 tables of NL50 using BSS, and that was even though I encountered 3 huge cooler hands which involved set over sets. That’s a BB/100 of about 10 for this session alone!

Fact is, BSS doesn’t work with live games. Playing too tightly gives you no action when you have monsters, and makes you lose a lot on beats, suck-outs and bad plays. Online games differ simply because you see so many more hands online, up to several hundred times more in my case, and thus, you make a decent profit just by winning blinds alone. Live games are so slow that you barely see 25 hands per hour, and you typically need to make money in that 25 hands or you’re just wasting a lot of time. You’d be better off waiting tables to make a living. This means that you have to loosen up, play more aggressively and read more accurately. This also leads me to believe that a profitable live game player is very much more skilled than his online counterpart, since it requires looser play (high margin for error) and accurate reads.

I learnt many lessons today. Seems like everyday I play poker brings new lessons to learn, some really expensive ones. I guess the key is not to have to learn the lesson twice.

Migrating from SSS

Moving on from the SSS (Short Stack Strategy) to the BSS (Big Stack Strategy) officially just yesterday. Reasons for moving being that the SSS is just too robotic, and while profitable, just doesn’t teach you very much, and soon gets extremely dreary.

Kept a steady BB/100 of 1.37 while playing SSS and found it hard to move any higher, but my initial attempt at BSS was pretty decent, holding on at 0.35, and moving up to 1.29 late yesterday. Dropped down to –0.2 today when I made several bad calls. I find that I’m learning a lot though. Maximizing value when you have a monster and learning to fold medium to strong made hands, sets for example.

As a side-note, several of my friends have made it to the top 20 of that local tournament I talked about in my earlier post! Yay them!… heh. Hope they make it to the big money. For those who are interested, check out the reports at pokerevents.wordpress.com.

I’ll be working more on playing BSS online in the weeks to come. Check back for updates!

Limit Games

A couple of nights ago, a colleague of mine that played poker (found that out recently!) took me to a local card room to check out the games there. We were talking about the games he used to play all afternoon, so I was really looking forward to playing there.

When we got there in the evening, the place was packed. More than 20 tables, with 7 or 8 people waiting lists. It was great. At least until I finally got a seat, got 65s on my first hand and flopped trips, tried to re-raise the guy who bet in front of me 4x his raise, and found that it was a LIMIT game! No wonder their lowest stakes were $3/$6. Tried to adjust to the game, but man, it was tough. After playing no limit exclusively, playing limit games make you feel handicapped. The differences may seem slight to the inexperienced, but when you have played both, you know that’s not true.

First off, the blind structure is different. On a $3/$6 table, small blinds are $1, and big blinds are $3 (yeah, weird right?). You can’t raise more than 1xBB each raise. So say the game start off with UTG calling, UTG+1 folding, and another two callers before action is on to you in late position, you can only raise another BB. That means on a $3/$6 table, you can only make a raise to $6 (a min raise). Imagine only being able to min raise every time you want to raise. So what does the $6 in the stakes mean? It means that on the turn, the minimum bet is $6. The river minimum bet is also $6. And you can only min raise if you want to raise. I just had to repeat that. It needs to sink in…

How is that significant? It simply means that most of the time, if there are several callers in front of you, the pot odds become so good that it really doesn’t matter what you have. You’re almost obligated to call if you have anything decent at all! That’s pre-flop. And say there’s some one who wants to raise in late position with AA, and there are 4 callers in front of him, not a single one of the four in front will fold to his raise, simply because it’s only going to be a min raise. It will take a limp, raise, re-raise (and sometimes, not even then) to kick limpers out.

All that’s fine if you have a monster. Say you have aces and flop a set. Man, that’s when you have all the money flowing in cause you can only bet the minimum, raise the minimum, and the pot odds are so good that every one else will call with a decent draw or pair. The sick thing is that you can get out flopped, out rivered so often it makes you wanna rip your hair out. There was a hand where I had pocket 4s under the gun, I limped, and there were 4 callers behind me. Big blind raised (min raise) and everyone else flat called (obviously). Flop came Q64, and I made my set. BB raised, I re-raised (min raise again), and got three callers behind, including the big blind. Turn comes a J, and big blind checks. I bet and once again, got 3 callers. River came a T, and big blind checks to me, I bet, two guys fold, and big blind raises (min raise). I flat call, and guess what he shows me? Pocket tens. Ridiculous.

