Breaking Down a Short-Handed Limit Hand
by Matthew Hilger

I recently played an interesting hand during a short-handed 6-max limit game.  The limits were $30-$60.  I was in the small blind and the villain was in the big blind.

It was folded to me and I raised with J-T of spades.  I love raising with hands like Q-J or J-T.  If you don’t hit a pair on the flop, you can still safely bet an A or K by representing top pair.  This gives you a high percentage of flops where you can safely represent some type of good hand.

My opponent called.  I had only been playing with him for a short period of time but my initial impressions were that he was a solid-aggressive player.  His call doesn’t narrow his range down much, although I can safely rule out a decent A-x hand or even something like K-Q as most opponents would reraise in position their solid hands. 

The flop was 9h 6c 4d.  This was not a great flop for me but I made my standard continuation bet on the flop.  My opponent raised.  This raise doesn’t tell me too much either.  I would expect some opponents to wait and raise the turn with any pair, especially top pair; however, other opponents will raise any pair in this situation.  My opponent could also be on a straight draw with a wide variety of hands: T-8, T-7, 8-7, 8-5, 7-5, 7-3, 5-3, and 5-2.   Some opponents raise these draws on the flop, others on the turn.  Some opponents would fold hands like 7-3 and 5-2 before the flop, but some opponents will call with all of their hands from the big blind.  So given the texture of the board and the different lines that players take in that situation, it was hard to determine whether or not my opponent was on a pair or a draw, but there was a decent likelihood of either given all of the possible ranges of hands.  I called with my two overcards and backdoor straight draw.

The turn was the Ks giving me a gut-shot straight draw.  I checked and my opponent bet.  This is where things get rather interesting.  In the heat of the moment and with little time to think, I decided to raise with the intention of betting out the river.  

My thinking was that there was a decent chance my opponent was on a draw and I could pick up the pot on the river if he missed.  In hindsight, there were some flaws in this analysis.  If my opponent was on a draw, my hand was the best!  In that case, I could actually check-call the turn hoping to improve with likely 10 outs, and then check-call the river if a blank hits hoping my opponent is on a draw.  There was also a chance that my opponent would fold a small pair either on the turn or river based on my aggression.  Although this chance exists, it is quite low nowadays in these short-handed games where many players call down with any pair.

My opponent called and the river was the 9d.  I continued with my plan and bet out only to see my opponent raise.  As I was moving my mouse to the fold button, I decided to wait and think this through a little further.  One problem is that many players will almost never raise on a bluff on the river.  If they do, it is with a very low frequency.  However, some players like to get tricky on the river.  The nine was a key card.  His line of play would have been consistent with having a nine, but on the other hand, a very good player might realize this also.  In an instant, this is the type of card that might induce a player to try a bluff-raise.  Whenever I am faced with a decision on the river, I always ask the simple question, are there some reasonable draws my opponent could be sitting on?  If so, I call.  This is one of those hands where my opponent was either sitting on a nine, or sitting on a busted draw.  Given that his draws are all inferior to jack-high, I called and my opponent showed 8-7.

Reevaluating his play, his play would have been similar with trip nines or 8-7.  He raised the flop and the bet out the turn.  Once he gets raised on the turn he called hoping to improve.  The 9 came on the river, a card that I would be unlikely to bet into, so he raised putting me on a draw.  I did have the draw, but I called thinking there was a decent chance that he was on a draw also!

This hand was discussed in even more detail in the short-handed Forum at my website, www.InternetTexasHoldem, where some of our Members had some very interesting analysis into the play of the hand of both me and the villain, including some higher level meta-game concepts related to this hand.

Matthew will be releasing this Spring All About Limit Hold’em, a revised edition of his first book Internet Texas Hold’em.  The new book will include two new chapters focused on short-handed limit hold’em.  You can read over 100 poker blogs, including Matthew’s, at www.PokerWonks.com.