I played a hand recently in a raised pot with suited connectors, and afterwards the other player involved said I had made a "moronic" play. I disagree, but I think it's useful to look at the decisions I made and evaluate them honestly.
It was a low buy-in NLHE game and I picked up 76o in the big blind. A player in early position opened for 3x the big blind, it was folded to me and I called. We both had stacks that were about the size of the max buy-in, which was 100x the big blind.
The flop came 582 rainbow, I had flopped an open ender. I like to semibluff draws in NLHE but I was out of position and he had raised, so I checked. He overbet, about twice the size of the pot. I thought for a bit and called.
The turn was a 4, I made my straight. I checked, and this time he bet about half the pot. I called. The river was a king. I checked and he checked behind me. He had QQ and I won the pot.
Now, the specific part of my play that he called moronic was my preflop call with 76. It's actually not a play I make a lot or would neccessarily recommend, but we always have to judge plays by the situation, not by a chart in a book.
I had observed the other player a bit and he had open raised more than his share of pots. I was getting pot odds of over 2:1 to call. I thought that he might not have much of a hand, but if he did have a big pair then 76 is not a band kind of hand to play.
In fact, 87s is the hand that plays best against AA heads-up (it's about a 4:1 dog), and 76s is not much worse off. You would prefer the cards to be suited, of course, but I don't think that really counts for as much as people sometimes assume. It's not like you're going to know you have the best hand with an 8 high flush - the straight is really the draw you would rather hit. The straight is more likely to be the nuts, and it's also more deceptive than the flush.
An added bonus is that if you hit big with a hand like 76 (two pair, trips or a straight) you may even bust the raiser. So, I called. I don't see a problem with that.
The decision that I actually do think is shaky is my call on the flop. Since he overbet the pot I was not getting even close to the 4:1 I needed to take a card off and try to hit my straight. So why did I call?
The overbet felt like an overpair to me, it's a pretty common play to overbet in that situation. While I was not getting the right pot odds to call, I felt that the implied odds were prettty good. He still had about 75% of his stack left, and I thought I might win it all if I hit.
Another big factor in calling is that I was drawing to the nuts, that was a very important point. If a 4 or a 9 came off on the turn I would have the nut straight, which would also be the best possible hand at the moment. There would be the possibility of a higher straight hitting on the river, or even a bigger hand like a flush or a boat, but I'd be willing to take that chance as the favorite if I could hit my hand on the turn.
In retrospect I think I was probably not getting the right price to call, even with the implied odds. Compared to his bet and the rest of the stack I was getting a little less than 5:1. That's only slightly better than the odds to hit the straight on the turn, and it assumed I could actually bust him.
The overbet seemed to signal that he was going to be willing to put a lot of chips in the pot but that turned out not to be the case. He was actually overbetting to protect what he thought might be a vulnerable hand, based on the rest of his play, and the king on the river really seemed to scare him him off. (I think he may have put me on AK, although I'm not sure how he thought I would have called an overbet on the flop and a bet on the turn with only two overcards. Would that have been less moronic than calling with 76 preflop?)
I think my play on the turn was fine. It surprised me a bit that he slowed down here and only bet half the pot, and I didn't want to lose him by raising.
Not betting on the river turned out to be a big mistake, though. I had the best hand, but instead of value betting I checked and gave him a free showdown. I was hoping to get in a checkraise, but after that small bet on the turn it was a mistake to count on him to bet my hand for me again on the river. I think he probably would have made a crying call for half the size of the pot there, and perhaps even a pot-sized bet. He might even have played back at me if I made a small bet and he sensed weakness.
So, looking back I think I made some questionable decisions, but not anything I'd call moronic. Of course you shouldn't let what someone says when they are steaming get to you, but I think it is very important to be able to look at your play in an honest fashion.
If you have any feedback on this hand, feel free to use the link below to add a comment :)
Ted