Western Strategy - "Are You Over-Playing Your Over-Pairs? pt. II"

By Justin West

In the first installment of this series on strategy, I discussed the topic of overpairs and at least one situation in which they could be severely misplayed and otherwise over-valued, leading to one's (poker) demise.

Rather than tread new ground, I thought I'd instead expand upon that article (which you can read here) by explaining my reasoning in a way that I had perhaps failed to properly illustrate previously.

First, a brief recap...

Here's a basic rundown of the scenerio: Player A picks up pocket kings pre-flop on the big-blind and puts in a raise roughly equal to the size of the pot to isolate as much as he can. That isolation works to a degree, and he's left against two opponents heading into a flop of Q-6-6. Here, he bets out for roughly half the pot, the player immediately to his left raises to a total of 4,000, and the last remaining player makes a smooth call. What does our gracious anti-hero do? He pushes all in, gets one caller from a player who has a queen. The fateful third queen falls on the turn to give Player A's opponent a boat, and thus Player A is ousted from the tournament.

I supposed in the article that after having been raised and seen that raise called on the flop, the proper course of action would have been to fold.

After I published that article, I did seek counsel from a number of my friends (all of whom I'd consider experts on the game, one being the Card Room Manager at PokerSchoolOnline.com). It seemed that the consensus was that a fold here could be warranted, but most, if not all players, would have simply called the raise and seen a turn.

Believe me, I've thought about this one, but even as I've pondered the situation again and again, I still come back to the same conclusion: Fold!

Why? For one simple reason: Lack of information.

Yes, you're getting good odds on this bet; you're getting enough odds here that many players would call a fold idiotic. But the fact remains that by folding you are protecting your chips, and you're protecting yourself from having to make a decision on the turn when you'll have no more information with which to make your decision than you did on the flop .

In my mind, I'm putting at least one of those players on a queen. I can bet on that. So, if I make that call and I see another queen on the turn, I'm hosed. I know it, they know it, and I'm out of the hand with fewer chips than I'd have had if I'd have just folded the hand. But that's not the point, as folding in fear of a two-outer is just ridiculous.

If, however, I just smooth call, and I see any other card other than an ace or a queen on the turn, where does that leave me? In the exact same position I was in, is where it leaves me, being first to act with an overpair to the board with a huge pot in the middle and with little to no information as to the size of my opponents' hands. That's dangerous.

So let's assume for a moment I make that call, and we see a brick on the turn. Say, for instance, it's a seemingly harmless three. Being first to act, should I bet, feeling my kings are still good? Or, should I check it, seeing if one of the two players to my left are going to bet?

Seeing as the player to my left raised my bet on the flop, I can expect aggression from him on the turn after such a brick card. Moreover, I can equally expect at least a call from the third player in the hand, which again puts me in a tight spot once that bet comes around to me. Again, that would leave me with odds to call, going into a river with no more information regarding the strength of my hand other than the idea that more than likely neither of them has a six, and I'm up against one or two players with a queen.

That's really the major idea here. Do either of these opponents have a six in their hand to make three of a kind? If I can deduce that neither of these players would be bold enough to play a hand with a six in it, and that I'm up against only a queen, I'd play the hand differently. But this whole article is based on a situation in which one cannot be sure.

All this boils down (again) to one simple reason for the fold: Lack of information. Personally, even though kings look to be good in this situation, I'm going to save my money for when I know they are, specifically for a situation in which my position will be such that I can gain some more information before making my decision.

Of course, one could ask why not just raise the re-raise before the flop in an effort to gain more information. That's possible, but to put in a raise would require a heavy investment, and with a paired board I'm not sure I'm willing to put so much of my stack at risk.

But, these are just my thoughts. The point of this series is not for me to tout myself as some kind of know-it-all expert on poker, whose advice you should follow without question. My goal is to make you think about some things in a different way, and perhaps inspire you to make some alterations to your game you'd previously not considered and that could benefit you greatly if instituted.

Think it over.

All for now.

- J

Questions or comments on this article? Click here to send a letter to the editors

Justin West played poker since the age of 17, he spent more than a year earning a living on the green felt; a modest living, to be sure, but a living nonetheless. His aim was at one point to win the WSOP main event, thus causing Hell to freeze over. However, given his penchant for sin and his extreme dislike of cold weather, Justin has put that dream to rest.