After playing a while though, I find there’s a method to all this madness. Limit games are not about bluffing. At least, you’re going to find it really really hard to make bluffs. Limit games are about making a hand, then milking as much out of it as you possibly can. This really reminds me of the no limit cash games I frequent, where players generally are loose enough to call down raises pre-flop with horrible positions and sub par hands just to “see the flop” and then pay huge amounts (that don’t add up in profitability) to draw on gut-shots. In any case, the real skill involved here is the milking. You need to be skilled enough to get the maximum value you can from your made hands, and you need to be able to lay down your made hands if you suspect a better hand so you lose less. This is different from no limit games cause sometimes, the pot odds are so good you’re almost obligated to call down if it was a no limit game.

This experience was interesting to say the least, and while I lost half my buy in, I found that it taught me yet another valuable lesson in poker. Namely, playing poker isn’t just about calling down with good pot odds. These marginal calls cost money, and the money adds up. Poker is about having several factors, i.e. pot odds, accurate reads, outs etc. add up to make a decision profitable.

Wish I took a few pictures of the place. I probably will, the next time I get to a new poker room. Look out for them. Till next time, do NOT call down with marginal hands! Or do, if you’re as lucky as the set tens guy…

When You're Meant To Lose

Have you ever been dealt a hand when you're predestined to lose from the get go? How do you cut or avoid losses in hands like that? The worst thing is when it happens when you're already down. It feels like a punch to the gut, and you're left wondering when it will end.

I play very regularly in a live game at a poker room where I live. Games there are generally very loose and aggressive, usually played at the $2/$5 stakes. This particular hand happened just last night on a full ring table, between 3 players, 2 of them extremely loose players (calling raises with 62o!) and another who would almost always play any two suited cards from any position (this isn't considered loose in that room!). Of the two loose players, one of them (Player A) is usually very aggressive, raising with almost any two cards while the other (Player B) plays a more passive game, only becoming aggressive after the flop. Pre-flop action was the usual limping from early position, followed by a 5xBB raise from Player A in mid position. 3 players after him folds, button calls, Player B in the small blind calls, and the big blind and initial limpers all call.

Flop came 2sTs5s, and action was checked to Player A who bet 5xBB. Button makes the call and Player B thinks then raises to 5 times the raise of Player A. With such a huge raise, it was almost certain that Player B had a made hand, at least 2 pair or better. Surprisingly, Player A and button flat calls, and the dealer dealt a 6h on the turn. Player B checks, Player A bets 20xBB (a minuscule bet compared to the pot), button calls and Player B instantly goes all in. Player A instantly calls and button goes all in immediately, flipping over the nut flush with As9s. Imagine the shock of everyone else at the table when both Player A and Player B flip over K high and J high flush! River, a 9c, was irrelevant as both players were drawing dead to the nut flush.

Imagine that! All three players flopped the flush, all three were slow playing, and all three thought the other was drawing to a flush (players in this room generally go for draws regardless of pot odds). This was the sickest cooler hand I ever saw, and I've definitely seen my share. How do you escape from losing the maximum with hands like the K high and J high flush? I remember a very similar scenario about 5 months back, of which I was on the receiving end. I had Ks9s in early position, UTG limped in, and I followed suit. A few other limpers came in as well, and the flop came three spades, no ace (I forgot the actual cards as it was such a long time ago). Blinds and UTG checks, I check, and one of the limpers made a 1/3 pot raise. UTG flat calls, and I re-raised to 4x the initial raise. Everyone else folds, including the initial raiser, but UTG calls. Turn comes another spade, and UTG checks, I bet, he goes all-in, and I knew he had the Ace, but I couldn't fold it and called. He showed pocket aces.

I think the simple "moral" of these hands would be - never play any two suited cards unless they are the nuts. Drawing to anything other than the nut flush or straight would potentially lose you a lot of money as making your hand would be tantamount to trapping yourself with the second best hand. This is why playing with any two suited cards is so dangerous. There was a similar hand that night where I also made a two hole card flush, but lost the maximum to the nut flush. This really sounds like a lot of bad poker, and it is. Embarrassing to tell, but one can only learn from such experiences.

Any of you readers have similar experiences? Let me know in the comments section. Cheers!

Knowing You're Ahead, but...

How often have you had a hand where you know you're ahead, pushed all-in and your opponent calls with a draw, and gets there? So many hands of poker come down to a face-off between a pair and two over cards, or even a pair and one over card. The former is a coin toss, and the latter the pair being the 2 to 1 favorite. In both situations, the pair is always the better hand, or as they say, ahead, but when the over card(s) spike on the flop or the following streets, the pair will be down to a two outer and will almost always lose.

