Episode 203: The No-Longer-Homeless Poker Player

Carlos Welch is no longer homeless! At least for the moment, he’s living with Alexander Fitzgerald in Bullhead City, AZ, and Andrew is paying him a visit! We catch on Andrew’s travels, Carlos’ new digs, and strategy!

Timestamps

0:30 = hello
23:05 = strat

Strategy

$2/$5 Hero ($700) opens to $20 UTG with AKo. Four callers, both blinds fold.

Flop ($105) AQ9r. Hero bets $55, Villain raises to $175, rest fold, Hero?

7 thoughts on “Episode 203: The No-Longer-Homeless Poker Player

  1. Hi guys, enjoyed the episode, thanks. Just a question on the strategy hand if I can. I agreed with your assessment re the check being best UTG on the flop, and also that once $55 is c-bet by hero that villain most likely has AQ or A9 when he raises to $175– even though a set of 9s is not out of the question.

    I also agreed with the fold. But I was wondering if we should 100% rule out turning AK into a bluff by 3-betting to $475+ or maybe even shoving to represent top or middle set?

    Because we’re able to put villain on 2-pair with a high degree of confidence. And especially if we perceive he will not want to put his entire stack in without a set. A higher variance line certainly – perhaps even wildly inadvisable – but I was hoping it would come up in your conversation briefly, even if only to be dismissed. Thoughts?

    • Full marks for considering all the options!

      I think that we’re unlikely to fold out two pair against almost any player type. Most players will correctly realize that raise-folding two pair is very exploitable, or will simply not be the sort to fold aces up on this flop, or for whatever other reason will call. Of course, if you think you’re against an exception to this rule, then go ahead (especially since you have a little equity when called, especially against A9). I agree it’s an oversight not to mention it, but I don’t think this is a good bluffing situation very often.

      • Thanks for the response Nate. After I submitted the question, I was mulling it over in my mind on the commute home – and came to a similar position as yourself. I guess the average player at live low stakes will just not fold two pair often enough to make this play profitable. Heck, getting one pair to fold isn’t easy! Your use of the term “almost any player type” has me thinking this play is probably not advisable at 10/20 or 25/50 either! The number of times you’ll get a fold in this situation is disproportionate to the equity you will lose trying – or something… thanks for helping on that point.

  2. I’m glad to hear that Carlos is coaching. That’s a natural for him! Andrew showed me some photos of Carlos with the little dogs, and your commentary here makes me smile again. Did the dogs go hiking or did you carry them?

    • Thanks Mrs. B. I am enjoying the coaching more than I thought I would. It scratches that old teacher’s itch even more than when I was in public education because these students actually want to learn unlike the teenagers who I used to force pointless algebra upon. I wish I could have just taught my kids poker. They would have loved the relevancy.

      The dogs did not go with us. They stayed at the house. I have a good thing going here with Alex. I didn’t want to mess it up in the first two weeks with a “sorry I dropped your puppy off of a cliff” call.

  3. Great episode! If I decide to get into more tournament play, I will definitely keep Carlos in mind.

    I had a question about the first AK hand. I completely agreed with the analysis about folding after the $55 bet and 3-bet raise. But I’m not sure why checking on the flop is better. Once we check, there is a fairly wide range of hands that could be betting, and it seems to me that it will be quite a bit less clear what that bet signifies if we have checked. Most likely, unless there’s a lot of heated action, we will have to just check-call, planning to reevaluate the situation depending on the turn card. But it’s going to be really tricky to keep playing anyways, and it really could be that we are crushed. It doesn’t seem to me like the kind of board/situation in which we want to risk our stack. My ultimate worry, I think, is that checking prevents us from narrowing the range down, which seems really important in my eyes in this particular hand.

    So I like the half-pot bet on the flop. This shows a lot of strength, given our pre-flop raise and board texture, and so when there is a raise, a fold (even if we are being unfortunately bluffed out) seems clearly the right move. (As we saw in the actual hand played.) Or if there’s just a call, we can still now play very cautiously.

    Perhaps why, ultimately, the check is better is because the bet still doesn’t get us enough valuable information? Perhaps just checking and seeing how things play out will be sufficient information to make a well informed decision on the flop and post-flop? Where did I go astray in my thought process? Thanks!

Leave a Comment

This blog is kept spam free by WP-SpamFree.