Here are a few hands from some sessions I've played at the Taj and some on-line at Party. In all instances, you can assume you're the most solid player at the table and the other players are going to respect your raises and know you're not mucking around with junk.

Hand 1 : This hand occured at the Taj. UTG and the BB are players I know well. They're both pretty loose and aggressive, but they play well. I'm dealt UTG+1. I've been running this table over and am up significantly. UTG raises, I three bet, one horrid MP player cold calls, the BB calls, as does UTG. The flop is . The BB bets, UTG raises... what would you do? I three bet. As expected the horrid MP player folded and the BB capped. UTG and I both called. The turn was . The BB bet, UTG called, I raised and the both called. The river was , BB check called, UTG folded and I won a huge pot. The BB flashed me before pitching them into the muck.

Hand 2 : Also at the Taj. The BB and UTG are gone now and the table is getting tired of my aggressive play. In EP I'm dealt and raise. 4 players call as does the BB. The flop is . The BB checks, I bet, one player calls and then the next raises. That folds off the rest of the field back to me. I raise, MP calls and the raiser caps. We all call. The turn is the . I check, MP checks, the raiser bets, I raise, the MP calls, as does the raiser. The river was a harmless . I bet, MP folds, and the LP calls. He shows me .

Hand 3 : 5/10 Bad beat tables on Party. Same loose-aggressive style as the Taj. I'm dealt in the BB. UTG calls, as do two other players. The SB completes and I check. The flop is . The SB bets, I raise and UTG three bets. The field folds off back to the SB who calls. What would you do? I elected to call. The turn was the . I checked, UTG bet, the SB called and I raised. UTG three bets and the SB folds. What would you do now? At this point I decided to get to check-call to get to the river as cheaply as possible. At showdown we split the pot when UTG shows the same hand as me.

Hand 4 : Still 5/10 on Party. There's a true maniac at this table. He's in LP. He plays every hand, cold calling any number of bets, then he caps the flop. It's bizarre. Even more bizarre is that he's actually up since he sat down. Anyway, he's butted horns with me a few times. He's won twice and I've won twice, but I've made more from him. Still, I can tell he's going to play against me every pot as some sort of macho pissing contest. I'm dealt and Raise in MP. Maniac calls as does the button. The flop was . I bet, Maniac raises, the button called, I three bet, and the maniac capped and the button and I both called. The turn was . I bet, the maniac raised, the button called and I called. The river was . I checked, the maniac bet, the button folded and I called. I was reasonably sure I was beat, but it's hard to fold to maniac just because a scare card hits. Alas, I was beat. He had .

Hand 5 : Just 2 hands later I'm dealt and raise in EP. The maniac calls, as do both blinds. The flop was . The BB bet, I raised, the maniac three bet, the SB folded, the BB called, I capped and they both called. the turn was . The BB checked, I bet, the maniac raised, the BB folded, I three bet and the maniac called. The river was the , I bet and the maniac called and I won a solid pot. I have no idea what the maniac had this hand, perhaps A-3o again.

There are some odd plays in here, like the turn check-raise with an overpair in Hand two, but there were reasons that I'll get into if there's interest. They may be the wrong reasons, but still reasons.

Drade

Hand 1, I'm torn as to whether I'd call or 3-bet here, but I think I like the 3-bet. Only major issue here is what you'd do if you got an A or K as opposed to the flush. I presume you'd call down, as the BB's play indicates a hand that has to be better than one pair. But before he caps, there's really not too much reason to believe that an A or K won't be good, so I like the 3-bet.

Hand 2, the check-raise on the turn is good, I think. That 4 is probably a nice card for you on the turn in case you were up against two pair, though in this case, it didn't wind up mattering. Of course, I'm a bit weak at times, so I may have check-called the river, fearing that MP made his flush.

Hand 3, I think calling on the flop was correct after UTG 3-bet, but I think on the turn, I'd cap it it, and call if UTG continues to raise on the river. If your feeling was that UTG wouldn't 3-bet you without a boat, though, then I guess going into the shell was right.

