All hands shown actually took place. To limit your experience, use the following search words--
BAD BEAT: when Lady Luck wasn't there for me.
GOOD BEAT: when Lady Luck was on my side.
DEFINITION: examples that define a poker term.
BAD PLAY: an error made during a hand.
LAYDOWN: folding a possibly beaten hand.
QUIZ: test yourself
Pre-flop I'm an 86% favorite. But the flop is horrible for me, and I become just a 62% favorite. The turn is ok, and I go back up to being a 73% favorite. But now my opponent has a a gutshot straight draw with just one card left. Rather than giving him the easy flush, Lady Luck decided to be mean and give him the gutshot straight instead.
My opponent had been raising all night and getting incredibly lucky. It was difficult for me to stay patient because I was the big blind every time he raised. I was nearly at my wits end and thought I had this opponent when I hit top pair on the turn. Little did I realize I was just a 20% dog at that point and hit the miracle card on the river.
Sure, I was a 25% dog on the flop, but I had the best hand going in and I watched this player carefully. I knew he was ready to donk off the rest of his money and I was at the right place at the right time. I became an 89% favorite on the turn, but Lady Luck was just not feeling me on the river.
I was tempted to call a re-raise pre-flop with KQs and when I saw the flop, I nearly fell off the chair. However, after seeing how the hand developed, I was glad I folded.
I think I made an error here. I didn't review or really pay attention to what happened on the flop. There was only a call on the flop instead of a raise when the player in position bet out. If someone had a king, wouldn't they raise on the flop after a bet? Additionally, I think the all-in was done without a king. Perhaps the player saw another king out there and decided none of the other players had one.
Then again, moving all-in against two players is a pretty strong move. Ultimately, there's no way to know.
My opponent might have thought he would win with any overpair or gutshot straight, but I don't really understand how he could possibly call. I am nearly convinced that big stacks have an uncommonly good chance to win nearly any hand against a smaller stack. It's pretty sick. Then again, he did have a 20% on the flop, so he was just a 5-to-1 dog.
It was a bad call on the river since I was only getting about 10-to-1. I should have been getting about 20-to-1 to justify the call, but I wanted to see if my read was right.
When someone re-raises pre-flop, he usually has a big pair or AKs. Weak players will re-raise with almost anything especially if they're on the button, but it's nearly fundamental to re-raise with a big pair in any position. I didn't think my opponent was bluffing or playing stupid because he wasn't very active when I looked him up in my hand history.
I was certain my opponent had aces or kings. Queens were unlikely since I had them. The flop was good for me to test my read. Most players will re-raise an early bet if they have a big pair. When he did, I knew I was beat. When a king showed-up on the turn, I figured he had aces. So I checked and hoped to see my miracle card. Lady Luck decided to show me her grace and I got it. If I hadn't gotten lucky, I would have paid my opponent off to see if my read was right. For just another dime, I thought it was worth it to see if I was on the right track.
What is so painful about this hand for my opponent is that I was just a 5% dog (two outs) to win the hand. Even the 53s was favored over me at 12%.
When you raise and the opponent who limped in front of you re-raises, it usually means they've got a very big hand. So even though I had an overpair, it was an easy laydown when I saw the re-raiser re-raise the flop bet. It was a little tempting to stay in the hand, but I was confident I was beat.
Here's more evidence that the big stack has ultimate power over smaller stacks. It could be one of those ideas that the more you are consciously trying to notice something, the more you'll find of that particular thing. Whatever it is, here are two hands that display what I'm referring to. In the first hand, I was the big stack so I dealt the bad beat. But in the second hand, I was the short-stack, so I took the bad beat. It's particularly frustrating because the second hand would have given me enough chips to start playing real poker and have a chance to win the tourney.
I'm getting more and more certain that there's something about being the big stack that allows you to win unfairly on PokerStars. I'm not sure what it is, but it seems like I'm always noticing that as long as you have more chips, you'll win the hand.
This first example is when I decided to call the all-in re-raise from a smaller stack. It was close to 3-to-2 pre-flop and I ended-up being the favorite on the flop.
The next example is when I was on the other side of the bad beat. What makes this beat worse is that it was a gutshot straight and my opponent was just a 16% underdog (with just seven outs) while in the previous hand, I was a 33% dog.
There was another player who was all-in that had flopped a set of jacks. However, he had fewer chips so if I had won this hand against the player with aces, I would pretty much have the same number of chips that I started the hand with. Had I protected my hand on the turn rather than checking, my opponent with aces would probably have folded leaving me dead against the other opponent. So either way, I suppose Lady Luck just had it in for me.
The first hand displays a good laydown. It's not a great laydown, just a good one. What makes it good is not so much that it was a good read, but more of the idea that a good laydown will keep you in the tournament and allow you a chance to continue building chips. In fact, if it wasn't for this laydown, I wouldn't have come in 2nd in this particular tourney.
However, I made a terrible laydown when I folded the following hand. I was in the small blind and played way too tight considering my chip stack. I should have seen the flop against two opponents who were probably fighting for 2nd place. Instead, I folded what would have been the nut straight against two opponents who went all-in. This bad laydown wasn't the cause of not finishing first, but I had the opportunity to win and just folded it down the drain with this hand.
An overbet from early position usually indicates a hand that needs protection. My marginal kicker and another player acting behind me allowed me to fold the hand pretty easily. You're never sure you made the right decision until you see the hand unfold. In this case, I knew I made a good laydown when the player behind me raised.
Sometimes I think there are players who know they are going to win before the hand even plays out. Is it a robot? Is it predicting software? Is it a cheat? It's probably none of these things. It's probably just a player who doesn't really care and is just trying to get lucky early. After all, it's only a $0.10 tourney.
