Hello All,

Paradise 25 NL game....

I am in MP with [9c] there are about 6 callers.....SB raises to $1. Everyone calles. Flop comes [8s][9d]. SB bets $1. I bet the pot $9. He calls. There is now $24 in the pot and we both have $30 in our stacks. Turn comes . He checks.... I go all in. He folds. I feel like I could have bet 3/4 of the pot here to make him call but I was afraid of the flush hitting. If I had bet the pot I would only have $10 left for a river bet so decided I would just go all in now to see if he would call with when the A hit.

In the long term it what is the correct +EV play here. I think it would be a 3/4 to full pot sized bet. I think my overagression made me lose a fair bit of cash on this hand...I yanked on the rod way to hard and lost my fish...DANG.

What are your thoughts on this hand. Should I raise to a certain percentage of his stack to see if I can get him all in on the River?

When is it correct to switch from the size of the pot to the size of your opponents stack when making the correct bet size??

Thanks,

ThaNinja

Very interesting and useful feedback rdale, I wasn't really aware of this concept of switching to betting in terms of stack sizes, and I'll have to incorporate that into my poker game.

I was curious, is there an aprox pot size when this comes into effect. At the NL50 I play, usually you have a $2 raise, let's say I call and there's aprox $5 in the pot. The raiser bets out $3, we both have $50 buyin. Should I raise to about 25-30% of his stack so $15?
I usually make a smaller raises, let's say to $7. Maybe that's why I don't get all in too often, and I tend to build my stack at a slower pace. I'm usually afraid they will fold and I ay it more softly.

Do you think that winning only small pots because of the extra aggression is compensated by getting other large pots? This is an interesting subject

I don't really start worrying about his stack size until the pot is pretty large (ie... larger than in your $8 w/ him having $45 in your example) and I'm sure I'm ready to push... In the initial problem, it would have been closer to $15... The problem is that, with the flush draw out there, if you bet under the pot, you're giving him better odds to chase his flush... So, that, combined with the fact that, as rdale said, he really didn't seem overly interested in the hand, made your pot sized bet fine...

I always think I'm overbetting, as I get a lot of folds where I think I could have made a little more money... But, I also don't get sucked out on that much... It's a give-and-take, as I'd rather win a small pot than lose a big one (I know the advice is kinda cheesy, but its still true...)
MVP

For me, the fact that he led with a $1 bet on the flop tells me he had nothing but overcards, like KQ, KJ, QJ, KT, QT. He might have even had Ax, maybe with a flush draw. When you blasted it like that, you were protecting your hand from the flush draw. By smoothcalling your $9, he tells you he's drawing, maybe even with an overpair.