Poker is not gambling, almost all poker players will tell you that. But placing all your chips at risk on a coin flip is gambling, like it or not. Some poker players will tell you that as long as you put your money in when "you're ahead", you will make money in the long run. That is true, to a certain extent. The only time that isn't true is when your bankroll cannot sustain you for the "long run".

An example from a live game I played just recently; I had Ac9c on UTG position, playing $2/$5 stakes, 9 handed. The game was crazy, players calling down with almost any two cards, going all-in with hands like J9o preflop with 5 callers in the pot, most players gambling with almost any two cards. UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls, player after that folds, and all mid position players called to the cutoff who raised to 6xBB. Button and the blinds fold, and action was on to me. I should have folded, being out of position with that many callers behind me, but I elected to call as the odds were decent, and the callers and raiser were loose players, the raiser having shown down extremely poor pre-flop raise hands. UTG+2 folds and the mid position player after him goes all-in for practically $600 in chips. This move forces every other player including the raiser to fold, and action was on to me. I have played many times with this particular player, and know him for a very loose, very aggressive player who doesn't mind losing his money. Limping from middle position and shoving all-in after a raise generally signifies only one thing. Weakness.

My A9s would be 50/50 against an under-pair, or two face cards, and a big favorite to any Ace with a smaller kicker. I read him for a small pair, suited Ace with a small kicker, or connected face cards like QJs, JTs. In all three situations, I would be at least 50/50 or better, so I made the call. He flips over KsQs, and we're down to a coin-flip with me having the upper hand (+13%). Flop comes 6d3cTs, and I'm almost a 3 to 1 favorite, when the turn comes a Kd and I'm drawing to a 3 outer. River was no help and I lost my stack.

How many times have you watched tournaments where players were knocked out based on 50/50 odds? In the recent WSOP $40k buy-in event, the eventual winner held Aces (no diamond) against 8c3d, and with a flop of QdTd8d was given 50/50 odds to win the bracelet. He called an all-in from the 83o (lots of donk plays by this guy, Haxton, the eventual runner-up) and his Aces held up, but it was certainly a toss-up. Even in situations where you're a 2.5 to 1 favorite, like KsKc against AsJs, should you put all your chips at risk? This was an actual scenario where I had the Kings on the big blind against a mid position limper with AsJs. We were both deep stacked, and I raised 6xBB to kick all the limpers out, but the AsJs then reraised 3x my raise. I over-bet with a shove all-in, and he reluctantly calls, spikes an Ace on the flop to take the pot. Doesn't seem fair but that's poker.

When or what makes it right to put all your money in? Here's my personal opinion, which is in one word, equity. When you have fold equity, e.g. you put the opponent's tournament life at risk with an all-in bet with a mediocre hand, that puts him in a decision for all his chips. You fold AKs pre-flop late in the tournament when there is a raise and a call in front of you with a healthy chip stack because you have better equity (cashing in the money) than 50/50. Is this gambling? Debatable. I like to think of it as calculated risks.

Let me know what you think in the comments section. Till next time, may you always put your money in when you're ahead!

Minimizing Losses Pt:2

First off, I'd like to apologize for not updating the blog the past three days. I have been involved in a crazy live poker schedule, and barely slept. To top it all off, I had to compensate for being away from work for a week; Yes, I do have a job!

Thanks for all the comments on the previous article. It definitely helps to know that my articles are being read! Please use the reaction checkboxes to help me gauge the article quality, and improve on site content, and if you really like the article, Digg it.

Now all that's out of the way, back to business at hand. The answer to the last hand posted was this. The CO had the flush on the turn, K high, and was trapping. He was probably also applying pot control, as there could possibly be an Ac out there, which might make a higher flush on the river. This was a great scenario to illustrate minimizing losses as it happens on both sides. To minimize losses on my end, I had to raise the turn, and fold the river. For the CO, he minimized (potential) losses by making a small bet on the turn, in case another clubs or paired card came on the river. Of course, in this particular scenario, I did not minimize my losses, and called the bet.

Pot control plays a huge role in minimizing losses. We have been talking about pot control so often, but what exactly is it? Pot control is when you know you're possibly ahead, but could be behind when the cards on the other streets come. Here's an example to illustrate this. This happened in a live game $2/$5, 8 handed table. I was on the button with 57o, and everyone from UTG folded to the CO who called. I had fantastic position here, and wanted to isolate the CO who has demonstrated that he was a loose passive player in previous hands, only getting aggressive when the opponent shows weakness. I raised to 4xBB, and SB folds, but BB surprisingly calls.