Hand 4, I don't think I'd play any differently. WIth that much in the pot, the river is a call against a maniac, albeit a reluctant one. And hand 5 seems pretty straightforward, other than that it shows your opponent certainly was quite a maniac.

Just my thoughts

-TW

Hand 1 is a tough decision. You've got odds to call for the flush, but raising for the free card may be a good play as well.

I like hand 2 a lot. You made it 2 big bets on the turn to the guy drawing.

Hand 3 I wouldn't have backed off so soon. Without a preflop raise it's pretty unlikely that UTG has JJ or QQ, which are the only hands that beat you. He's much more likely to have QT, JT, KQ, or maybe even 89 or 9T or KT.

Hand 4 I'd have called down too.

In hand 1, here's why I three bet the flop. The problem is that the BB can lead out with a wide range of hands here. It's a test really to see how committed UTG and I are to the pot. 45, 67, 89, JTs of spades(or that type of hand) are all possibilities. He knows that I'm aware that flop could have hit him strongly. UTG's raise indicates to me that he's also under the assumption that I've got AK and wants to put the screws to me with a medium pair, say 9's. I'm quite sure this flop is going to be capped. If I just call two bets here, I'm pretty sure the BB will three bet and UTG will cap it, confident I have AK and thus exerting the maximum pressure on me. Knowing this, and that the pot is going to be huge and I want to get to the river as cheap as possible to see if I can hit my flush, I felt I needed to raise. If I'm going to call capped betting, I might as well continue to represent a big overpair and three bet here. My three bet may buy me a free river card, but more likely, it will slow down UTG, should the BB lead at the turn again, and thus get me to the river for one bet. Also, by representing a big pocket pair, I'll certainly get paid if the flush hits, as the assumption will be big pocket pair, not nut flush. In the end, it didn't matter, as I flushed out on the turn, but...

In hand 2, I also really like the turn check raise, but its not a play I'd use often. My position relative to the bettor and the player on a draw, coupled with my certainty that the MP player would bet the turn if checked to were the only reason I'd try this. If I'd had any doubt about whether he'd bet, I would have led again. The additional benefits of playing the hand the way I did were two fold. First, with the pot as large as it was, it was difficult for me to remove the drawer's odds. But check raising the turn got me as close to ruining them as possible, always a positive. Really, the only thing I was worried about in the hand was a diamond hitting, or a jack. Another benefit, looking back in hindsight, is the possibility that the MP player may realize that he's behind and slow down on the turn. Had I bet, MP called, and then the LP just called, the MP player would have had correct odds to draw, which is a situation we get into all the time in limit. The river completing a runner-runner flush didn't concern me. If it turned out that MP was drawing to a straight and hit runner-runner flush, then good for him. But I wasn't going to back down on the river with potentially two extra bets coming.

In hand 3, I screwed the pooch. I've been playing too much Omaha and forgot that in Hold em, the nuts isn't always out. I remember that I had convinced myself on the turn that he had to have Jacks and almost folded. Obviously he's never going to fold, so there's no way I can win the hand, but I did back down pretty quickly. I was quite sure he didn't have queens, due to the lack of a pre-flop raise. It seemed unlikely that he'd have jacks also because he didn't raise pre-flop, but I limp with Jacks occaisionally, so I couldn't fully rule it out.

Hand 4 I thought I might have mangled the hand. I still can't decide if I backed down too soon, or not soon enough. I slowed down when I did for a few reasons. First, the pot was sufficiently large, second the maniac was clearly not slowing down. He's telling me that he's got some peice of the flop and thus isn't going anywhere. The trouble is, I don't know how much of the flop he's got. Does he have a set, two pair, a straight, one pair and a straight draw, a pair and a flush draw? Who knows. All of those are potential trouble. Additionally, my hand, while nice, is vulnerable. If the board pairs, a flush or straigh card comes, or an overcard comes, my hand will be in jeopardy and I have no idea which cards hurt me because I'm up against a maniac. So basically, half the deck is going to slow me down on the river anyway, so I might as well slow down now. The additional problem is the presence of the third player in the hand, just calling, further increasing the danger to me on the river. Basically I was trying to lose a little less when I lost the pot and win a little less the times I win, but that may be weak reasoning.