CJ Asked: Kind of scary.. Calling 5$ Pre-Flop with 24 s00ted and raising $52 on a draw, I suppose that is one way of playing it...
Luckbox scared.. hmm.. That is a little scary to me.. ANYWAY.. Ya, I was a little nervous. But big Pocket pairs only have one way to win..
I am not at all concerned about calling $5 pre-flop with 24h. It is an easy enough hand to get away from and if it hits, like a 24 flop, then you can bust someone who overplays AA/99, etc.. Huge implied odds there. I do not think you ALWAYS play this but changing it up once in a while can make interesting hands.
As far as the OESD on the flop. We were not very far behind (basically a coinflip at 43%). The idea behind this hand (I think) was to assume Mr. 99 was smart enough to fold when we made a large raise. He had a lot of ways of being beat on that flop. So we have some amount of positive expected value in the fact that people will fold that hand (x) amount of the time to us. We only have to rely on our backup 43% a certain portion of the time.
Here was the conversation I had with Flux during the hand (paraphrased).
Sir: He raised 5$
Flux: Fuck him he is a fag
Sir: He bet 8$
Flux: Raise him 28$
Sir: he went all in
Flux: Fuck! How many outs do we have!
Sir: I think we have to call now
Actually I think the guy with the 9's played this TOTALLY wrong.. I will not entirely defend our play except we had outs and we were freerolling with earlier winnings.. Again, the concept behind the hand was the guy was smart enough to fold a marginal hand. He was not. So we had to rely on our backup outs. We would have been more than happy to only take 13$ from him. Although a clue to him not being smart enough would be the $40 buyin he made. Something to note in the future.
How can the guy with pocket 9's not even consider AA-TT, A made straight, draws which he had none of, and a small set. Especially something like JJ I would push hard there..
I think you need a better hand than 99 to call off a 28$ raise.. Once he called bullshit on our semi-bluff raise we were committed to the hand.
I am starting to think that big pots and big backup draws are what this game is about, I need to digest this a little more since I never play this way, but it is interesting..
This hand might make you think that all we were trying to accomplish was pushing alot of money in with a decent draw. That is not the point at all. Also, as Fluxer mentioned, we only posted the interesting suckout hand which made us $70 or so, not the other two tables where we made over $180 playing our made hands exactly the same way. What can I say I am a Shock Jock!
One more thing: Using my normal tight-aggressive style I might win $50 a night playing NL or lose a buyin, being more aggressive with made hands and draws, and making pots big when I want them to be, makes the whole dynamic change.. I end up making $100-$300 a night, and lose a buyin at about the same frequency as my tighter play.
Anyway.. I think this hand on the surface might have looked "fishy", I think delving deeper into the thinking behind the hand helps to show why it can be +EV. Fluxer may have some more to add too. If he ever wants to do a guest post he is totally welcome to. This is my analysis of the thinking behind this one hand.