I have played with BB a lot, and consider him to be a solid player, which immediately made me wary for what he might have called me with out of position. BB had also been calling a lot of raises, so I put him on a wider range than I usually would. The flop comes 3d4d6d, which gave me the nut straight but placed a possible flush on board. I have a very aggressive reputation, and would usually place a c-bet, so action was checked to me. This would have been a very good opportunity to cash in on my reputation, as most players in a hand with me in that particular live game would generally call my c-bet regardless of what they had. However, this was also a drawback as they might outdraw me on the turn or river. This fact, coupled with the dangerous board called for pot control, so I checked.

The turn was a Qh, which may have helped either the BB or CO. BB checks, and CO bets half the pot, making it $35 to call. I call and BB calls, which makes the pot slightly less than $200. River puts a Kc on the board, which by now has me convinced that I have the best hand. BB checks once again, and CO folds without bothering to wait for me to bet or check (a strange move but a money saving one). I put a value bet of $125 into the pot, same as what I had been doing in previous hands with bluffs which was called down. BB called and mucked his hand once I showed my straight, and I took down the pot.

Would you readers have played this hand any differently? Let me know your views in the comments section.

Minimizing Losses Pt:I

Have you ever been in a hand where you think you flopped the best, only to discover you were way behind and drawing practically dead to the actual nuts on the flop? I have; countless (and I mean that literally) times. In those situations, are you destined to lose a lot of money? I believe otherwise. Poker is a game of maximizing your wins when you're ahead, and minimizing your losses when you're behind.

This is a hand I played a couple of days ago, with Ah9h on UTG in a 6-max $0.25/$0.50 game. I raised 3xBB, and action folds to cut-off (CO) who calls, and the rest folds, 2 players to the flop. The flop comes Ac9d2c, giving me aces up. I decide to slowplay as I had been raising quite a bit in the previous hands, which makes this a good time to seem defensive. CO raises to $3, and I happily called. The turn comes 3h which is largely irrelevant, so I decide that my hand is relatively safe. I check, CO raises to $6.50, and I re-raised to $13, having about $14 left in my stack. He puts me all in, and I call only to see I was facing a set of deuces. The river was no help.

As you can see, I was way behind on the flop from the word go. With only 4 possible outs, I had only 8% to win the hand by the river. Yet, I thought I was ahead, and even tried to slow-play my hand. Could I have avoided losing my whole stack to this hand? Maybe. The set of deuces was extremely well disguised, and aces up is a tough hand to fold. I was blinded by the apparent strength of my hand, and disregarded the fact that my opponent could have caught a better flop than me. We can probably coin a new term here - Poker Blindness: A condition where you think you have the best hand without consideration to the strength of your opponents.

With hindsight, and without being poker blind, this would have been the best way to play the hand. The raise on UTG was correct, effectively pushing out most limpers, and drawing in one player to go heads up. CO flat calls a UTG raise, which shows some strength as he could be slow-playing big pockets (unlikely) or holding high suited connectors (JT), and small pocket pairs. Small pocket pairs are generally the best hands to limp in with as you could probably flop a very well disguised monster, while being able to fold if you miss. This is called set-mining. In very rare occasions would a set miner re-raise with small pockets due to the danger of being 3 bet and thus forced to fold.

The check on the flop was also correct as I could have the best hand, but when CO bet, I should have re-raised. If CO then goes over the top, it would be very apparent that he could only be playing with a set, AK and flush draw being very unlikely as he would have raised preflop with the former, and flat called with the latter. If CO decides to be tricky and calls the raise, I could then check the turn, and fold if he bets out strongly as a flush draw would very likely check the turn as well. Strange as it sounds, check-raising postflop would have saved me the most money.

The following hand illustrates an actual played-out situation very relevant to the current topic. I had pocket 8s on SB, in a 6-max 0.25/0.50 game. UTG had just sat down and paid blinds, so the inital pot without any bets was $1.25. UTG checks, UTG+1 folds, CO calls, button folds, I call and BB checks; 4 players to the flop which comes Kd5c8c, giving me middle set. Action is checked to CO who bets $1. I call to represent a flush draw, and the rest folds. 4c comes on the turn, and I check again to CO who bets $3. I flat called again, making the pot $10. River comes 3d, and I check once more to CO who goes all in for my whole stack of $21.25.

What would you readers do if you were in my position, and why? What do you think the CO had, and would you have played the hand any differently? Leave your answers in the comments section, or email me at entropically.driven@gmail.com. I will provide the actual hand and outcome in Part II of this article.