Answers to my poker question... part two

Here's the second half of the first of many emails in response to my hypothetical hand... This is a blogger who plays live and likes to sometimes play online poker too.

Continued from previous post…
"The fact that it's so early in a tourney means I would be willing to gamble a little more to accumulate rather than protect and avg stack when still so much play before actually "playing" for anything. Although I'm not a fan of shoving in this spot it's not the worst poker strategy in the world.

2) Raise...it doesn't matter what you raise, if you're trying to end the pot with a raise (not my style) then might as well put it all in. I don't have a problem making a raise that would price in a draw b/c the same raise that would price in a draw could be the raise amount that a marginal blind hand might call from a button raise pre and post flop.


3) Call...the only thing I see wrong with a call here is the fact you're not building a pot with a such a hidden monster hand. Have to think what a call looks like to the other guys in the pot...(prolly draw in their heads). So when the non flush card hits the turn two things happen, they either beat you with a straight and making bet to protect their hand or they don't have a straight and just betting to protect their hand against your "flush draw" they put you on...(after all, down here in the south, the flush draw is the only draw they put you on).

I know you don't only put the guy on the nuts but if there's one thing that I agree with from the guy who posted a comment is that the range of the other guy has got to be bigger than the nuts.

In my opinion this is a hand that plays itself and you should NEVER try to find a way to get away from this hand. I genuinely feel your game has gotten more creative since I've known you but a criticism I have is that you spend too much time trying think of ways you should have gotten away from a hand or not lost a much rather than taking it in stride. I know I've just gotten to the point where I'm completely comfortable with my instinctual play in normal hands and have spent time discussing hands where I feel I have been out played or not gotten maximum value. Just in general weather in cash or tourney they're certain situations where making a big bet could win you the pot and save the pain of losing a hand in dramatic fashion, but then again that same play could cause you to win a pot before giving it time to build....although I try not to use variance as a reason for ANYTHING it does hold weight to me in the sense that being results oriented in specific instances will drive you crazy and isn't the right perspective....sometimes you just have to lose.

I hope you understand where I'm coming from and straight forward is the best way to try to answer any question.

Let me know if you agree or disagree or kinda agree or I'm a genius or moron...lol

Take it easy."

Personally, I got a lot of value out of this response. BTW, to answer his question, he's a moron. Just kidding, closer to a genuis than a moron by far. Despite the fact, I've thought for a while I haven't been results oriented, likely it appears to others it may still be a leak, as my friend assumes I'm looking for a fold here or a way out of hand that kind of plays itself post-flop.

He’s not alone as another response, this one from Gabe Costner, who was nice enough to reply, seemed to agree, that the hand was too standard to find anything meaningful out of it. Don’t know if he assumed me to be results oriented too. Gabe did offer some nuggets about his approach to tournaments, hands and situations, that I will share later that I think were insightful.

To be continued...